You are on page 1of 13

Running head: PAROLE SYSTEM

Parole System Jackie Olney SOC 331 October 1, 2012 Professor John Stender

Derived from the French word parole means word, the applied meaning is on your word (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2012). The Parole system in the United States is designed to give some inmates in prison a second chance at changing his or her life for the good through conditional release. While some in society do not believe in parole and have a hard fast theory that if a person does the crime then do the time. While that is true for crimes like murder or crimes committed on children but for lesser offenses like bad checks or some forgery cases there must be a balance of crime versus punishment. The prison system is overcrowded and the cost to keep a person incarcerated for a crime that would be better served on probation or in rehabilitation programs. Parole plays a significant role in a state corrections system and if it were not available to some inmates there would not be a reason to behave while incarcerated or participate in programs to rehabilitate or change his or her life. The mission of the Division of Probation and Parole is to enhance public safety and promote offender reintegration in the community through proactive supervision and referral to community based resources (Commonwealth of Kentucky, 2011). The parole system has a very lengthy history dating back to the 1800s. The two main prisons at the time were the English colony at Norfolk Island ran by Alexander Maconochie and Irelands prisons off the coast of Australia ran by director Sir Walter Crofton. Maconochie disapproved of fixed prison terms so he developed the mark system. Through the mark system, prisoners earned responsibilities through study programs, labor, and good conduct. The idea behind was that the more responsibilities earned would lead to the prisoner release. The release was not considered time served but task accomplishment. When Maconochie became superintendent at Norfolk, he was able to institute his marks system program, and the prisoners did well. In 1844 Maconochie returned to England to lobby for a parole system. In 1849 he was

chosen to be governor of the New Birmingham prison where, he sought to put the parole system into operation. Unfortunately, his parole system was met with uneasiness; it was believed the marks system was too lenient. Consequently Maconochie was dismissed as governor of the prison system in 1851 (Witmer, 1927). In 1854 Sir Walter Crofton was in charge of the Irish prison system and attempted to put Maconochies mark system into practice. Crofton had the belief that the prison system should be more about improvement. The most effective form of improvement would be tickets to leave that could be awarded to prisoners who did not only show achievement but also embraced change. Crofton was the first person to move prisoners to intermediate prisons from a strict prison system. Once in an intermediate prison, they could accrue marks for behavior, work performance, and educational improvements. The marks were accumulated as passes toward release on parole. Once parole was granted parolees were mandated to report to the police, where they would receive help finding jobs while his or her movements were monitored. Modern parole system credits its efforts to Crofton and the Irish prison system. The United States parole system dates back to 1876 with Brockway Zebulon. Zebulon formulated a system to reduce prison population and ensure prisoners could succeed once on parole. Zebulon enacted his system after his appointment as superintendent of a youth reformatory. Zebulon constructed a grade classification for the juvenile system similar to the marks system instituted by Maconochie. When a juvenile entered a youth facility, he or she was given a second grade classification. After six months of good behavior he or she graduated to first grade. If an inmate did not follow the rules and acted out they were given a third grade classification and had to work his or her way back to second grade status. An inmate was granted released after

maintaining good behavior at the first grade level for an indeterminate period. However, just because a juvenile was released from a youth facility that did not mean he or she was entirely free. Once released the inmate was ordered to report to a volunteer guardian the first day of every month for a period of six months or more, depending on the original crime. When a parolee reported to the guardian, he or she had the responsibility of providing proof of conduct, living, and working situation. In 1907 New York was the first state to implement the parole system (History of Parole). By 1927 Florida, Mississippi, and Virginia were the only states that did not have any type of parole system. By 1942 states and the federal government had enacted a parole system based on principles of Maconochie, Crofton, and Brockway. Even though the parole system of the 21st century has changed since its inception in the United States in 1927, the principles have remained consistent. Parole is still a conditional release of an inmate from prison before his or her entire sentence is completed and still viewed as a privilege that must be earned. Upon release parolees are still supervised, meaning he or she must meet with a salaried parole officer, similar to the volunteer guardians in previous centuries. Many confuse parole and probation and at times there seems to be a very fine line by which there are distinctions. Parole is the early release of a person incarcerated from prison who has served a portion of his or her mandated sentence. When an inmate is granted parole, he or she is allowed to return to the community under the supervision of a parole officer and conditions handed down by the parole board. Probation is granted by a judge at either a trial or after a plea bargain with a prosecutor. A judge will give a sentence of a specific amount of time to serve in jail or prison but probate the time, meaning he or she are on probation and with typically little or no jail time immediately

required. Probation can be in place of jail time or in combination, for example a person may receive probation but ordered to serve 30 days in jail. Once he or she is released from jail the probation commences, and it can last from six months to five years, depending on the crime. The stipulation is that if the probationer commits another crime or fails to follow the terms of the probation he or she will be incarcerated for the amount of time the original sentence. Probation violations can turn into making a person eligible for parole at a later time of incarceration. A recent interview with Parole Officer Fredrick Miller from the Kentucky Department of Corrections brought to light a professional perspective on the parole system. Officer Miller stated that he and many other officers equate the parole system to a dangling carrot (personal interview, September 25, 2012). If an incarcerated offender follows the rules, seeks the requirements necessary to meet the parole board and shows the parole board he or she have been rehabilitated and deserve a second chance through parole, it may be received. If an offender does not show that he or she is willing to do whatever it takes to reenter society as a productive member the chances of parole are minimal. Parole is designed as an inmates trade off: good behavior, participating in rehabilitation programs, receiving a high school diploma, or learning a skill can show the prison system an inmate is ready for parole. An inmate can shown through documented paperwork he or she is ready to return to society but the final approval comes from a parole board. However, before an inmate can present his or her good behavior or positive actions to a parole board there are a number of other considerations that determine a persons parole eligibility. The type of offense for which a person was convicted determines if a person is eligible meet the board personally or if the board will do a paper review, meaning the members will not speak with the inmate and make a decision based on information received. The length of a persons sentence determines when he or she will

meet a parole board to request release. Typically a person seeking full parole must serve onethird of his or her sentence; however, some crimes require a person to serve two-thirds of his or her sentence before meeting the board. There are two ways to leave prison; serve out the entire sentence or plead his or her case before a parole board. The parole board is at the center of the criminal justice system and ccontrary to what many think, parole is not a given out lightly and the board reviews everything about an inmate. The parole board is made up of five members who serve a four-year term along with the sitting governor. Three members are chosen by the sitting governor, one by the Supreme Court Chief Justice, and the last by the Court of Criminal Appeals presiding judge. The members meet once a month and typically convene for three days. The members do not take their oath lightly and spend a great deal of time reviewing everything possible about an offender. The members consider prior convictions, statements from victims or others that have a connection to the crime, previous probation or paroles, conduct in prison, any programs he or she attended (AA, NA, counseling, etc), judge or prosecuting attorney statements, and resources available to offender if released (Kleiman & Hawken, 2008). Once the parole board members have reviewed all pertinent information available the board will interview the inmate (Caplan, June 2007). The inmate is typically taken into a conference type room with the members on one side of a table. The members will ask a series of questions about the crime committed, what he or she have done while incarcerated, and ask what the inmate plans to do if parole is granted. The interview process can take as little as fiveminutes or as long as 30 minutes. Once the board is satisfied with the question and answer the members will acknowledge if parole is granted or not. If parole is granted the members will give

the inmate terms of his or her release and what type of parole is being granted. If it is not granted the board will tell the inmate why and when they are available to meet them again. There are three different types of parole that a board can issue: temporary absence, day parole, and full parole (Department of Corrections, 2012). When an inmate is granted temporary absence, he or she is given permission to leave prison a few hours a month unescorted. An inmates security level dictates the length of time they are allowed freedom; medium or maximum security prison allow prisoners to leave for up to 48 hours a month and minimum security prisons allow up to 72 hours a month. Even though the prisoners are unsupervised, they are still given guidelines as a condition of the pass. For example he or she must be in the residence, they were released to by 8:00 p.m., the prison will call to verify and in some cases a patrol officer may visit during the evening to make sure he or she have not left the residence. An inmate may be granted a day pass enabling them to be out during specific day time hours only. This is typically done when an inmate is close to fulfilling his or her sentence requirement. A day pass permits a person to search for employment, attend a rehabilitation program, or school. Full parole is the goal of prisons because it allows them to reenter society going back to family and friends as long as they are positive influences. Parole can be revoked if a new crime is committed or the parolee does not adhere to the terms set by the parole board or parole officer. Federal offenses are different so parole is not permitted. If an offender is sentenced on a federal crime he or she will serve the entire sentence and may have probation upon release for a period of time (U.S. Parole Commission). Some in society understand parole to mean that once an inmate is released from prison they are free to live his or her life without further responsibility to society for the crime he or she committed causing incarceration. This is far from the truth. Parole does not erase a person prison

sentence it just allows a person to serve out his or her time in society instead of prison. For example, a person is sentenced to five-years in prison, after one-year he or she goes before the parole board and is granted parole, so for the next four years the parolee must follow specific guidelines. The conditions of parole can be attend weekly rehabilitation programs, maintain steady employment, stay away from specific people, not own weapons, and do not commit another crime. If the guidelines are not followed the parolee will be returned to prison to serve out the balance of his or her sentence. Immediately upon release from prison a parolee is required to report to a parole officer who will again outline the conditions set by the parole board. A parole officer may also give a parolee additional conditions like pay restitution, pay parole fees, do not move without permission, do not leave the state or county, and report once a week, or month. Any breach in those conditions may also resolute in revocation of parole. A parolees best friend or worst enemy on parole will be his or her parole officer. The parole officer has the responsibility of supervising the remainder of the offender's sentence. The parole officer may supervise parolees in a variety of ways relating to the terms of their release. For example monitoring drug and alcohol use, bracelets, curfews, and community service (Travis & Lawrence, 2002). Parole officers note positive and negative behaviors, home conditions, the results of tests (if any are required by the court), infractions or violations, and the offender's compliance with the court's orders. Some parole officers may give a parolee several chances to get back on track before he or she violates him or her. Officer Miller said that he evaluates infractions fully before automatically revoking parole, for example is a parolee fails a drug test he may require the person to attend a few drug classes and drop every week for a few months. If the parolee continues to test dirty (drugs in his or her system) the parolee may have to serve a few days in

county jail or if the parolee has no concern about the tests his or her parole is revoked. Officer Miller went on to state that he does not like to revoke paroles and will do so only if the parolee does not care about his freedom through his or her actions. However, other officers are not as lenient as he, and some will revoke a persons parole with one dirty drug test or non-notification of residence change. There are many arguments for and against parole. The most common argument that favors parole is that the parole system benefits prisoners. Prisoners who remain incarcerated are motivated by another prisoner's release, good behavior is rewarded. For example, if a prisoner has not invested in reform, but sees cellmates leave on parole; this may cease the negative behaviors. The long term may be a full commitment to work hard and stay out of trouble so that he or she can receive parole. Another benefit for parolees is his or her hard work to reform is reworded and serves as the proper foundation of reentry into society. If an offender is paroled, it sends a message that hard work paid off. When he or she reenters society the work ethic, selfdiscipline, and compliance with authority is instilled and provides power to move ahead. From a societal point of view, it is fair and just too incarcerate offenders for as long as necessary. For example, it would be a miscarriage of justice to keep an eligible, model offender incarcerated simply to make a social statement about maximum sentencing. Maximum sentencing should only apply to those who deserve it. Additional important are the arguments against parole. The possibility of parole haunts some victims' families. For example, if a woman was brutally murdered by her husband, her parents, and children may have to appear at every parole hearing to obstruct the offender's release. In a sense, the atrocity never disappears from some victims or their families' lives. They must fight against the same offender for the rest of his sentence. Another argument against parole

is that offenders become adept at mimicking reform to be granted parole. His or her reentry is not bolstered by genuine reform. So, it may be easy to be lured into criminal activity, e.g., recidivism. Last, in an extreme case a parolee can place parole officers and the community in jeopardy. Violent criminals, who have not truly reformed, can attack his or parole officers or other members of their communities. Once a person has been granted parole it is hard to image anyone wanting to go back to prison. The fact is, parolees classified at high risk of violating his or her parole account for approximately 13% of re-incarcerations, down from 16% in 2000. According to the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research about 46% of parolees re-offend within two years of release. Their study concluded specific factors were at the heart of re-offending: age at time of release, economic status, if parole was issued by the court instead of a parole board, drug or substance abuse problems, and if a person spent more time in jail instead of parole time By the end of 2010 the parole population accounted for more than 4,888,000 adults in the United States. That means supervised parolees accounted for 17% of the population representing a decreased by approximately 2,000 persons on state parole. Of those on parole, drug offenders account for approximately 35% of the population. However, violent offenders only account for about 27% of those on parole, which had remained changed from 2009 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2011). Unfortunately, sometimes everything comes down to money. That fact is the average yearly cost to incarcerate a person is about $31,200 with a range of about $14,000 in Kentucky to $60,000 in New York. Translated that means the average daily cost to incarcerate a person is $86. However, the average daily cost for a person on supervised parole is about $3.98

(Department of Corrections, 2012). So the logical cost-effective means of dealing with the prison population is to grant parole when available. The future of the parole system remains to be seen. Even though there are many institutional facilities around the country there are still not enough to hold the thousands of offenders every year. The system is overcrowded, staffing is low, and funding is hard to obtain. The entire justice system is at risk if the parole system were to fail. This would not be fair to those offenders that made a mistake and have learned from errors (Schuessler, 1954). The United States parole system was created to give a person a second chance of reclaiming his or her life after a criminal offense. If a person uses his or her time in prison productively then the parole board is apt to give the inmate a second chance. Once on parole a parolee must maintain the same values of hard work and determination used to gain freedom as the backbone necessary to keep that freedom. A parolees parole officer is in place to help him or her succeed, and as long as there is honesty a parole officer will do everything within his or her power to help. Just because the system is overcrowded that does not mean parole will not be revoked if necessary. The Division of Probation and Parole are in place to ensure public safety but they also want to make sure offenders are successful on parole because nobody wants to spend his or her life in prison when there are opportunities for a productive life.

References Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2011). Corrections (Probation and Parole). Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov Burns, R., Kinkade, P., Leone, M., and Phillips, S. (June 1999). Perspectives on Parole: The Board Members' Viewpoint. Retrieved from https://ehis.ebscohost.com Caplan, J. (June 2007). What Factors Affect Parole: A Review of Empirical Research. Federal Probation. Retrieved from https://ehis.ebscohost.com Commonwealth of Kentucky (2012). Retrieved from http://crime.about.com Department of Corrections (2012). Miscellaneous Statistics Adult. Retrieved from http://doc.sd.gov Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. (2012). The Purpose of Incarceration. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com History of Parole in New York State . (n.d.). New York Division of Parole. Retrieved from https://www.parole.state.ny.us/introhistory.html Kleiman, M.R. & Hawken, A. (2008). Fixing the Parole System. Issues In Science & Technology, 24(4), 45-52. Retrieved from https://ehis.ebscohost.com Schuessler, K. F. (1954). Parole Prediction: Its History and Status. Journal Of Criminal Law, Criminology & Police Science, 45(4), 425-431. Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com Travis, J. & Lawrence, S. (2002). "Beyond the Prison Gates: The State of Parole in America." Urban.org. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org United States Parole Commission. United States Department of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/uspc

Witmer, H. (1927). The History, Theory and Results of Parole. Journal Of The American Institute Of Criminal Law & Criminology, 18(1), 24-64.

You might also like