True Casualties: The Children of Prisoners

Breakpoint with Chuck Colson ^ | 5/25/2006 | Mark Earley

[Mr. Silverback]

Note: This commentary was delivered by Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley.

When Joe’s dad went to prison, Joe went to prison too—a prison of shame and anger. Responding to his father’s incarceration, Joe fought, drank, and smoked dope. And while Joe’s prison was figurative, he was on a path leading to a real prison with bars and barbed wire.

Joe is not a unique case. As a recent article in the National Journal claimed, “The next generation of prisoners is going to come from the current generation of prisoners.”

Sadly, society stands idly by as the children of prisoners become the unintentional casualties of the “war on crime.” With more than 2.3 million individuals currently behind bars in America, our incarceration rate quadruples that of previous decades. And the children of these prisoners are five to seven times more likely than the average child to end up in prison one day. Even more shocking, the American Correctional Association concluded that 52 percent of female juvenile offenders had an incarcerated parent.

Tragically, intergenerational punishment extends even beyond the United States.

On a recent trip to Bolivia, I had the opportunity to visit San Pedro prison in La Paz. As I watched throngs of prisoners shove each other out of the way for their daily bowl of gruel, I noticed a little girl with matted hair and grubby face lift up her own bowl among the ranks of hardened criminals. Although innocent of any crime, she had no other choice but to join her parents behind bars.

She doesn’t deserve prison. And neither do the 2 million American children with an incarcerated parent. But that’s exactly where we will send them one day if we do not begin to reform the criminal justice system.

We must reevaluate who we lock up, why we lock them up, and how we lock them up. Prisons are for people we are afraid of, not mad at. In other words, prisons are for dangerous offenders who pose a threat to society. We need to challenge “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” laws and mandatory minimum sentencing, responsible for filling 60 percent of our federal prisons with drug offenders, many of whom have no prior criminal record for a violent offense and many of whom are not drug dealers. On top of that, we need to consider the ramifications of separating families by incarcerating prisoners far from their homes.

But we can do more than influence public policy. Jesus said in Matthew 18:5 that “whoever welcomes a little child like this in My name welcomes Me.” The Church has always heeded the call to care for at-risk children—forgotten children. And these children are the most at-risk and forgotten children in America. God has a bias toward those who do not have advocates. As His followers, we should too.

Thanks to a caring Prison Fellowship mentor and a local church, Joe has embraced Christ and now spends his free time participating in mission trips and playing football with friends from the church youth group. Through Prison Fellowship’s Angel Tree program, we have watched thousands of children of prisoners like Joe escape the vicious cycle of crime and come to Christ.

Would you consider helping us reach the unintended casualties of the war on crime? Help us by mentoring a prisoner’s child or buying a child a Christmas gift on behalf of their incarcerated parent. Help us to send a child to a week of Christian summer camping. Call us at BreakPoint (1-877-322-5527), and we’ll tell you how you can help and make a difference.

This is part seven in the “War on the Weak” series.

[Mr. Silverback]

1. Focusing on those cases, despicable as they are, is what the media wants us to do. That's why they report them.

2. Read the whole thread. We've had a discussion about how some states abuse three strikes and others do exactly what they should. If the three strikes in question are all serious violent crimes, I'm 1005 behind three strikes. If not, it's a crime itself.

[coloradan]

A burglar can do a great amount of damage to hundreds of people's lives, whether he/she is violent or not. When you steal from a person, you are taking their time and labor against their will.

I support laws against burglary, and I also would support laws requiring restitution, which is not presently the case.

I do not, however, find it abusive to keep those criminals away from my children.

We're talking life without parole here... three strikes and you're out. Do you think that's the right punishment for a burglar?

Is it your position that disagreeing with a law or its punishment makes it permissible to break it?

That was not my position.

I would only agree if the law violated basic human rights. I don't concur that drug laws do that.

Is owning your own body a human right? Or do you agree with the drug warriors that each person's body is property of The State, and therefore The State has an overriding interest in what goes into that body, over the wishes of the body's sole inhabitant?

That because not everyone else is a perfect parent we should give criminals a pass?

Straw man.

Well if "whatever that is" is beating a child into a coma, abandonment, constant abuse, nonsupport, or exposing the child to a constant chain of criminal activity? YES!

Those things are already crimes, and my statement was, criminals don't have a lock on bad parenting - meaning, there are non-criminal activities that lead to screwed-up children. The things you just cited ARE criminal, therefore, not responsive to my question about nanny-state parenting laws.

[after dark]

You must not understand my writing. I think violent evil people should be incarcerated.

I draw the line at incarcerating people for accidentally passing bad checks , and accidentally touching police officers with their pinky. It is immoral to apply the three strikes rule to those types of laws. You really must ask yourself if the sort of people who abuse the three strikes law have a sexual fetish for incarcerating people. Then again it might just be greed. Prisons provide good jobs for many people. I can understand why some people would want to work in a prison filled with people who accidentally wrote hot checks trying to feed their children on a tight budget.

As for the victimless crimes of being a dope head or being a whore, I favor more creative and less costly punishments such as caning.

[Mr. Silverback]

Either you didn't read the article before you started spreading your "wisdom" around, or you are a first class idiot and proud to be one.

Let's go to the tape:

You think the problem is that the dirt bags are in jail.

WRONG! I think that the problem is people guilty of minor nonviolent offenses, including non-violent three strikes offenses, are in jail for much longer than they need to be and in lockups intended for violent offenders. If you really think some guy should do years of hard time for having an ounce of pot, that doesn't mean you're tough on crime, it means you're trying to kill a mosquito with a sledgehammer.

Your studies show nothing more than that criminals in prison have children that don't fair as well as children that have law-abiding, involved fathers. You needed to studies to know that?

WRONG AGAIN! The studies show that all other things being equal a parent doing jail time makes a kid more likely to be involved in crime. In other words, if two families headed by single mom welfare cheats are living on the same block, and the mother in one family goes to prison for several years, the likelihood goes up for that family and not the other. If two rock-solid middle class families live on the same block and one of the Dads goes to jail, only his sons are more likely to get involved in crime. BTW, you might want to do some reading at the breakpoint site, crime isn't something that only the crappy dregs of society do. There are a lot of kids facing these problems who are from families that would otherwise be great places to grow up.

Ya dig how that works now?

Release criminals back on society for the sake of their children (what about my children?),

Who's more dangerous to your kid: The guy who got nabbed with an ounce of pot, or his kid when the kid joins a gang?Are we better off stopping the cycle, or do you want your grandchildren to still be dealing with the third generation of this crap?

or should the state take away their children and raise them in a better environment? Oh, enlighten me, O Great social Engineer, where would that better environment be? Have you even a clue what the foster care system is like in this country?

They do not morph into wonderful fathers. How do the studies compare between jailed dads and violent, drugged out dads?

Since those of us with brains were discussing non-violent offenders, that's a straw man comparison. Nice try.

Want to work on the problem? Try promoting what is known to almost eliminate poverty and crime: Marriage, school, & work.

First off, I do. I spend a lot of my time doing work with scouts, for instance and I'm going to move up to Cubmaster of the pack I currently lead a den in.

Second...If you have a twin outboard boat, and when one of the outboards has been totally sabotaged by an incompetent mechanic, do you say, "We'll, I'll just make sure that other outboard is really well-tuned and in great running condition" or do you fix the broken engine? Our current system of incarceration is not enough time for some offenders and way too much for others. That's not justice, but apparently you're OK with injustice as long as we go out preaching marriage and work. Well, I'm not.

I've seen this situation up close and personal, and the family involved was two hard working parents who got married before they started having kids and did everything else right. The dad needed to go to prison and even though he was my friend I felt no sorrow when they sent him away until he is very old, but I've seen the effect on this family and no family should have to go through it for an ounce of pot or a kited check.

[Mr. Silverback]

And if you don't agree with the pot laws, then you can work to have them overturned, after which it won't be a crime.

I like traffic laws. Regulation of the road prevents many accidents.

Now, should I do 30 days in jail for blowing through a stop sign? How about six months?

Here's a radical idea: Maybe punishing dope users the same way we punish the guy who holds up the convenience store is just as harsh and stupid. And maybe you're "tough on crime" for supporting that in the same way you'd be a traffic safety advocate if you wanted to send me to jail for running a stop sign.

[Mr. Silverback]

As for the victimless crimes of being a dope head or being a whore, I favor more creative and less costly punishments such as caning.

Although it would be very difficult to get corporal punishment instituted, I would say this: In the current regime, Mom kites a check, goes to jail for months, and the kids go into the foster system to have God knows what visited on them. Under your system, Mom gets caned and can't sit down for a week, but she's home the same day.

Works for me.

[SampleMan]

Now, should I do 30 days in jail for blowing through a stop sign? How about six months?

If you run the stop sign on purpose and kill someone, perhaps 5 years would be good. Your analogy is ridiculous. People don't accidentally or even negligently sell drugs, they willfully engage in activity that is a felony. Give me a break with the poor little drug dealer BS.

[SampleMan]

If two rock-solid middle class families live on the same block and one of the Dads goes to jail,

The fact that you could construct that sentence and not find anything wrong with it tells me that I won't be agreeing with you any time soon. And I couldn't be happier with my judgment.

Here's a news flash. Don't want to go to prison? Don't commit felonies. Don't want to go away for a long time? Learn your lesson on your first two second chances.

We could make it twenty strikes and you're out, and you would still want to cry about the poor, solid, dad that was just stealing $50 or selling pot on that twentieth strike.

Isn't it amazing that I'm 40 years old and haven't ever accidently committed a felony. Come to think of it, no one in any "solid family" I know has gone to prison. I grew up well below the official poverty line, and I don't buy into any of that "no way out" or "forced into crime" BS.

If someone's selling drugs to kids in front of my house, I have no problem with them being in prison for the same amount of time as someone who steals $300 from a cash register. I would however be willing to drop the jail time for nonviolent offenders if hard labor were part of the sentence.

[SampleMan]

You don't know much about psychology or human trafficking to speak about "victimless crime" in the fashion you do.

You also don't know much about the populations of our prisons if you think they are full of jay walkers and the like.

I'm continually amazed at the bedrock defense that is thrown up for pot smoking, which can always be summed up as "The man is oppressing us."

Sorry, I ain't buying it.

[Mr. Silverback]

If you run the stop sign on purpose and kill someone, perhaps 5 years would be good.

Oh wow, five years for ending someone's life. I guess you're only tough on certain kinds of crime. What kinds might those be? Let's see...

Your analogy is ridiculous. People don't accidentally or even negligently sell drugs, they willfully engage in activity that is a felony. Give me a break with the poor little drug dealer BS.

Oh, those kinds of crimes. Well I'm not one of those kum-bai-yah types who want to ditch drug laws, but I'd like you to provide me with a case where possession of an ounce of pot killed somebody. In fact, show me how pot possession costs as many lives--directly, by the act of possession itself--as are taken by people running stoplights or stop signs.

Yeah, they chose to buy pot. But jail cells are cages and cages are for things that are dangerous or need to be protected. A guy with an ounce of pot is neither one of those, and sure doesn't need to go up for six months or a year.

I noticed you didn't respond to my other post. I suspect it's because you know you got schooled, SimpleMinded.

[SampleMan]

We're talking life without parole here... three strikes and you're out. Do you think that's the right punishment for a burglar?

For career burglary? YES, I do. If the perp is idiot enough to go back to it twice, he needs to be kept off the streets.

A good five years for the first offense would be good as well, then he can't cry that he didn't know the consequences or have time to think about it.

Tell me, when your innocent little burglar pokes his head in my daughters window at 2 AM, do you want me to give him a good slap on the wrist, and gently explain his employment options to him? Right now, my plan entails saving the state years of jail costs.

[Mr. Silverback]

Oops, I was wrong, turns out you did respond to it. But I was right that you're getting schooled.

The fact that you could construct that sentence and not find anything wrong with it tells me that I won't be agreeing with you any time soon. And I couldn't be happier with my judgment.

Hey genius burger, you know that family I mentioned, the one I'd seen go through this? Rock solid middle class family. Your puny imagination does not equal empirical evidence.

[Mr. Silverback]

Oops, I was wrong, turns out you did respond to it. But I was right that you're getting schooled.

The fact that you could construct that sentence and not find anything wrong with it tells me that I won't be agreeing with you any time soon. And I couldn't be happier with my judgment.

Hey genius burger, you know that family I mentioned, the one I'd seen go through this? Rock solid middle class family. Your puny imagination does not equal empirical evidence.

We could make it twenty strikes and you're out, and you would still want to cry about the poor, solid, dad that was just stealing $50 or selling pot on that twentieth strike.

BS. You don't know what I'd think. My assertion is that some punishments don't fit the crime and are counterproductive. You're approach is kill the mosquito with a sledgehammer, and anyone who's worried about the damage to the drywall is a big fan of mosquitos and an even bigger fan of malaria.

Your ignorance is not empirical data or wisdom. It's time, at the age of 40, that you grow up and realize that.

[SampleMan]

Tell you what. Me and the other grown ups will keep protecting society. You keep crying. We all have our roles to play.

[SampleMan]

Hey genius burger, you know that family I mentioned, the one I'd seen go through this? Rock solid middle class family. Your puny imagination does not equal empirical evidence.

Save it for the movie of the week, Katie Curic, or somebody that hasn't heard it a million times from Oprah.

People don't just accidentally commit felonies. If you have a bone to pick about someone being innocent, pick it. But stow the garbage about how abusive our system is. There's nothing rock solid about committing a felony, certainly nothing rock solid about committing a series of felonies.

[SampleMan]

I noticed you didn't respond to my other post. I suspect it's because you know you got schooled, SimpleMinded.

You suspect wrong. Not a first for you I'm sure. Its because I don't respect your intelligence, and doubt your morals, your moral fortitude, and your integrity.

I'm not sure whether to be more disgusted with the criminals or their apologists. That is the extent of your schooling abilities it seems.

[Mr. Silverback]

Tell you what. Me and the other grown ups will keep protecting society. You keep crying. We all have our roles to play.

Remember that you said that. You don't get to complain about any injustices from here on out, tough guy.

[Mr. Silverback]

Save it for the movie of the week, Katie Curic, or somebody that hasn't heard it a million times from Oprah.

News flash, slick: Disagreeing with your kill-em-all-let-God-sort-em-out approach to criminology does not make someone a welfare queen or an Oprah devotee, much less a friend of Katie Couric. It says something about your level of arogance that you think only some half-brained kum-bai-yah milksop could possibly disagree with SimpleMinded The Great and Terrible. Plus, you're diverting attention from the fact that I called you on one of the prejudices you substitute for data. No need to play games, just walk it off, princess.

People don't just accidentally commit felonies.

My kid didn't accidentally [fill in childish offense here.] That doesn't mean it's productive to spank him with an ax. Nonviolent crimes should not involve years of hard time, period. We need to reform the system so they pay a heavy price without going to jail. It will be cheaper, more effective and their kids don't get screwed.

But stow the garbage about how abusive our system is. There's nothing rock solid about committing a felony, certainly nothing rock solid about committing a series of felonies.

You basically revel in the idea of government making sure innocent minors pay for someone else's mistake, and then call it being an "adult" and "protecting society." Surely we should create a Nobel Prize for humanitarianism just for your supra-genius thinking in this field.

By the way, where's the answer to my pot/stop sign question?

You're "answering" my points with crap about Oprah because I'm kicking your butt. You don't have to admit it, just stay on the mat this time, princess.

[Mr. Silverback]

You suspect wrong. Not a first for you I'm sure. Its because I don't respect your intelligence, and doubt your morals, your moral fortitude, and your integrity.

What a pathetic and small person you are to doubt my intelligence, morals or integrity (much less all three) based on me disagreeing with you in one thread.

Sorry, but if you're judging me to be a dumb immoral liar, than you are not qualified to judge your anus from a hole in the ground.

[after dark]

Oh please! I am hardly in league dope heads. Most of them would regard me as an ace hole for saying they should be caned

As for psychology, I love behaviorism don't you?

I am on record as writing that violent evil people need to go away for a long time. Human trafficking falls into the category of evil. I regard the whores as victims.

I doubt seriously that you want the three strikes rule applied to people who mistakenly write hot checks. May be hot check writers should also be caned. In order to have a balanced legal system we must have mercy. With the exception of evil people , giving out draconian prison sentences to people guilty of misdemeanors is cruel and expensive.