About
This is the personal blog of Roger Brooking. But if you’re interested in contributing an article call 04 475 9420.
I have been working as an alcohol and drug counsellor in Wellington for the last ten years. Most of my clients are in the justice system – which is not surprising considering that 80% of crime occurs under the influence of alcohol and drugs
During this time I have discovered that the courts repeatedly fail to mandate or encourage offenders into treatment – and as a result they relapse, re-offend and frequently return to prison. I have also found there is very little rehabilitation available in prison and even less support when prisoners come out. This situation has been so frustrating to me that I have written a book about it.
It’s called Flying Blind – How the justice system perpetuates crime and the Corrections Department fails to correct.
Flying Blind describes the way in which groups like the so-called Sensible Sentencing Trust have dominated public debate about justice and sentencing issues in New Zealand. Victoria University criminologist Prof John Pratt has described this manipulation of the media as political populism and says it has driven competition between the major political parties in Western democracies to appear tough on law and order. This has led to increased use of remand, longer sentences and the building of more and more prisons – the last Labour Government built four, National has already built one at Mt Eden and is planning another at Wiri. As a result, New Zealand now has the second highest rate of imprisonment in the West; we lock up nearly 200 people out of every 100,000 of our population.
In the process, little attention is paid to addressing the drivers of crime or providing rehabilitation. Flying Blind describes the political and systemic obstacles which stand in the way of early intervention and effective rehabilitation – and keep offenders locked into a vicious cycle of crime.
Flying Blind also points out that using prison as the default strategy for dealing with crime is ineffective and imposes an unacceptable financial burden on the taxpayer. New Zealand is facing the biggest financial deficit in its history and we need to find a new approach. This blog provides a vehicle for comment on these issues.
“In the process, little attention is paid to providing rehabilitation.”
What rehabilitation Roger? The reason they are being locked up longer is because your Criminology mates have failed to come up with anything that prevents re-offending. You can’t tell me that Restorative Justice is the answer. What rehab have you got that works?
“Associate Professor Greg Newbold, School of Sociology and Anthropology
Abstract
Since 1910, New Zealand has been engaged in a constant search to find a method of rehabilitating criminals that really works. In 1996, inspired by the work of Canadian criminologist Paul Gendreau and others, the Department of Corrections embarked on a new experiment called Integrated Offender Management (IOM). Based on a psychotherapeutic model, IOM involves a complicated and expensive process of identifying an inmate’s ‘criminogenic needs’, creating programs to address those ‘needs’, and applying the programs in the hope of preventing further offending. When initially conceived it was hoped that IOM would produce at least a 25 percent improvement in overall correctional efficiency. Eleven years on, with five-year reconviction rates remaining in the region of 86 percent, it appears that IOM has failed. This paper examines the objectives, strategy, and actual implementation of IOM in New Zealand, and suggests why the project inevitably foundered. “
There was also no chance that Integrated Offender Management (IOM) would ever make any difference. Its focus is on designing rehabilitation programmes. But the Corrections Department does not provide adequate funding to even address literacy problems of prisoners (estimated to affect 90% of prisoners), let alone rehabilitation of a similar percentage with alcohol and drug problems.
IOM also ignores the lack of accommodation and support available to prisoners on release. In other words, IOM is an ill-conceived strategy lacking in clear goals which was never funded properly. Of course it failed.
Good to see your blog Roger
From a person who just left prison I knew I needed help, I asked for help, there was absolutely no help. From my unit of 60 people not 1 person was on a program for rehabilitation ? This has to be at least part of the reason we are in prison to rehabilitate or at least get the opportunity. I know I am not perfect and have many faults but at least I want to try and change
Hi all,
Excellent Roger….So what would be helpful for those in prison who also have alcohol &/or drug issues? Could clinics from the health units in prisons be utilised? I know there are community rehab places for forensic psych folks; would they be a useful model? I’d love to be part of this….
The National government has doubled the availability of alcohol and drug treatment in prison so that now approximately 1,000 prisoners a year can attend. However, 23,000 people spend time in prison each year so 1,000 is less than 5%.
Another gaping gap in the system is that there is very little funding for alcohol and drug assessments on prisoners applying for parole. This is why Judge Carruthers made the comment that the Parole Board is ‘flying blind’ – which became the title of my new book (see the link at the top of the page).
Finally, there is a woeful lack of supported accommodation and halfway houses in the community for those coming out of prison. New Zealand releases only 1% of prisoners into halfway houses compared with 60% in Canada. Judge Carruthers says that because of the extensive use of halfway houses, the Canadians are 5 to 6 times more successful than New Zealand at reducing reoffending .
I had great passion for wanting to “get out there” and help offenders by either being involved in the creation of programmes or policies surrounding them and working around educating our society or by helping the offenders themselves. Unfortunately, with everything National have done I feel “helpless” to even try. How are we meant to help when National have made things more difficult? what are the chances now for rehabilitation? for adequate justice? It is a real shame. Only when society wake up will we see these changes.
As a former prisoner who was jailed under the banner of a “miscarriage of justice”, and having been released some five years ago after serving 14 months, the biggest problem I have found is finding someone willing to give me a chance to prove what a fantastic employee I can be. Mental health was an area I felt I could contribute to in a positive way…but no, halfway through completing tertiary study to become a Mental Health Support Worker I am told that I am unsuitable to be considered for employment due to my conviction. The fact that I was deemed suitable to do two days a week work placement (unpaid I might add), given my own login and password to that organisation’s computer system perplexes me! I’m ok to do unpaid work…but not okay to be a fully paid employee. Were I any weaker I would have become a “reoffending statistic” and resorted to the crime I was supposed to have committed in the first place. I now suffer from low esteem as I cannot become a contributing member of society again; I am what people would now class as a benefit bludger; and I find it very daunting, to say the least, that this is my lot for the rest of my life. My loss…the country’s loss…your loss. For as long as people who wish to show society they have changed are stopped from doing that, there will always be people who will return to the comfort and safety of a life of crime. Where is the logic in that?