Every day, the Criminal Justice System impinges on the lives of thousands of Canadians, particularly those of offenders who are consistently and publicly castigated for their alleged crimes. At the outset, a person’s actions are subject to social censure – the arrest process and a subsequent trial leading up to a verdict. Once a verdict has been handed down, it becomes public knowledge that the person convicted of a criminal offence deserves to be punished. Said punishment will be embodied in a sentence that is more or less harsh, depending on a number of applicable criteria. Some claim that convicted offenders have forfeited their rights as citizens and that they must therefore suffer the consequences of their actions. Not so long ago, the notion of inflicting pain was clearly highlighted as various forms of corporal punishment were administered more or less creatively. Ultimately, people found some reassurance in thinking: “ That’ll teach ’em ! ”
«People had finally come to realize that criminals were no longer faceless strangers. Offenders were thought of as real persons, someone’s son or daughter, brother or sister, husband or a wife… even a child’s father or mother.»
Nowadays, a number of influential people seem to be espousing that same philosophy according to which offenders simply got what was coming to them and now need to suffer for what they have done. Hence, a good way of achieving that objective – making sure they suffer – might be to put them away for a lengthy period of time, assuming that they are not cuddled while doing their time. Otherwise, what purpose would be served by sending them to prison ? Let’s be serious ! The more offenders suffer, the more they will learn from their mistakes. So video games are out of the question ; forget about preventive health measures (condoms, safe tattoo and needle exchange programs, etc.) ; and do away with costly steaks and shrimp and whatever else. In any case, no one forced them to commit the offence ; they had a choice. No?
I have learnt one thing over the course of my 35-year career: that way of thinking leads directly to a dead end, where neither the interests of the community, the victim, or the offender are served. I first set foot in a prison at what was then known as the St-Vincent de- Paul Annex (B-16). The year was 1971 and the military regime was drawing to an end, having been seriously challenged since the fifties. One thing was becoming increasingly obvious: removing offenders from society, keeping them behind bars and subjecting them to austere living conditions may well have contributed to quenching the victim’s and society’s thirst for vengeance, but were somewhat ineffective in bringing about change in offenders and preventing recidivism. To the contrary, rather than becoming a place of positive learning, prisons had become schools for crime.
A number of community stakeholders, including community agencies, devoted a great deal of energy to bringing about much needed penal and correctional reforms. A new vision of penology emerged. Greater emphasis was placed on rehabilitation and reintegration. People had finally come to realize that criminals were no longer faceless strangers. Offenders were no longer perceived simply as bad people who had chosen a life of crime. Offenders were thought of as real persons, someone’s son or daughter, brother or sister, husband or a wife… even a child’s father or mother. In other words, offenders were becoming – as they had always been – full-fledged members of a community. Offenders may well be serving a prison sentence, but all were drawn from a community and their links to that community, be they weak or strong, remain important and necessary for them while in prison. For they will be returning to that community one day.
In most cases, incarceration is but a temporary measure. This means that prison inmates will one day regain their freedom and reintegrate the community. Such a transition requires preparation. Otherwise, failure and a return to prison remain real possibilities. Speaking with inmates and feeling their confusion and dismay on the eve of their release leads one to understand the enormous challenges and the overwhelming anxiety they sometimes face. Those fears must be addressed before release with the support of professionals, loved ones, peers, and volunteers.
There are no magic recipes or miracle cures for reintegration ; thinking there are is but a pious wish. Reintegration is a demanding process for everyone involved, be they a caseworker, a volunteer, a parent, a friend, or an offender. The Association des services de réhabilitation sociale du Québec acknowledges the major challenges associated with the social reintegration of offenders. The Association has always believed that being attentive to all the actors involved in the reintegration process was essential, particularly offenders. For, in most cases, they hold the key to their own success.
This issue features testimonials from people who are currently working toward their reintegration or who have done so one or several times before.
