Protecting Healthy People From Each Other Severely Limits Prison Visits

 Two years ago, when the Covid pandemic hit in full force, the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) cancelled all visit between loved ones and prisoners. My mother had planned to visit the next day. This month marked twenty-six months since my last in-person visit with family or friends. It's been a long separation. 

About a year into this pandemic, the MDOC implemented video visitation for most, if not all, prisons in Michigan. It's not the same as in-person, for sure, but it's better than nothing. However, technology limitations and poor implementation has made video visitation limited and often fraught with problems. 

Since the pandemic has begun to wane, most Michigan prisons have brought back in-person visits, but with restrictions. At the prison where I am housed (Handlon Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan), both prisoners and visitors must have a rapid Covid test before their visit. They must also wear masks, and they must sit on opposite sides of a large plexiglass shield. It's a bit overkill, if you ask me. 

Because the plexiglass shields are so large, and to limit the number of people in the room, only four prisoners may have visits at any one time. In practice, this means that for my own housing unit of 240 prisoners, only 12 two hour visiting spots are available per week for visits. It's simply not enough. Too many prisoners have been unable to have visits because of these draconian limitations. 

I was one of the fortunate few to have an in-person visit, with my mother, recently, and though it was wonderful to see her again, it was nearly impossible to hear each other half the time because of the masks and plexiglass barriers. Put even a few people in a closed room who are speaking loudly to hear each other through barriers and the volume makes hearing anything difficult. I'm grateful we both know sign language because we resorted to communicating in sign half the time so we could understand each other.

Fortunately, the corrections staff working the visiting room work to ensure the visits are as pleasant as possible, but they are restricted in what they can do. It's important that the MDOC protects people, though I believe their motives are more about protecting themselves from lawsuits. However, everyone is restriction weary. 

It's time to return to normal, including normal visits in prison. If people must sign waivers promising not to hold the MDOC liable if they catch Covid on a visit, so be it. Besides, if the Covid tests are reliable, why all the extra measures? It makes no sense. Allowing only 5% of a prison housing unit to have visits in one week is not tenable. 

Maintaining healthy relationships with family is one of the primary keys to keeping re-offense rates low. I get that the pandemic complicated things and made visits unavailable, temporarily. But mask mandates are dropping all over the place, and restrictions have been lifted around the world. It's time that the MDOC takes a different strategy and makes it possible for prisoners to see, hug, and visit with their loved ones again.

Victims of Crime Deserve Better Than Stopgap Measures

 One of the things I've struggled with a lot in prison is balancing what I know victims of crime need and the often moronic legislative and prison policies that solve nothing. When someone suffers harm at the hands of another person, that person should be held accountable. I believed this before prison, and I believe it even after 13 years in prison. But I also have a keener sense of justice now, and I know that simply locking up offenders for long periods of time does not accomplish justice. 

If I or someone I loved were a victim of crime, especially violent crime, I would want the offender punished for the harm he or she caused. But getting my pound of flesh would solve nothing. It might make me feel better temporarily, but having the state accomplish my vengeance would do nothing to address the WHY of the crime. It would not reassure victims that offenders are safe to return to society (which happens with most offenders). Yet, punishing crime is essential to maintaining order in society. We cannot let crime go unpunished.

So, how do we balance society's need to deter crime by punishing criminals with the larger needs of justice, like addressing the causes of crime? How do we ensure those who commit crimes are not returned to society as bad or worse off than they were when they committed their crimes in the first place? I don't have all the answers to this dilemma, but here are a few places to start:

1. Let victims have a greater voice in the process.
Instead of the state usurping the offense and making it about a violation of state law, let victims participate in crafting a punishment, and use the legal framework as boundaries of what punishments are allowed. Some victims would be better served by acts of restitution and repentance than long terms of incarceration. And prison sentences should be flexible enough to factor in changes in offenders (including time cuts for milestone achievements). Restitution and restoration should be the goal whenever possible, not solely incapacitation. 

2. Start offenders on a pathway of rehabilitation early in their prison term.
Instead of waiting until an offender is ready to leave prison to address their emotional issues, thinking errors, moral failures, and addiction problems, start this process early so their incarceration becomes a proving ground for change. Prison should also reinforce and reward self-directed rehabilitation.

3. Provide opportunities for offenders to address their own trauma. 
Many offenders have long histories of trauma. This is not an excuse for them turning their pain onto someone else, but addressing this trauma and helping them heal from it could go a long way to preventing future victimization. It could also result in significant reductions in addiction issues. It's not a cliche that hurt people hurt people. It's a reality. 

4. Provide education and job training that is comprehensive and multifaceted. 
It does no good to train someone how to fix plumbing and electrical problems, for example, if he fails to show up to work because he is still deep in his addictions. It also does no good to train someone how to have a legitimate job if he knows nothing about managing his finances, filing taxes, paying bills, budgeting, and living within his means. It also does no good to train someone how to fix cars if he can't get past the interview stage. Many offenders need training in basic interpersonal communication skills, which is essential for job interviews and working with others. 

These ideas are just a start. Victims of crime have to become more important to the criminal justice system. While incapacitation is important, for a time, the end goal ought to be ensuring offenders are safe enough to return to society. Our current system fails to aim for that goal, and it leaves victims in the dark about whether or not offenders are even working to change. Victims of crime deserve better than that. 

This past week, Michigan's Governor signed a bill into law allowing the parole board to keep violent offenders longer by extending the time between parole consideration. This is nothing but a bandaid meant to avoid the real problem: Michigan's prison system does little to nothing to reform its charges. That is the real travesty. That is nothing but the state multiplying the injustice victims have already experienced. Victims of crime deserve better than stopgap measures. They deserve real reform.

Too Young to Buy Cigarettes, But Here, Have a Life Sentence

 This week, I was talking to another prisoner whose life may change if the Michigan Supreme Court rules favorably in a case concerning youthful offenders. After Miller v. Alabama ruled in 2012 that juvenile offenders could not be sentenced to a mandatory life sentence in prison, additional cases have challenged life without parole sentences for offenders aged 18-25 years old. These are referred to as "youthful offenders." Scientific studies have concluded that children's brains are not fully developed, including their ability to make fully rational and thought-out decisions, until around age 25. If the Michigan Supreme Court rules that offenders between 18 and 25 (or some perhaps even a lower age, like 21) cannot be sentenced to a mandatory term of life in prison, several hundred offenders will be eligible for resentencing. 

This other prisoner I spoke with falls into this category. But what stuck out to me in our conversation was the irony he faced when he first came to prison. He's 45 years old today, so when he entered the prison system at 18 years old, prisoners could purchase cigarettes. However, because he was only 18, he was not allowed to purchase them. In other words, he could be held responsible, to the same degree as adults, for the tragic choice he made to kill someone, but he could not be responsible enough to know that cigarettes could kill him. Talk about irony. 

Youth between 18 and 20 are considered not responsible enough to buy cigarettes or purchase alcohol because their brains are too immature. Yet, they can be held responsible, with the full brunt of the law applied to adults, for decisions they make while their brains are not fully developed. Clearly, our laws schizophrenically apply scientific knowledge. 

I contend that youth who make terribly tragic choices, like those that take another person's life, should be held responsible for those choices. But when we choose as a society to put these youthful offenders in prison for the rest of their often very long lives, we fail to consider the science that proves they are not using a fully developed prefrontal cortex. Their rationalization is severely diminished. They are unable to fully comprehend the consequences of their actions. Our laws ought to reflect that fact. 

I don't believe that this prisoner should have been able to purchase cigarettes when he first came to prison. But since our laws are smart enough to acknowledge how stupid it is to let children purchase cigarettes, they ought to be smart enough to take the youthfulness of offenders into account in sentencing. I believe the Michigan Supreme Court will rule favorably for youthful offenders, at least up to 20 years old, but if not, then the Michigan legislature ought to make the change. It's time for Michigan to start using science to inform its laws.

Michigan Prison Shorts

After several years of struggling through the many complications prison presents, a book I co-authored about prison life is finally available for purchase on Amazon.com. This book, titled Insider's Guide to Prison Life, seeks to demystify prison for loved ones on the outside. My goal is to help support and build relationships between those who are incarcerated and their loved ones. If you or someone you know has a loved one in prison, https://www.amazon.com/Insiders-Guide-Prison-Life-Prisoners/dp/B08YFGRLG5/ref=sr_1_1?crid=39HD157HSWZ1D&keywords=insiders+guide+to+prison+life&qid=1646912607&sprefix=insiders+guide+to+prison+life%2Caps%2C108&sr=8-1 is a must read. Buy it now on https://www.amazon.com for $14.99. 

Senate Bill (S.B.) 649, one of the two "good time" bill currently in the Michigan legislature, has been held up for months now from even receiving a hearing. The Senator holding up this hearing is Senator Roger Victory, the chair of the judiciary committee. If you would like to see good time for Michigan prisoners passed, or even debated by the legislature, contact Senator Victory and urge him to schedule a hearing. He can be contacted at SenRVictory@senate.michigan.gov or (517) 373-6920. 

Another important piece of legislation held up by Senator Victory is S.B. 487, which would create a community oversight committee for Women's Huron Valley prison. After numerous lawsuits have failed to improve conditions and safety at the only women's prison in Michigan, it is critical that the MDOC be held accountable. A community oversight committee would provide that essential accountability. Other states have implemented such a committee, which provides an important level of accountability, especially when corrections departments fail to correct confinement conditions. Contact Senator Victory to urge him to schedule a hearing on this bill as well. SenRVictory@senate.michigan.gov or (517) 373-6920. 

Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that mandatory life sentences for juvenile offenders were unconstitutional, Michigan has STILL not resentenced quite a few offenders sentenced as juveniles to life in prison. Various prosecutors have also failed to follow the Supreme Court's guidelines, so some who have been resentenced must be resentenced again. It's a complete waste of resources, simply because Michigan continues to view juvenile offenders like adults. A package of bills has been introduced to ensure juvenile offenders cannot be sentenced to life without parole. They are S.B. 848-851. If you would like to track the progress of these bills or give your input regarding them, contact https://www.safeandjustmi.org to receive timely updates. Their email address is info@safeandjustmi.org.   

The Adolescent Redemption Project (TARP) is another organization working tirelessly to end life without parole for youthful offenders (14-25 years old). TARP is active on social media and offers opportunities for people in free society to hear directly from men and women who were sentenced to life without parole as youthful offenders. You can follow their work at www.AdolescentRedemptionProject.org, on Twitter at @TARP4Mercy, on Facebook under The Adolescent Redemption Project, and InstaGram @AdolescentRedemptionProject. 

I hope you'll take the time to support the great work these organizations are doing and to urge the Michigan legislature to finally act on these important bills.