“Creating the Permanent Prisoner” by Sharon Dolovich

Part 1: Summary. 

Statement of Title and Author. 

The title of this publication is “Creating the Permanent Prisoner” by Sharon Dolovich. The journal was published in 2011 as part of an academic periodical dubbed the  LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE: AMERICA'S NEW DEATH PENALTY.  In this writing, Dolovich reviews the issue of prisoners serving shorter terms rather than permanent ones. Additionally, the scholar raises serious issues concerning why the number of prisoners serving life sentences are few. She makes a correlation between shorter terms of a sentence to repeated offences. Dolovich (2011) proposes the awarding of life imprisonment compared to the shorter sentences. Additionally, she questions the effectiveness of rehabilitation initiatives questioning the psychology of the ex-convicts in their integration to the community. 

General topic. 

The general topic of the publication centers around the need for life imprisonment over shorter sentences. Dolovich indicates that the continued isolation of prisoners has a damaging effect on their psychology (p.106). The scholar correlates the findings of a research conducted by Craig Haney on secure housing units for prisoners. The report indicates that almost 97% of the prisoners exemplified anger and aggression issues towards their neighbors. The impact of punitive isolation under less conducive environment had an adverse impact on the behavior of the prisoners. Therefore, these findings reiterate the need for life imprisonment. 

The effectiveness of the penal system in rectification and rehabilitation of behavior is questioned. The writer indicates that in 2006 out of 840,000 prisoners, only 41,000 served the life sentence. This small number of lifelong sentences only correlates to about 1.7% of the total cases. Therefore, this assertion raises scrutiny to the efficacy of the system as the number of people going to jail keeps increasing—the writer advocates for a stricter approach to the imprisonment of wrongdoers.  

Main Argument. 

Whereas it remains the duty of the government in the rehabilitation of wrongdoers, the principle of permanent exclusion promotes the total removal of such individuals. The idea of total exclusion from the environment is aimed at total rehabilitation of the whole community through selective isolation of the wrongdoers. Dolovich indicates that ex-convicts have a sense of “hypermasculinity” which pose a serious impediment to emotional connection and social integration. The scholar indicates that people with criminal records have a tendency to prove their masculinity through engaging in violent acts (p.107). 

Description of Book/Text.  

The difference in policy and approach by the two systems is responsible for mix up in the penal system. The reintegration system campaigns for the social reintegration of the prisoner after serving his/her term. Alternatively, the exclusionary policies seek the total removal of criminal entities from society through limiting their freedoms of movements, speech, and association. However, the low number of people serving life sentences without parole is attributed to the preferential application of the re-integrationist system over the system of permanent exclusion.  

Part II: Discussion and Evaluation. 

The adoption of the permanent exclusion improves the state of the penal system (p. 102). The partiality of the criminal code to embrace diverse principles in its operation is responsible for the American penal meltdown. Dolovich (2011) indicates that whereas many are arrested and serve their sentences, an alarmingly small number of people often end up serving lifetime sentences. The scholars argue about the effectiveness of the penal system as more convicts pass through the organization. The assertion made by the scholar stems from the obligation placed upon the criminal and corrections systems. Typically, both institutions are meant to operate with the intent of seclusion of violent people and the rehabilitation of these same entities. 

Nonetheless, these institutions have continued to admit, acquit, and readmit the same criminals. Consequentially, the adoption of the principle of exclusion over the re-integrationist policies is relevant in the efficacy of the prison system. Therefore, the scope of this paper argues the importance and relevance of the exclusionary system.  

Today’s society is not only sophisticated but also characterized by a lack of resources. Typically, life has become economically demanding and challenging. Hence, the scarcity of resources and falling standards of living in individual communities is instrumental in the increasing crime rate. Therefore, backed with a reintegration policy to rehabilitate criminals into the same neighborhood, the cycle of crime never ends. Thus, once convicted felons are released back into the street, the chances of criminal activities happening increases, a situation that endangers the lives of many in the community. Alternatively, does prison rehabilitation work? 

The basis of the imprisonment is the rehabilitation of the criminal entity. The penal and prison system work in conjunction with the ministry of justice in rendering verdicts and punishments to offenders. This system of balance and checks allows for tranquility and safety in the country. Nonetheless, how is the rehabilitation of prisoners conducted? Are these practices effective? These are some of the pressing questions that are continuously raised concerning the penal system. Nonetheless, it is imperative to state that provided the integrationist policies work separately without consideration of the restrictions placed on convicted felons; therefore, no accomplishment in prisoner rehabilitation.  

American prisons have been instrumental in the acquiring of skills and even education by the prisoners. While serving their terms, most prisoners enroll for education and apprentice programs in which they receive certification and skills. These new qualifications and expertise are aimed at improving their lives once their sentences are commuted or served. Nonetheless, most of the American job market remains opposed to hiring convicted felons. The existence of these labor restrictions is detrimental to the lives of the felons post-conviction. Resultantly, such people are often left with the option of crime or starvation.  

The LWOP (Life without parole) allows for permanent exclusion. Nonetheless, it is essential to state that the LWOP only serves to increase the protection of the broader society from criminals. Additionally, it is also necessary to indicate that the LWOP is only one of the correctional alternatives under the whole tutelage of permanent exclusion. Therefore, not all crimes committed warrants one to life imprisonment. Additionally, the Dolovich propositions on the adoption of the permanent exclusion come with the revamping of the living conditions within the prisons, reduction of parole hearings, and the restructuring of job and living policies that restrict the lives of newly released felons.  

The current American penal system is an insult to the penological principles. Not only do polices of reintegration violate laws like deterrence and retribution, but they also contribute to the insecurity of the society. Nonetheless, through the implementation of Dolovich’s American Carceral System, the identification of social deviants for permanent exclusion is possible (Dolovich, 2011). This approach is aimed at targeting several violent individuals for life imprisonment sentences as a means of reducing the existence of more crimes and promoting the obligation of the penal system. Additionally, it is also essential to state that Dolovich’s position on the re-integrationist principle remains that need to improve the community’s rehabilitation of convicted felons through the provision of a conducive environment. This assertion relates to the creation of laws and regulations that protect Americans with criminal records from accessing specific jobs or even living in certain neighborhoods. Alternatively, the need to maintain the rule of law and tranquility should be the sole objective of any intervention to improve the efficacy of the penal system.   

Reference . 

Dolovich, S. (2011). Creating the permanent prisoner.  published in LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE: AMERICA'S NEW DEATH PENALTY , 11-13.