Prison Gangs and Rehabilitation Programs in the US

Introduction

According to Lyman (1989), a prison gang is a criminal entity made up of a select group of prisoners governed by a code of conduct and structured within a strict chain of command. Most prison gangs conduct their operations in secrecy and aim to control certain quarters of the prison through the use of violence and intimidation toward non-members (p. 48).

Public authorities are becoming increasingly concerned about the growing influence of prison gangs not only within prison settings, but also in the outside world. Scholars are worried that the criminal activities conducted by such groups have gone beyond the confines of prison walls. Reports also indicate that more gangs are being formed in prisons today compared to a few years ago (Ruddell & Winterdyk, 2010). For instance, according to a 1999 study by the National Gang Crime Research Centre, the number of inmates affiliated with prison gangs in state prisons rose from 9.4% in 1991 to 24.7% in 1999. A separate study by the American Correctional Association found that correctional facilities had an average of 11.7% gang-affiliated prisoners in 2003, a figure that rose to 13.8% in 2008. Applying the 2008 proportion to the total prison population yields approximately 200,000 gang-affiliated prisoners — a figure that illustrates just how serious a security threat these gangs represent.

The negative influences of prison gangs within correctional facilities are well-documented. Threats posed by prison gangs include: distribution of contraband materials (including drugs and weapons), prison riots, higher rates of prison violence, heightened interracial, interethnic, and inter-gang incidents of violence, operation of criminal enterprises in the wider community, obstruction of rehabilitation through support of criminal conduct, and undermining reintegration into society, as parolees may feel justified returning to a life of crime (Ruddell & Winterdyk, 2010).

Challenge of Prison Gangs

As matters currently stand, far more men and women are incarcerated than was the case a few decades ago. As of 2000, the total prison population was approximately 2,000,000 individuals. The responsibility for improving the quality of inmate life and ensuring rehabilitation is shared between community members and those tasked with managing correctional facilities. Prisons are public institutions funded by taxpayers, and what happens inside them determines, to a significant degree, whether an inmate is successfully rehabilitated and whether he or she can reintegrate into the community.

It is noteworthy how many in the public believe that inmate and prison management is a simple task. This has led lobby groups and politicians to call for the removal of so-called "luxuries" — such as education programs, fitness equipment, and televisions — from correctional facilities in order to make these institutions tougher. Many hold the simplistic view that harsher prisons would deter crime and force prisoners to reform. The prevailing sentiment is that individuals who choose to commit crime should bear the full consequences. However, such simplistic measures cannot solve the complex problem of prison gangs (Fleisher & Decker, 2001).

Prison Gangs: Structure and Organization

The typical prison gang in the United States is led by a single leader who oversees a committee of members responsible for the gang's operations. Most criminal gangs in prisons have organizational structures and chains of command so well-defined that they appear more organized than many street gangs. Studies indicate that leaders and committee members make up approximately 15 to 20% of such gangs, meaning that the majority of members have no formal stake in the group's leadership (Fleisher & Decker, 2001).

Like their street-level counterparts, prison gangs maintain mottos, symbols, or creeds and a code of conduct governing how members interact with one another and with outsiders. The two most essential qualities required of members are secrecy and loyalty. Many prison gangs are heavily involved in smuggling contraband — including drugs — into the prison. Gangs also provide protection to their members, and it is largely this offer of protection that leads many inmates to join. Gang members constitute the most valuable asset within such organizations; when members depart, the group becomes vulnerable to rival attacks (Fleisher & Decker, 2001).

Researchers have consistently found that gangs are responsible for the majority of prison violence. Much of this violence is driven by the competition to be the exclusive supplier of contraband and to hold the greatest power within the prison. Many of these gangs form in overcrowded prisons where staff are unable to monitor the activities of every inmate (Fleisher & Decker, 2001).

Conclusion

Prison gangs have had serious negative impacts on the quality of life within correctional facilities. These impacts have prompted institutional responses to disorder, crime, and rule violations. The majority of correctional agencies have developed policies for managing gang-affiliated prisoners. Efforts to manage prison gangs, however, must be matched by well-designed community programs. Such programs should include carefully developed reintegration initiatives that provide education and vocational training aligned with the skill demands of entry-level employment in a modern economy. Research demonstrates that the influence of criminal gangs in prison extends into the community. The most significant implication of this finding is that prison gangs will strengthen their hold on communities if those communities do not develop interventions that go beyond law enforcement suppression alone. If this trajectory continues, street gangs may become better organized and drug gangs may become more influential in the community (Fleisher & Decker, 2001).

It has been estimated that two thirds of prisoners reoffend within three years of leaving correctional facilities, and the offenses committed upon reoffending are often more serious or violent than those that led to the original conviction. Approximately 90% of inmates are released within seven years. It is therefore critical that authorities suppress prison gang activity and ensure that rehabilitation programs are functioning effectively. Some researchers, including Gilligan (2012), have proposed replacing the traditional prison system with secure residential communities — which he termed "anti-prisons" — devoted entirely to education (from elementary through college level) and comprehensive therapeutic services, including medical care, psychotherapy, and drug abuse treatment. Gilligan argued that earning a college degree while incarcerated is the only intervention proven with consistent effectiveness over decades in the prevention of recidivism. He further contended that prisoners must be treated with dignity and respect if we expect them to return to their communities prepared to extend those same qualities to others (Gilligan, 2012).

Society must also distinguish between restraint and punishment. When an individual poses a danger to themselves or others, restraint is warranted — regardless of age. This, however, is categorically different from inflicting pain as retribution or to "teach a lesson," since the primary lesson communicated through punitive treatment is that pain is an acceptable instrument of power. Decades of research on punishment and aggression have shown that the more harshly a child is punished, the more aggressive that child becomes — both in childhood and in adulthood. The same pattern holds for adults, particularly those in prison. The sole defensible rationale for incarceration, therefore, is to restrain individuals who pose a danger to themselves or others while actively assisting them in transforming their behavior — not only away from violence, but toward constructive contributions — so that they may return to their communities as better citizens (Gilligan, 2012).

Bibliography

Fleisher, M., & Decker, S. (2001). An overview of the challenge of prison gangs. Corrections Management Quarterly, 1–9.

Gilligan, J. (2012, December 10). Punishment fails. Rehabilitation works. New York Times.

Lyman, M. D. (1989). Gangland. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

Miceli, V. (2009). Analyzing the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs. Senior Honors Project, 1.

OPPAGA. (2007). Corrections rehabilitative programs effective, but serve only a portion of the eligible population. Florida: Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability.

Petersilia, J. (2000). When prisoners return to the community: Political, economic, and social consequences. Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections.

Ruddell, R., & Winterdyk, J. (2010). Managing prison gangs: Results from a survey of U.S. prison systems. Journal of Criminal Justice, 730.