There are various philosophies underlying the correctional system enterprise. There are some who believe that the main purpose of confinement is to punish convicted felons for the wrong they have done or have been convicted of doing. There are others who believe in confinement as a tool of rehabilitation to prepare residents to reenter society with a "clean slate." Then there are those who believe that incarceration should serve both purposes.
The late Thomas Coughlin, who was Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services while I was a prison chaplain, indicated that he had a problem with the concept of "rehabilitation." He stated that the word "rehabilitation" carried the implication of restoring residents to their original condition. According to Coughlin, many of these residents had not been on the "right foot" to begin with, and therefore, in his opinion, the word "rehabilitation" was a misnomer. He preferred the word "habilitation" which implied that the purpose of confinement was to have residents start off on the "right foot" upon release from prison.
Commissioner Coughlin served his term while Mario Cuomo was governor of New York State. Governor Cuomo had a fairly liberal policy, in which residents were released relatively early to parole. During his tenure, the Department of Correctional Services provided for residents to have access to higher educational programs while they were confined. Various colleges and universities established satellite or residential campuses at various facilities. Many residents took advantage of this opportunity by enrolling in the college programs and obtaining degrees in different fields of study. Both Governor Cuomo and Commissioner Coughlin believed that if residents obtained a college education during their confinement, they would be "habilitated" or "rehabilitated," and returning to the community in a much different and better condition then when they first entered the penal system. They would then reenter society with the necessary tools to become productive and law-abiding citizens.
When Governor Cuomo was not re-elected in 1995, George Pataki, a Republican, was elected Governor of New York State. His was a more conservative approach to incarceration in which he eliminated the college programs because according to him, tax-payers were paying too much money just for the state to end up with "educated criminals." He rationalized that residents should not receive a free education when there were law-abiding citizens who had a difficult time financing their education.
Under Pataki's tenure, Parole Commissioners who had a more conservative bent were appointed. Residents who appeared before the Parole Board were denied release several times before going home. The approach under Pataki's tenure was more of a punitive one. The mindset that existed under the Pataki administration was that "once a criminal, always a criminal." The fundamental belief was that criminals could not change or be rehabilitated.
By the time I retired in 2009, another Democratic Governor, Andrew Cuomo, had been elected. Like his father Mario's, his administration was more liberal in regard to Parole. More residents were released at their first or second Parole Board appearance.
Unfortunately, under Cuomo's tenure, the college programs were not reinstated, at least not completely. The same mindset that existed under the Pataki administration continued to be permeated. This was in spite of the fact that it had been stated that 75% of residents who received a college degree while incarcerated, did not return to prison after their parole release.
The same thing had been said about residents who were involved in religious programs of one kind or another. During the administration of Mario Cuomo and George Pataki, there had been proposals to lay off chaplains in order to maintain a "balanced budget." Negotiations between the state and the faith groups resulted in no chaplains losing their jobs. The elimination of college-level programs, and the proposed lay offs of chaplains led many to believe that the punitive mindset was the prevailing one in society, including among those who worked for the Department of Correctional Services.
As a Minister of the Gospel working in a correctional facility, I always took the approach that I wasn't there to question the guilt or the innocence of those convicted and eventually confined. I even shared that position with the residents with whom I came into on a daily basis. It was my position that my role as a chaplain was to:
1. Be the face and presence of Christ in an environment of dehumanization and oppression.
2. Affirm the dignity of the residents as creatures and children of God.
3. Encourage the residents to join a community of faith as a part of their restoration.
4. Encourage the residents to pursue higher education or employment that was consistent with their goals and aspirations.
5. Nurture and upbuild the residents who were members of "the Church behind the Gates."
6. Enable the members of the prison church to discover their gifts and utilize them in the Body of Christ.
7. Carry out a program of theological studies that would equip the residents to exercise their gifts and serve as leaders in the prison church.
Through the above steps, the chaplains would enable the residents to be prepared to reenter society and be reunited with their loved ones. They would return as people who would contribute to growth and social development in a positive way.
The work of the faith community with the prison residential community is neither punitive nor rehabilitative. It is one of redemption and liberation from oppression, both individual and systemic.
It is God's liberating and salvific activity in history that will enable the "Church behind the Gates" to carry out the ministry of Christ both effectively and faithfully.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona, Visiting Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
No comments:
Post a Comment