Posted on 03/01/2020 1:35:12 PM PST by karpov
A common, and emotionally potent, criticism of incarceration in the United States is that it harms children by taking parents and siblings—mostly fathers and brothers, since men account for more than 90 percent of prisoners—out of their homes, depriving families of caregivers, role models, and breadwinners. “More than 2.3 million people are incarcerated in the United States,” writes Black Lives Matter cofounder Alicia Garza, in an essay published by the Brennan Center for Justice. “That’s 2.3 million families that have been torn apart.” In that same Brennan Center compendium, Van Jones, cofounder of the #Cut50 initiative to reduce the incarcerated population by half, makes similar claims. In addition to “perpetuating the ugly legacy of racism,” argues Jones, imprisonment is “tearing families apart.”
Many Democratic Party presidential candidates echo these arguments. In her criminal-justice reform plan, Senator Elizabeth Warren laments that “one in ten Black children has an incarcerated parent.” Joe Biden suggests allowing “nonviolent offenders who are primary care providers for their children to serve their sentences through in-home monitoring.” These proposals are intended to address the problem that “children with incarcerated parents tend to do worse in school, experience anxiety and depression, and develop behavioral issues,” as Bernie Sanders puts it.
Some on the right have made similar arguments. In a speech delivered at the Heritage Foundation, Senator Mike Lee observed that “a majority of prisoners are also parents—most of whom lived with their minor children before they were arrested or incarcerated.” He found fault with a “penitentiary approach to punishment” that “severs the offenders’ ties to their family.”
In New York, the belief that incarceration is almost always a net negative for families—particularly children—may soon shape criminal-justice outcomes.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Hillary’s next book on parenting: “It Takes a Prison”
I thought the government conceded this point when they did everything in their power to keep children in ghetto schools as long as possible - before-care, after-care, whatever would keep them from the people the state perceived as their greatest threat (the idle parents).
“depriving families of caregivers, role models, and breadwinners”
If they were doing all that they’d probably be too busy to be law breakers dontcha think?. As I go into my 3rd year of service in my churches prison ministry there is one thing I have never heard any of the men say that I come into contact with...”I didn’t do it”.
Depends on the crime. if it’s something where restitution can be made and the person can do that on the outside, I don’t have a problem with that. Things get righted and the person pays for the crime. No need to take him/her out of the family.
Anything violent, go directly to jail and stay there until your time’s up. Tough about the family,but you earned that.
The article lost credibility when it stated, “2.3 million people are incarcerated”, therefore “That’s 2.3 million families that have been torn apart.”
Wrong. There are many single men in prison, who have no kids. And there are many who were separated from their family before entering prison.
I see the results on families of “Daddy” or “Bro” coming home or not going away because they are not caught yet all in a neighborhood near me where my daughter used to live before the hurricane. Wisely she had a tall chain link fence and four “bad” dogs. When the miscreants went away for a while the neighborhood and their families were much more peaceful and wives and children didn’t get beat up.
Can’t have two systems of justice: one for those with families and one for those who don’t.
This “evidence” doesn’t jibe with the statistic that the number one indicator as to whether or not someone will be incarcerated during his lifetime depends on whether or not the father is in the home.
Perhaps that pertains to noncriminal fathers, whereas criminal fathers are a bad influence increasing the likelihood of the children getting into trouble themselves?
“Can’t have two systems of justice: one for those with families and one for those who don’t.”
—
Could apply to all.
Yes, though some nonviolent crimes have incredibly malevolent outcomes. Judgment based on circumstances required.
Probably, but I’d suspect a criminal dad is better than none at all. Too often, the bad influence is worse with nobody to reign a young person in at all.
Dealer Dad and Meth Mom are such good role models and providers that every kid should have both, and being non-violent criminals, they should never be separated from their families by being incarcerated.
My take would be the opposite. I think sons particularly can feel that it is disloyal to be straight and successful if they are cared for by a father who is crooked and unsuccessful.
Your run-of-the-mill incarcerated criminal is pretty unpleasant too. Low average IQ with emotional issues and violent tendencies.
The truism pertains: children learn most and best by the examples they are watching.
Reminds me of a cousin’s grand daughter that was recently put in prison for selling drugs. The cousin’s comment was that she’d be with better people.
Wife and I just could not believe that statement. But in a sense it’s true, as she will learn new trades while in prison.
No. My dad had criminal tendencies. Never once have I wished I'd grown up in the same house as him. Oh, God, no.
Frankly I don’t know enough about it; I just think nuclear families are important.
I’ll take your word for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.