Family

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Family

Towards the end of our discussion today it seemed that a pattern was emerging throughout most of Vera’s Agencies. This pattern being the integration of family into the various treatment processes. Family is used as a tool for positive reinforcement and motivation. In the article, Coming Home: Building on Family Connections, it is stated that “research supports the notion that family support and acceptance can spur positive change in people released from prison”. In addition to the concept of family, the article explains the approach in which La Bodega de la Familia takes when assisting a new individual. This is the approach of “strengths-based”. In other words, rather than focusing on weaknesses and negativity, strengths are not only the focus, but they are heavily emphasized.

Realizing the importance of family and a strength-based approach caused me to reflect on not only each Vera Agency, (including the project that was mentioned about working on getting kids to school), but my own life. Various questions came to mind.

-How has my own family led me to where I am today?
-Similarly, could I be where I am today without them?
-Why did I choose Esperanza?
-Do I act as a motivator for someone in my life?
-How do the challenges of college compare and contrast to going to jail/prison(going away, etc.)?

The first two questions piggy back off of each other. My family has been my support system, my conscious, my drive, and so much more. And knowing how much they have contributed to my life, I know that without them standing by my side I would not be a Vera Fellow today. Would I be in jail or prison without them, probably not but I would not be as motivated as I am. This leads me to the next question, as to why I chose Esperanza. I can remember during the interview when I reread Esperanza’s mini summary and there was one word that caught my eye, family. I was extremely interested in Esperanza because of the family aspect. I also find it intriguing that a family may not realize how much of a support system they are, and that I may not realize that I too am toughing somebody’s life, the same way that my family motivates me. Something like family to me is something that I am grateful for, however, even though I know how blessed I am today I realized one way in which I take my family for granted, and that is through the motivation that they unknowingly provide me with.

The last question comes across as really having almost no comparison. However, after speaking with Margaret DiZerega before leaving she brought something like this up. I am not sure if this is how she meant it but I found it to be interesting. I realize that John Jay is a commuter campus but I wanted to include it regardless. Both leaving for college and going to jail/prison removes a family member from the support system. Communication becomes difficult, and the relationship is no longer as easy as it once may or may not have been. Being that I am not from New York, but from Rhode Island, I know this feeling. It is time consuming and it takes energy to make sure that long distance relationships are maintained. Of course the biggest contrast is the re-entry aspect. Even though a person going to college is not with their family, they still maintain contact with “the real world”.

Overall, it is interesting, important, and crucial to analyze both family and the strength-based approach. It is hard to imagine a person who has been incarcerated being thrown back into the world without family. To be alone, without motivation, or anyone to show you your strengths seems a recipe for disaster.

As a side note, family is being referred to as a loose definition.

18 comments:

Lenny said...: Katie,

Comparing going away to college and being sent away to prison is, in my opinion, very appropriate. Although it may seem as if the two experiences are completely opposite, I think that they share an important link. Being away from family in a correctional facility or at a university, forces a person to adapt to their new surroundings. It forces people to reshape themselves. More often then not, the individual beings to emulate the characteristics of those who are more established within the institution, or they might begin to think differently as they form new groups (new families if you will). The longer someone is away, the more difficult it might be to re-enter the family they left behind. I experienced this myself when I went away to boarding school as a high school freshman. I became different from who I had been in order to get along in my new environment. I developed interests that enabled me to relate to my new peers, and in the process I distanced myself from my life back home. What allowed me to return comfortably to my ‘old life’, despite how much I had changed, was the warm welcome of my family and friends in New York. Because of these experiences, I can appreciate what it might be like for someone returning from prison if the community you are returning to wants nothing to do with you, or if the members of your family don’t understand how much –or why- you might have changed in even a relatively short time. I think this is why integrated, family inclusive approaches (like those of Esperanza and La Bodega) are most affective and most beneficial to all involved.; September 23, 2010 at 9:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Katie,

I agree with your observation: there does seem to be a pattern emerging, whereby there is an increasing integration of the family into the various treatment processes. I have always believed that family life is crucial to development in most, if not all, aspects of society and the individual. The people who we have the most contact with, and sometimes those who we are most influenced by, play a major role in building us up toward becoming better people. However, there are also those instances in which some family members may actually hinder one’s positive development, and I am sure we all know of at least one case where this is the sad fact for someone’s life. I hope that we, as a society, do not feel defeated by the latter scenario but, instead, press on to find alternatives that help the incarcerated feel connected and cared for somehow.

The necessity for more positive family involvement in the case of prison reentry is evident. Why? I like to think about this specific population’s need in this way: if we who are educated, free from chains, and nestled in many of the comforts that money can and cannot buy are in constant need of encouragement, affection, and communication, then imagine how much more would individuals in the prison population yearn for these very things? Yes, it is possible that these individuals may have committed a crime (and in some cases they are wrongly accused); however, I believe that we, as a society, should try to create better methods of restitution, reintegration, and restoration instead of a singular focus on the punitive. There has to be some way to make their process from imprisonment to reintegration back into society more humane, cost effective, and just plain effective!

You said that “[t]o be alone, without motivation, or anyone to show you your strengths seems a recipe for disaster,” and I completely agree! I often hear many people comment on how much of a “social being” humans are. However, I hope that we can take a moment to think about this truth in light of the current prison reentry methods. Realize that an individual of the prison population sometimes spends huge chunks of his or her life locked away, alone, abused, and in terrible living conditions. They may eventually be released back into society BUT not as the liberated humans that some would like to believe.; September 23, 2010 at 10:27 PM
Professor Reitz said...: Great, prompt post, Katie! And thanks to Lenny and Jamie for commenting early. It has been such a good start to the blog this year with everyone getting on early (and in some cases) often. Keep up the good work.

One of the things I was thinking about from my corner in the back of the room yesterday was how simple the good ideas are and how weird it is that such simple, good ideas have to be (re)discovered. As Katie, Lenny and Jamie all suggest, the importance of the involvement of family (in general and in terms of rehab/re-entry) seems like a big, fat "no duh." Now, I am someone who really has no background in the world of criminal justice other than an interest in detective fiction and the rise of the police in Victorian England. In other words, maybe it seems simple because I don't know enough.

But then one must ask, if it seems so simple and is/was not being/been done, well, then, why? Jamie suggests that maybe family can be part of the problem. That is certainly easy to imagine. But then it seems just as self-evident that family would need to be part of the treatment, so that those original, problematic aspects of this person's life could be dealt with (if not solved, then managed in a way that the person could be more functional/less destructive).

Similarly, anyone who has tried to train a dog, child or spouse knows that positive reinforcement works way better than negative reinforcement. How can this not be the center point of any attempt to get someone from point A to point B (prison to home, 8th grade to high school, unable to ride a bike to able to ride a bike)?

So again, what am I missing? If family involvement/positive reinforcement seems like such common sense, why is it being (re)discovered in demonstration projects by cutting-edge innovators in the 21st century?; September 24, 2010 at 12:33 PM
Katie Spoerer said...: Lenny,
I appreciate your perspective and you bring some important points to light. I really enjoy the comparison you made here, “More often then not, the individual beings to emulate the characteristics of those who are more established within the institution, or they might begin to think differently as they form new groups (new families if you will). The longer someone is away, the more difficult it might be to re-enter the family they left behind.” This point brings me to look at violence in jails and prisons as well as gang membership.

Jamie,
It amazes me more and more that our re-entry programs are lacking the way that they are. At the rate that people are re-arrested, and the statistics that support the fact that individuals who have already served time will most likely serve again, you would think that we would focus more on helping them. Perhaps I am being naïve because I do not know a lot about the actually process associated with being released from jail/prison or the costs that would follow it. Politicians will not push for more money in correction facilities because the public will not see where the money is going, however, if money was used to help rehabilitate, then perhaps crime rates would drop, over population in jail/prison would fall, and focus could be placed on other issues, like counter-terrorism.

Professor Reitz,
When I was thinking about family, it did cross my mind that they could hurt more than they could help. After I thought about that I remembered “La Bodega’s program counsels and refers other family members who are dealing with mental illness or substance abuse, offering prevention as well as treatment.” La Bodega looked at their case load as being the entire family and not just the individual who was being re-entered. This approach is fantastic because it “kills two birds with one stone”. In a sense, this is proactive and it helps to prevent future issues with the newly released individual and it could mean the difference between the other family member being eventually involved in the criminal justice system.; September 25, 2010 at 11:09 AM
Jessica Rivera said...: Katie,

Family is a huge part of a persons development. Without the warmth, motivation, and love they provide, many grow up feeling like they don't belong and /or should not make something of themselves, if their family don't think highly of them.

In many ways, Job Path integrates family and friends in helping individuals find out their true potential. By adding the spice of support, that individual is able to rise and achieve his or her goals. Job path does a great job in making sure that family participates in the individuals life so that they can feel a sense of confidence and don't feel alone in the process.

However, going to what you were saying, there are a lot of youths and adults who are sent to prison and when released, are displaced in society. This is a huge problem that Vera is trying to fix and many of our agencies are trying to tackle as best as they can. But the answer alone as Prof. Reitz said, is simple. It is simple that family is the solution to the problem and while many don't understand why; we need to look into our own lives and see that family in many ways do shape us. We may not all have "perfect" families, but nonetheless, they are our support and drive systems. They are the ones who raise us, and teach us how to be ourselves in this crazy world. But in the end, they are there, they are the ones that help structure us to who we are. And sadly while many or perhaps some don't see the value in family, they are just hurting because they are alone.

Like you said Katie, being alone can hurt someone internally and externally in many ways. Without that comfort and support system, that individual can go about doing a lot of wrong in his or her life. Its a sad truth, but the happy part to this is our agencies mission and goals in trying to fix this wrong, along with the projects Vera is working on, are in the process righting this wrong. With family support systems most agencies have, perhaps in the long run change will be made and seen.; September 25, 2010 at 12:57 PM
ROSARIOJJC said...: I enjoy every single comment this time.
Katie,
my personal opinion is that the way our grandparents guide our parents years ago, is the same way your parents will guide you and you will guide your family in the future. When a family disintegrates at an early stage, what example they are going past to their family and we are going to give our future family?
Let me make some comparisons here.
The way I see the Vera Institute is our grandparents and us, we are their children, and the different organization we intern with are our future family. We are going to guide those organization the way the Vera Institute want and us to represent them during our internship, with our knowledge and core values. If the Vera Institute didn’t guide us in the right path, it similar to a parents that do not show interest in his family without a strong base and they can past it to their family in the future. We see many teenagers incarcerated today because their parents did not care for their families’ futures. Let use the example of Lindsay Lohan, for me she did not have a good path when she was a little girl and look at all the trouble she is facing now. On the other hand, let us look at Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea’s parents guided her through the correct path, and I never heard of Chelsea getting into any kind of trouble with alcohol, drugs or with the law.
My grandparents always guided my parents in a straight path. For me my family takes first priority, I always follow the old saying my grandparents said, a family should always be together in good and bad situations. Do not get me wrong there will be times when someone in the family is not going to agree with another family member, but that does not give the notion to put down that family member. That is the time when that family member needs a hand. After reading the article, La Bodega de La Familia, I can see that families being united and helping one another. In my neighborhood, a Dominican family owns a bodega. The owner’s families are the employees; they also learn how to be responsible to their own family needs. The owner once was telling me that we have to teach our family to stay together, help one another and get an education. If one of the family members starts going down the wrong path, sit down with that family member and say something in a positive way not in a discouraging way.
Katie, you are who you are today because your parents were there for you all the way, if not you would not be the young woman you are today in life. However, we have to take what our parents teach us and embrace, after all they been around longer than you and I. Katie, never look to the past, the past is gone, only concentrate on the future and your aspirations. There will be times you will feel lonely due to circumstance, maybe because your parents are not next to you or any other reason. You are not alone; you have all of us here during good and bad time. Remember the Pointer Sisters song during 1979, “We Are Family” well you can sing, We are a family, I have all my sisters, brothers and me. I cannot make any comments about any of my family members being incarcerated, since my family is still old fashion and if any family member gets out of hand; my family will NOT tolerate it. But I do understand the point that many people in jail are not getting the same affection you and I got at home. On that point, I do not blame the person, I blame the parents. Sometimes we have to find the root of the problem and investigate how the person was raised at home, and if it is necessary give some type of therapy/treatment to that person together with their parents. Jose; September 25, 2010 at 2:07 PM
Christina G. said...: I have a particular interest in on this topic being that my agency is devoted to not only finding jobs for persons recently release from prison, but also assists them with financial matters such as child support, food stamps, and bad credit.

The idea of including families in the re-entry process is an amazing idea, and as Professor Reitz mentioned it makes no sense that we are only realizing this now. Family does give support to a loved one, but to ignore the negative issues and only focus on the positive seems to be the real recipe for disaster.

Katie, it seems that you have had great emotional support from your family and they have been a positive contribution in your life, but even so, I am sure that things are not perfect. But it is nice to have positive role models, which help to shape productive member of our society. However, I agree with Jamie when she acknowledges the fact that sometimes family may be detrimental to the development of an individual. What if you have a family that only provides negative behavior? What if you realize that your family is bad influence and need to distance yourself? Going off what you said about family being a loose term, sometimes people manage to create new families, when the ones that they were raised by are not an adequate support system. I am wondering if those new family members are included in these family centered programs.

Jamie, when I read the last sentence of your statement it gave me chills because at CEO yesterday a participant told myself and Mary Lewis, Life Skills Educator, a story. He said that a man put two flies in a jar and closed the lid. Those two flies kept hitting their heads as they tried to escape. After so many times of trying they gave up and remained at the bottom of the jar. When the man finally opened the lid, the flies didn’t move; they didn’t realize that they were free. He told us that this was an analogy for men and women released from prison. He also told us that not every person is prison is a criminal, and not only those that were wrongly accused. But he explained that a man who kills someone with his car by accident is not a criminal, however he will most likely be serving time for a manslaughter charge.

Yesterday I observed my first Life Skills class. Parolees are coming in for the first time to learn about our agency and begin training for their emersion into the workforce. This was by far my most interesting day at CEO, as Ms. Lewis even included me in her lesson. I was able to engage in dialogue with about 12 of the 21 participants, and they engaged in dialogue with each other. The conversation was extremely stimulating and though provoking. Mary Lewis is a licensed pastor and her technique is very effective. Talking with the participants and understanding their issues and concerns as well as including their family is important to keeping men and women from recidivating. But I am concerned with the fact that family members are going to have their own problems that need to be addressed, but also that there are stronger forces in our society that need to be tackled otherwise our efforts will be in vain. But this might require a brand new spin-off.; September 25, 2010 at 3:49 PM
Prof. Stein said...: This has been a particularly moving blog. It is easy to see the profound impact that most of your families have had on you. It’s a “no brainer” to draw from your stories the conclusion that family, almost alone, is responsible for an individual actor’s success or failure. My work with both child maltreatment and adult criminality suggests that early experiences in the family are indeed formative and that the continued support of family is extremely valuable in easing all kinds of transitions. But this is far from the whole story.

Lenny reminds us that many families are fractured and incapable of providing support because they, too, are sinking. Christina tells a compelling story of ants that stop trying; the metaphor of the ant, trapped in something large and suffocating, who eventually internalizes his prison, is an apt one for the inmate whose “prison” eventually exists so strongly in his mind that no mere storming of the gates will be sufficient to give him back his autonomy. Those psychic prisons often exist long before the first conviction… even caring families may not have the tools to overcome poor schools, poverty, discrimination, unavailability of nutritious and affordable foods, the fact their young men have been incarcerated in numbers totally disproportionate to their appearance in the population, and the national drumbeat that places all responsibility for failure at the feet of the shoeless man or woman who is told to pull him/herself up by his own bootstraps. If this family is double whammied by internal issues-poor health, drug addiction, teen pregnancy-then caretaking efforts must occur on a much wider scale.

So, to wind back to Prof. Reitz’s question "why do we keep recreating the wheel?": broader programs that try to support individual reentry efforts by really supporting families’ needs-like Family Justice-have often failed because they are labor intensive and costly at the outset. Although expenditures can be recouped many times over, it’s still difficult to find the political will to make the investment.

As we have often ended up asking: in whose interest would it be to keep people in prison and/or keep a permanent underclass in society? Here's another no brainer: why not support families from their inception until waiting until they are in trouble? For example, research suggests that home visits by nurses the first 6 months of a baby’s life can cut in half the chance of child abuse occurring. In half! Yet, there is no move to mandate such a program nationally. And there are a multitude of similar interventions that have not been implemented. Cui bono? Who benefits from this awful state of affairs?; September 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM
Alisse Waterston said...: Well, my dear colleagues have beaten me to the questions I would pose for our blog on this topic. In particular, Professor Stein asks "whose interests" are served when it seems so obvious that providing the kinds of supports we're discussing here would be both cost-effective and might actually serve human needs.

I really think this is the big question. Where (to whom and for what?) do our collective resources actually go? For what purposes and what ends? Who benefits most and who benefits least? How does the rhetoric about poverty, family, social problems and even the "national interest" play into protecting real interests on the backs of society's most vulnerable (and today that includes the poor, working poor and the "middle class" now falling into poverty)? Are resources really "scarce" or are they made to be scarce? What would actually happen if resources were more evenly distributed? Who would gain and who would lose?

The safer approaches (those that don't threaten "interests") tend to win out, at least for now. This doesn't meant there can't be a different way. I believe there can be. I wonder if you think so too. What might a different way look like?; September 26, 2010 at 6:39 PM
joseph said...: The comparison between going to prison and going away to school was an ingenious approach to this subject by Katie. Both instances do create a need for the person involve in the given situations to adapt as Lenny pointed out. Being plucked from family whether they are biological or social in construction and being placed in an environment alone and unknowledgeable can me disconcerting. Jamie wrote about hearing how humans are “social beings”. This is true, we have an instinct to connect to others, it is one of our survival techniques, and is why when we are placed in a foreign environment like college outside of our own hometown or detained in a prison, people forge relationships to survive and n the process make new families. This new family then takes the place of the biological or original social family, and in turns takes on the same roles of support, encouragement, and motivation.

Katie wrote that a person away from college maintains contact with the “real world.” I think this is also a good point, but may need to be expanded. The person living away from home on campus for instance has a choice to stay only within the confines of that institution or to also venture out as well into the “real world.” Living on campus itself shelters the person and hinders their growth from experiencing certain experiences of the “real world.” A prisoner does not have that choice, in fact the prisoner is only reminded what the “real world” is like in a one sided sense, through letters, visits, and watching the outside world through the prison wall.

I left an environment very different from the one I live in now. I moved from upstate New York, from a community built around a prison and surrounded by farms. Now I live in New York City, a place called “El Barrio.” Many people speak only Spanish, and their backgrounds are very different from mine. Living with my Aunt and Uncle I’ve created a new family, a new support system to encourage me and motivate me. I understand what Katie is saying that people need some type of family to aid them in certain transitions, especially a transition from an institution into the “real world.”; September 26, 2010 at 6:47 PM
Alisse Waterston said...: This topic has been pressing on my mind since Katie posted. What's on my mind is beyond the series of questions (that I already posted) having to do with why--if it's so obvious that family support is essential--that it comes as some major revelation and brand-new insight with policy-related implications. Of course this question (and those that flow from it) are really important because they provide a context for the more on-the-ground issues of family.

But I'm also wondering about definitions of "family" and about fragility of "families," and how these questions tie into the issues already raised. Katie mentioned that she employs a broad definition of "family," of what constitutes family. When we think about providing supports for family in order that family then help support a vulnerable family member, what is the profile of family (by composition, by kind of relationships, by kind of dynamics, that make it more likely that the family can provide good "support"? Is there a profile of what constitutes a "strong" versus "weak" family in terms of it being able to provide the support we're talking about? Also, what are the forces or factors that make the "family" itself vulnerable?

Also on my mind is how often blame for producing a "screw up" is laid at the door of the family. While there may be truth the accusation, the fault can't all lie with the family. What else factors into problems attributed to dysfunctional families--especially for female-headed, single-mother families?

Finally, and this returns to the original questions about "in whose interests?"--if we can blame social problems on dysfunctional poor mothers, does that blame-game help reproduce the social problems we supposedly want to address? In other words, if it's "her" fault, let's fix "her." If it's not "her" fault, whose fault is it, or what's at fault?; September 27, 2010 at 12:59 PM
Alex.nechayev said...: I must say, the perpindicularness of prison and college seem much more striking to me than the parallels between the two. Although I do agree that the seperation from family, as a support system, can certainly be comparable it falls through on a certain level, and the re-entry process are so different that I feel it destroys the comparison.

I accept the seperation issue as absolutely true. Once in a dormitory style college campus or in prison, one's life changes drastically. The place is new, the people are unfamiliar, you must essentially find a way to "survive" and adapt to the new environment and requirements. However in both situations the connection to family is not neccesarily obstructed. Under both circumstances the closeness of the family is critical to how much emotional and mental support the person recieves, and really the strain to stay connected is very similar.

Family ties play a role in every situation and life period, no one can be where they are unless they traveled their past's path to get there. Family influences are significant in both the positive prospective as well as in the negative, and in a way family is the vessel which took you to the voyage of your life and carries you a long way through it. If it has helped to take you to prison or college I believe it is party responsible, and ought to be a support system, either by being a part of one's life or even being removed from it.

The significant differences betweeen the re-entry process from college or from prison is where the analogy falls apart for me, in a slightly humorous way. The single similarity between the two is the fact that family can aid the person in reintegration to the society as well as help the person emotionally, mentally financially and every other easy family helps in any situation.

I think that the element of positive reinforcement introduced by Professor Rietz should be a key component to the prisoner re-entry process. To truly accomplish their aims of re-entry I think that if the family could be brought along to partake in the process it would be greatly beneficial, however I think that good, strong positive family relations will automatically try to and succeed in helping, but negative ones will not be at all cooperative or helpful, so I think it could wind up being a moot point. Truly a conundrum.; September 27, 2010 at 5:27 PM
Chad Infante said...: This conversation is by far the most interesting we have had on the blog.

I think that Jamie and many more of our colleagues are right in indicated that the family can be as much a part of the problem as they are a part of the solution. But I also think that Jose makes a very important point to say that if done right the family could be the most forward propelling force in a person’s life. But why then is it that the family has not always been a part of the solution?

I ask my fellow class mates to help me answer this question.

If family is as important as we say it is then why has it not always been a part of the solution?

Personally I think that the degradation of the family has to do a lot with the industrial-complex. We rush to put our parents in old folks home because anything that is old or not fancy and new must then be locked away; if it is not top of the line it is not worth our time. We forget about what our grandmothers tell us. Many of my grandmother’s home remedies for sickness are as good or, more often than not, better than the products produced by any pharmaceutical company, yet still there are always studies upon studies that try to disprove these old ideas when the medication we buy is one in the same but simply with different names and packages. Likewise the children that grow up today spurn old wisdom from parents and grandparents alike, crumbling the structure of oral wisdom necessary to uphold the family structure.

Equally important in understanding the degradation of the family, particularly for people of color, is the process of colonialism. Slave families were broken apart so that they could be managed without family reprisal. Native American children were torn away from their parents and sent to Indian schools in a grand scheme of assimilation. Latinos fare much better than both Native Americans and African Americans in that respect; the abuela plays an important role and can help to explain why, despite the many obstacles the Latino/a community faces, they seem to fare much better than some other minority groups.

The answer to many of our problems are often right in our faces and are often times behind us. But we think that looking back is somehow counterproductive. We must look back to the family, to the words and advice of our grandparents and our ancestors if we are to map our future, and this is particularly important for people of color.

Chad Out!; September 27, 2010 at 9:55 PM
Katie Spoerer said...: Professor Waterson,
I find these two questions extremely interesting, “what are the forces or factors that make the "family" itself vulnerable?” and “what else factors into problems attributed to dysfunctional families--especially for female-headed, single-mother families?” What might hinder the ability for a family to truly support an individual? An explanation that I hope to explore more in the future is environmental factors. Particularly social disorder; which was explored in, by Shaw and McKay, the Chicago School study (for those of you who know it and those of you who do not). I do believe that environmental factors could be an issue that might derail an individual or a family and cause them to lose focus.

I do agree with Joseph where I might expand on my idea of the “real world”. My thought is that, inside a jail/prison a person is extremely restricted. Even contact with those outside the complex is so controlled that they essentially lose any concept of being a “social being”. However, living on a campus, an individual does have a choice to connect with many types of individuals at free will. I do not necessarily agree with the statement that “living on campus itself shelters the person and hinders their growth from experiencing certain experiences of the “real world.”” I attended college at the University of Rhode Island for a year and a half, prior to transferring to John Jay College, and I lived on campus. My personal experience was that I had complete freedom, and I was able to grow as an individual because I was independent. On another notes, as Lenny said, “being away from family in a correctional facility or at a university, forces a person to adapt to their new surroundings. It forces people to reshape themselves,” I much like an inmate reshaped myself to my surroundings. I again reshaped myself when I moved to NYC.

The two biggest differences between jail/prison and college are, re-entry (which in some ways I think that they are similar) and the “real world” concept. But as far as family is concerned, the strain that is put on the relationships are very much alike.

Alex mentioned positive reinforcement. I mentioned this topic in my opening and I strongly believe that a family base, supported by a strength-based approach is a supreme combination. I also think that, particularly in New York, it must be taken into consideration that family homes, in many instances, include many generations.; September 27, 2010 at 10:11 PM
Nadiya said...: Thank you everybody for an interesting discussion. Thank you, Katie, for raising an interesting and appealing topic.
Last week, I was looking through a criminal case of one individual at my internship (Neighborhood Defenders’ Service of Harlem). We were discussing it with my mentor. Our client was only 19. It was not his first time being caught. I had mixed feelings towards this individual. On the one hand, I felt sorry for him. At the same time, I was questioning myself what the reasons were for him to commit multiple crimes at that young age. My mentor helped me to come up with the answer. He said that circumstances, environment were a person lives, their family and friends, school/education – all of this shapes the individual. Definitely, if an individual has nobody waiting for them at home, if they are not loved and being taken cared of, they start hanging out with wrong people. At that point, a crime starts. For some of them, crime is the means for survival (poverty plays a huge role in it). For the others, it is a drive and fun (however, it is another topic…).
I cannot compare going to the college with being incarcerated. Definitely, people that you meet in both institutions play a crucial role in one’s life. Time spent in school or prison leaves a scar on your heart. Memories could be pleasant (mostly, those from the college) or the most terrifying (mostly, those from prison)… Re-entry is difficult. Again, people need support and care. They might get lost in the tickets of life. I experienced it twice... The second time was the tougher one. It was my move to the U. S.
I took my family for granted when I was back in Ukraine. When I was fifteen, I moved to the capital and started my college. Even though I started my independent life at that time, still, I could feel their support and care. I came to the U. S. when I was nineteen, all by myself. I enrolled into the college and things started to fall in their places. My family was far away from me. My mom supported me with her warm words; my dad supported me with wise advice. They were so close and so far away at the same time… Some people admire me for my achievements in this country. Often, I hear the words: “Being alone over here, you managed to do so many things…” I participated in numerous activities… I lived through all the difficulties…When I look back, however, I cannot but admit the basis that was given to me by my parents. Life, circumstances, people shaped me. But my parents made me who I am now. And I am grateful for this. I agree with Jessica that our family supports us, “they are the ones who raise us, and teach us how to be ourselves in this crazy world.”; September 28, 2010 at 7:17 AM
Professor Reitz said...: As an English professor, I naturally love the compare-and-contrast thing that is going on here with prison & college. But part of me is, like, huh?

I've been reading Harry Potter with my youngest son lately and in the most recent volume we encountered the Dementors, who, for those of you outside the wizard world, serve as prison guards at the dreaded Azkaban prison. The Dementors enforce prison rules by becoming whatever it is you fear the most; an overwhelming sense of cold and fear assault you until you are basically unconscious from your own terror. The ultimate punishment is "the kiss of death": the Dementor basically sucks out your soul.

Now, it is possible that I've taught a few soul-less classes before, or that, perhaps on the day of an exam, I am what a student fears the most, but even a mediocre college experience is geared toward feeding rather than stealing your soul. Indeed, even the separation from family is different: in college, your family, though absent, is proud of where you are/what you are doing; in prison, your family is, well, something other than proud. O.k., so fear, living death, shame...; September 28, 2010 at 9:23 AM
Prof. Stein said...: What a great conversation!

I wanted to respond to the last issue, regarding the parallels and “perpendicularities” between prison and school. (Thank you, Alexander. I don’t care what Orwell says. I love making up words or giving them novel applications.)

Like Prof. Reitz, at first I recoiled at the idea that the two, seemingly disparate, places-prison and college-were being found comparable. I decided to not say anything because I thought, “well, this is where people are finding a place to identify and build empathy… maybe the situations are not analogous but their association is serving a useful purpose.” Still, I was glad to see Alexander’s and Prof. Reitz’s thoughts about the queer comparison because it did feel strange to have left it uncommented upon. Then I let myself free associate a bit. I would like to share my thoughts with you.

I started with this dismay that students would compare college to prison. I then realized that clearly, many students feel that college is a foreign place, where the rules can seem arbitrary, the stress may feel overwhelming, and those supervising them are insensitive to their needs: a kind of prison. Then I thought about how, when I have asked former or current inmates why they do not take advantage of, or follow through on, educational and employment opportunities, they respond that “it’s just too hard”, “I will fail”, or “I won’t fit in”. In comparison, going back to prison (amazingly, to one who hasn't been there) feels like the safer alternative. And because incarcerated people often internalize prison reality as inevitable (remember the ant?), they will choose the familiar dungeon over the unknown job or school opportunity. I heard one former inmate, returning home after thirty years, say that "people seem frightened of me but if they only knew how frightened I am of them!" Although this seems counterintuitive, it is true for many people reentering society.

Similarly, people used to ask me, sometimes with a kind of awe, whether I was ever afraid talking to murderers. For the most part, I was not. But then a very astute questioner once said to me “Were you terrified”-here I waited for the usual query about doing research in prisons-“when you asked those two famous psychiatrists to work with you in graduate school?” He knew the truth: that it is hardest to do things you have never done before, where you risk not only failure but humiliation, than to stay in your comfort zone, even if your comfort zone has murderers and rapists in it.

Maybe prisons and schools have more in common than I thought.; September 28, 2010 at 1:22 PM
Professor Reitz said...: Prof. Stein: those two famous psychiatrists were your Dementors!; September 29, 2010 at 8:57 AM