Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
Adjustment: how well an intent will adjust to prison - intervention and monitoring, how well inmates get along with staff and peers
Escape risk: likelihood of escaping due to previous escape attempts or mental health
Public safety: violent criminal history
Perimeter: no gates, no fences, no portal, open design - escapes occur often
Firearm use: only used in emergencies (COs need approval from warden to use)
Restrictions: free movement except at night, have phone access, try to mimic eventual release
Allows more interaction between inmates than maximum, otherwise essentially the same - inmates are prepared for minimum security
Perimeter: double fences, alarms, cameras, visitors go through x-rays machines
Firearm use: around the perimeter, but not used inside
Restrictions: moderate on movement, interactions, and privileges
Security level: minimum/medium for women, minimum for men
Must be open to Indigenous teachings (do not have to be Indigenous)
Proposed solution to Indigenous overrepresentation
Not enough lodges
Inequality between CSC operated and S. 81 facilities
Under capacity
There are reasonable grounds to believe there is a risk to the public, staff, or inmates and it has been determined that they cannot be safely managed at any other maximum-security institutions or a Treatment Centre (transfer to SHU is only reasonable alternative)
They are identified as a radicalized offender and it has been determined that they cannot safely be managed at any other maximum-security institutions or a Treatment Centre
Few/no programs
Restricted access to mental health services
No objective criteria
every 4 months there is a reassessment
arbitrary process
more expensive
Overcrowding → less resources
may be legally innocent
unprepared for diverse needs
no resources upon release from remand
Ensuring safety of incarcerated people
Upkeep of physical infrastructure
Overcrowding
Access to health care
Ensuring institutional security
Security + surveillance (inside prison): CX-01
Service - adjustment, needs, re-entry: CX-02
Canadian citizenship
High school graduation
CPR/First-aid/automated external defibrillator
Pass interview, background check, and psychological assessment
Online (4 weeks), 2-4 weeks of written assignments, in person for 12-13 weeks
Not standardized across provinces
Mental health training: optional 2 day workshop
“Read the book, but don’t throw the book” - read situation and adjust response based on situation
Small decisions have large impacts
Always help another officer
Don’t rat out on fellow officers
Don’t become overly friendly with inmates
Defer to experience of veteran offenders
Prisons don’t deter (experimental effect)
Focus on deterrence, not rehabilitation
Limited availability on programs and services
Prisons are not designed to be rehabilitative environments
Physically + psychologically stripped down
Marks the changing worlds
No status restoration when re-integrated back into society
inmates constantly hungry
Resort to canteen which is processed food and is expensive
Request nutritional assessment by dietician
Impacts safety and security - food is commodity
Criminal human capital
Pre-prison reputation or high-profile crimes
Obtained through school of crime - getting to know other people and creating networks in prison and social connections
Less segregation by race/ethnicity compared to US prisons
Belief that Canada is a multicultural country
Informal rule that there is no tolerance for racism
Racial diversity in incarcerated population - overrepresentation of certain groups
Due to systemic discriminatory policies and colonial history
Stressful and Restrictive environments due to overcrowding and higher security having more pushback
violence is an instrument of power and control
Gang-related conflicts
Collecting unpaid debts
“Street beef” that make it into prison
Infrequent and short stays to “end as soon as possible”
Programs and services provided
Approval by oversight committee to keep someone in SIU
Offered an opportunity for minimum 4 hours out of cell
2 hours with meaningful human interaction
More than half of SIU stays are more than 15 days
No legislated maximum stay
Can’t access programs/services
First review at 60 days
Neurological
Psychosis and insomnia
Early mortality
Indigenous overrepresentation
Mental health overrepresentation
Unclear purpose
Substance dependency
Mental health disorder
History of family dysfunction, trauma, abuse
Residential instability
Low education + employment
Long criminal history
Team: institutional parole officer, correctional officer, manager
Goal: support rehabilitation + protect public
Challenge: short incarceration for provincial/territorial = limited programming, focus on release planning
Done during intake + throughout sentence
Looks at how likely and individual is to reoffend based on factors (spousal assault, violent youth, sex offences)
Antisocial peers
Antisocial personality pattern
Antisocial/pro-criminal attitudes (ONLY STATIC RISK FACTOR)
History of antisocial behaviour
Lack of attachment to family/marital supports
School/employment problems
Lack of prosocial leisure or recreational activities
Substance abuse
Variation between jurisdictions in assessment tools used and information used in assessment
Impacts self-perception and imposes stigmas
Biased towards specific groups (Indigenous, Black, female, mental disorder – more likely to be overclassified)
Public consensus is that people in prisons don’t deserve programs – balance between punishment and rehabilitation
Limited access to programs
Programs are not being implemented as intended
There is no throughcare to community programming
Programs that follow risk-need-responsivity model
Where participants are motivated and open to change
Education and vocational programs
Substance use programs that include cognitive behavioural therapy and throughcare
Sex-offender specific programs that use RNR + CBT
Reduces recidivism through community supervision
Minimize pains of imprisonment
Incentivize good behaviour
Saves cost for government
Statutory release is most common: 61.7% (more than half)
Most people serve 2/3 of their sentence before released into the community
Parole is a decision made by the Parole Board of Canada + Statutory Release is not a decision, it is mandated by law
Life sentences are only eligible for Parole, not Statutory Release
Cultural and communication barriers – people who sit on parole boards are different from individuals applying for parole
“Paper hearings” for provincial/territorial applicants - applicants do not have the opportunity to explain themselves in person
Public and political pressure
Too much discretion and subjectivity – everyone who has the same factors should have the same outcomes (precedent)
No feedback on outcomes of decisions
Housing
Stability = lower recidivism
Females, Indigenous, those who struggle with mental health and substance abuse
Important for supervision and programs
Employment
Stable employment = lower recidivism
Incarceration creates barriers to employment because:
Criminal record is stigmatizing
Lack of job skills and gap in employment history
Characteristics of incarcerated people in compound barriers
Health Care
Supervise
Released on Parole or Statutory Release
Requirements vary
Responsibilities
Risk assessments and case management planning
Enforce conditions of parole
Assist in accessing programs and services
Dual role: support + enforce
· Healing circles and restorative justice – voluntary
· Purpose:
Provide support for sex offenders beyond warrant expiry
Provide meaningful opportunity for community engagement
Successful completion of sentence
Revocation due to new conviction
Suspension: arrested and returned to custody
Small majority of people who repeatedly offend
Support of parole officers
Unreasonable parole conditions
Family + community support