The Reality of Recidivism:

The harsh conditions of confinement, the strict policy adherence and having all decisions made for the offender is sometimes less difficult than making the right choices in a hostile free environment. Offender's visions of new freedoms and successful life outcomes while incarcerated are often met with realities of a difficult society structure. Self worth can dissipate rapidly when expectations for employment, living arrangements and relationships deteriorate.

Reintegration to a life of freedom is hard and intimidating. The odds of a successful parole can be low. This final and in depth lesson will explore these issues and offer insight on how to best overcome the adjustment. The first challenges to face the new parolee are simply making good choices once released.

Transition From Prison to Home

The psychological consequences of incarceration may represent significant impediments to post-prison adjustment. They may interfere with the transition from prison to home, impede an ex-convict's successful re-integration into a social network and employment setting, and may compromise an incarcerated parent's ability to resume his or her role with family and children. The range of effects includes the sometimes subtle but nonetheless broad-based and potentially disabling effects of institutionalization prisonization, the persistent effects of untreated or exacerbated mental illness, the long-term legacies of developmental disabilities that were improperly addressed, or the pathological consequences of supermax confinement experienced by a small but growing number of prisoners who are released directly from long-term isolation into freeworld communities.

There is little or no evidence that prison systems across the country have responded in a meaningful way to these psychological issues, either in the course of confinement or at the time of release. Over the next decade, the impact of unprecedented levels of incarceration will be felt in communities that will be expected to receive massive numbers of ex-convicts who will complete their sentences and return home but also to absorb the high level of psychological trauma and disorder that many will bring with them.

The implications of these psychological effects for parenting and family life can be profound. Parents who return from periods of incarceration still dependent on institutional structures and routines cannot be expected to effectively organize the lives of their children or exercise the initiative and autonomous decision making that parenting requires. Those who still suffer the negative effects of a distrusting and hyper vigilant adaptation to prison life will find it difficult to promote trust and authenticity within their children. Those who remain emotionally over-controlled and alienated from others will experience problems being psychologically available and nurturant. Tendencies to socially withdraw, remain aloof or seek social invisibility could not be more dysfunctional in family settings where closeness and interdependency is needed.

The continued embrace of many of the most negative aspects of exploitative prisoner culture is likely to doom most social and intimate relations, as will an inability to overcome the diminished sense of self-worth that prison too often instills. Clearly, the residual effects of the post-traumatic stress of imprisonment and the retraumatization experiences that the nature of prison life may incur can jeopardize the mental health of persons attempting to reintegrate back into the freeworld communities from which they came. Indeed, there is evidence that incarcerated parents not only themselves continue to be adversely affected by traumatizing risk factors to which they have been exposed, but also that the experience of imprisonment has done little or nothing to provide them with the tools to safeguard their children from the same potentially destructive experiences.

The excessive and disproportionate use of imprisonment over the last several decades also means that these problems will not only be large but concentrated primarily in certain communities whose residents were selectively targeted for criminal justice system intervention. Our society is about to absorb the consequences not only of the "rage to punish" that was so fully indulged in the last quarter of the 20th century but also of the "malign neglect" that led us to concentrate this rage so heavily on African American men.

Remarkably, as the present decade began, there were more young Black men (between the ages of 20-29) under the control of the nation's criminal justice system (including probation and parole supervision) than the total number in college. Thus, whatever the psychological consequences of imprisonment and their implications for reintegration back into the communities from which prisoners have come, we know that those consequences and implications are about to be felt in unprecedented ways in these communities, by these families, and for these children, like no others. Not surprisingly, then, one scholar has predicted that "imprisonment will become the most significant factor contributing to the dissolution and breakdown of African American families during the decade of the 1990s" and another has concluded that "[c]rime control policies are a major contributor to the disruption of the family, the prevalence of single parent families, and children raised without a father in the ghetto, and the 'inability of people to get the jobs still available'."

Ex-Offenders who Violate the Terms of Release

For minor administrative rule violations, the Parole Division may, at its discretion, decide to hold a conference with the offender or impose a low-level sanction such as writing a letter of reprimand. However, any offender who is alleged to have committed a new offense, absconded from supervision, or violated any rules, terms, or conditions can have a warrant issued for his or her arrest. Such warrants, which are sometimes referred to as "blue warrants," will be executed by law enforcement authorities.

At a revocation hearing, testimony is heard, and the hearing officer will determine whether enough evidence exists to recommend revocation. Even if the offender has received a new felony conviction, a revocation hearing will be conducted to consider mitigating circumstances, unless the offender waives his or her right to the hearing. If the evidence shows a violation, the hearing officer may recommend that the appropriate authorities (that is, the Board) revoke the offender's parole or mandatory supervision.

If supervision is not revoked, the Board may allow the offender to continue supervision under the same or modified conditions. Alternatively, the Board may order a transfer to an Intermediate Sanction Facility. Parolees arrested or convicted for a technical violation or minor infractions while use face a 90 to 120 days in prison stay, are now regularly being detained for sentences longer than those served on their original convictions.

A Profile of Returning Prisoners

Of the 55,183 prisoners released from Texas Department of Criminal Justice custody:

• 84 percent were male; 18 percent were married.

• 44 percent were non-Hispanic blacks, 32 percent were non-Hispanic whites, and 24 percent were Hispanics.

• The median age at release was 34, and 70 percent were under 40. The youngest prisoner was 17 years old and the oldest was 97.

• 39 percent had been incarcerated for drug offenses, 33 percent for property crimes, 17 percent for violent offenses, and 11 percent for other infractions, including driving-while-intoxicated and weapons offenses.

• The average prisoner served 3.3 years in state correctional facilities.

60 percent were released through non discretionary means, such as the end of a court-ordered sentence; nearly all the rest were released through the approval of the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

• 59 percent were subject to parole supervision or felony probation supervision after release and had to abide by such conditions as having a job or participating in drug or alcohol treatment.

Where Do They Go?

• Immediately following release, the vast majority (99 percent) went to a Texas community, with 58 percent returning to five of 254 counties. None of the remaining 249 counties received more than 2 percent of the returning prisoners.

• Twenty-six percent returned to Harris County, which includes Houston. Fifteen percent went to Dallas County, which encompasses the city of Dallas. Eight percent headed to Tarrant County, home to Fort Worth, and 6 percent returned to Bexar County, which includes San Antonio. Travis County, which includes Austin, received 4 percent.

• Of the 23,177 prisoners released to community-based parole or mandatory supervision, the largest share (23 percent) returned to Houston. Within the city, 26 percent returned to just seven neighborhoods facing high levels of poverty, crime, and joblessness: Alief, East Houston, East Little York/Homestead, Kashmere Gardens, Trinity/Houston Gardens, Third Ward, and MacGregor. Each neighborhood received between 196 and 538 supervised prisoners, more than many entire Texas counties

The Role of the Parole Officer
Rule number one, never miss or be late for a parole visit. A parole officer is thoroughly trained to surveying uncertain behavior. A parole office can get the help a parolee needs. There are many agencies, programs, and people willing to help you make it! It is not a sign of weakness to turn to them for help. It shows that you are smart—smart enough to realize everyone needs support now and then.

Ask your parole officer or your parole agent to give you the names, addresses,
and phone numbers of local agencies and groups like these:

• Social service organizations
• Food pantries and places where you can get a free hot meal
• Places that have free or low-cost clothing
• Places where you can buy inexpensive used furniture
• Health clinics (free or low-cost) or health care providers
• Mental health clinics or mental health professionals
• Substance abuse treatment programs and support programs (Narcotics
Anonymous/Alcoholics Anonymous are for you, Nar-Anon and Al-Anon are for your family)
• Support groups for ex-offenders and their families
• Check with libraries and community centers
• If you are a senior citizen, check with the Area Agency on Aging

Various Parole Programs

Mentally Retarded Offender Program (MROP) is a program that places mentally retarded releasees on a specialized caseload with a parole officer trained specifically for providing supervision and services that meet these offenders' special needs.

Special Needs Parole is an early parole, with Board of Pardons and Parole approval, permitted for offenders who are elderly, terminally ill, physically handicapped, mentally ill or mentally retarded.

Sex Offender (SO) are offenders who have been sentenced for committing a sexual offense, have a past conviction for an offense involving sexually deviant behavior, have displayed sexually deviant behavior in the commission of any offense, or have admitted committing sexually deviant behavior. Sex offenders require a higher degree of supervision than other offenders do.

Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP) has for its primary goal to reduce the rate of re-offense and move the participant toward a more pro-social lifestyle.

Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities (SATFs) primarily provide treatment and rehabilitation to offenders with substance abuse problems. They also offer education and life skills training. They may offer vocational training and 24-hour supervision.