Jump to content

User:OleAthena/Prison contemplative programs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article Draft

[edit]

*all my additions to the Prison Contemplative Programs article*

Prison Animal Programs (PAPs)

[edit]

Each program has their own personal details but the base of each is generally the same: dogs with behavioral issues, or are otherwise unable to be adopted yet, are sent to live in a cell or block with their caretaker(s). The inmate handlers are responsible for walking, grooming, feeding and playing with their dogs. The handlers are also responsible for attending obedience training classes to teach the dogs commands. In order to participate in the program, inmates must exhibit good behavior for at least a year prior, and maintain good behavior throughout the duration of the program. [1]

As of 2014, prison animal programs are present in all 50 states in the United States. Other countries known to have utilized them are Canada, Scotland, England, South Africa and Australia. A wide variety of animals have been used in these programs - domesticated animals like dogs and cats, livestock like cows, and even wildlife like raccoons and rabbits. One program in Ohio even had a domesticated deer and llama.[2][3] In many programs, inmates train and care for animals to increase adoption by the public. There are also service animal programs which inmates train and socialize puppies to go on to do more specialized training like seeing eye dog training or explosive detection dog training. [4] Other programs emphasize the teachings of animal husbandry skills (grooming, handling, training and care), as well as the rehabilitation and care for injured wildlife with the end goal of re-releasing them back in the wild. [5]

Prison-based dog training programs (PBDPs) have been used in the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections since 2001. Staff and inmates at Pennsylvania prisons participating in these prison dog training programs have said they effectively reduced recidivism and prison misconduct; the programs also increased positive interactions between staff and inmates. [6]

Programs in the United States

[edit]
Minnesota and Wisconsin
[edit]

Can Do Canines is a "prison puppy program" that operates within eight prisons in Minnesota and Wisconsin. In the program, each prison takes between 5 and 20 puppies that are assigned to selected inmate handlers. Can Do Canines staff members make regular visits to each facility to advise the handlers on how to work with the puppies as they grow up. Handlers that work with the dogs speak of increased empathy, confidence, and patience; while the dogs are properly taken care of, and receive attention and training around the clock.[7]

California
[edit]

Paws For Life K9 Rescue is a California based dog rescue organization that works to improve the lives of animals and people through through canine-centered programs. In April 2014, they launched the first dog rehabilitation program in a men's maximum security prison. In this program, inmates commit to ten weeks of sharing their lives with 15 dogs from high-kill shelters in Los Angeles, California. As of 2020, 21 inmates that participated in the program have had their sentences commuted, most serving life sentences.[8]

Marley's Mutts is a nonprofit dog rescue dedicated to saving the lives of shelter dogs in Kern County, California. Their mission is to make "a pawsitive and lasting impact on communities by rehabilitating souls and creating second chances using the power of the human/animal bond." [9] Their program Pawsitive Change partners with California state prisons and selects 8-10 at-risk shelter dogs and 24-30 incarcerated individuals to participate in each program.[10]

South Carolina
[edit]

Animal Advocates of Barnwell County is a nonprofit organization dedicated to changing the lives of the dogs and cats in their community. In 2013, they partnered with Allendale Correctional Institution (ACI) and began the Meowmates/Muttmates program. The program started with two cats, and has grown into 50 animals being trained, housed and fostered by the selected inmates, affectionately given the name "Pet Dads". [11]

Georgia
[edit]

Canine CellMates began in 2013 in Fulton County Jail, in Atlanta, Georgia, "to provide a program that is as much about rehabilitation and the reduction of recidivism as it is about saving shelter dogs." [12] In 2021, they began their new out-of-custody program Beyond The Bars to help support inmates after being released from prison; "We feel like one of the most important, and overlooked, components, of successful re-entry is positive community." [12]

Despite these programs being active for years, even decades, there has been very little academic research done on them.

Benefits for Female Offenders

[edit]

In 2015, a study done by Barbara Cooke and David Farrington found that by participating in dog training programs helped alleviate some of the pains of imprisonment for female inmates.[13]

They specifically noted six areas where the women identified improvements: psychological and emotional health, motherhood, transferable skills, security, trust, and serving time.

  1. Psychological and Emotional Health: Participants reported improvement through stress relief and comfort the dogs brought the handlers; they provided an outlet for negative emotions as participants stated they could talk to the dogs or take them for a run to let off steam. Participants said the programs provided a therapeutic environment that allowed them to face psychological and emotional stress; it helped them overcome past problems, face their mental illness, and promote self-reflection.
  2. Motherhood: Most of the participants were mothers. Participants stated after being separated from their children, they had no outlet for their desire to nurture and show affection; they also felt ashamed of themselves for being separated from their children. These pains were alleviated through being able to take care of the dogs, hug and kiss the dogs, and feel proud of themselves in being able to accomplish change.
  3. Transferable Skills: Two of the most common areas mentioned were self-efficacy and empowerment. Autonomy was also an important theme for the women; participating in the program influenced their confidence in their ability to lead pro-social lives after release as well as maintaining a sense of autonomy while in prison. The women expressed appreciation for the ability to control the light switches in the program's dorms - a privilege the general population did not have. Organizational skills were also improved through organizing events such as graduation ceremonies and dog talent shows.
  4. Security: Participants lived in separate dorms from the general population; the participants reported feeling safer in this prison environment than the general population. There was a drastic difference between the compounds and the training dorms; one participant stated fights would happen every other day compared to not one fight in over a year of living in the training dorms. The authors state the dog training program created "an oasis of security within the volatile prison environment" (pg. 208).[13]
  5. Trust: Participants in the program reported not feeling the need to lock their personal lockers and if they're called away by the prison, they know the other women will care for her dog as if it were their own. They also mention the prison staff to be more trusting of the women in the program, however this could partly be rooted in the fact the women must stay in good behavior to continuously participate in the program.
  6. Serving Time: Participating in the program has provided the women with the time and opportunity for self-reflection, self-improvement, as well as speeding up their perception of time while in prison as they're not focusing as much on time spent and when they're getting out.

The women in the program also noted that the knowledge they have gained from the program has made them better equipped for re-entry into society which also helped provide a sense of relief in the women. The nature of the program greatly influenced the perception the participants had of their daily activities as well as themselves. Some of the participants said they had a sense of freedom they'd never felt before. Others said they were able to process the guilt they carried from their offenses and attempt to amend the harm of their actions. [13]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Prison Dog Training Programs Rehabilitate Canines and Cons | Danielle Rousseau". sites.bu.edu. Retrieved 2024-04-09.
  2. ^ Furst, Gennifer (2006-12). "Prison-Based Animal Programs: A National Survey". The Prison Journal. 86 (4): 407–430. doi:10.1177/0032885506293242. ISSN 0032-8855. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  3. ^ Hill, Leslie (2020-11-16). "A touch of the outside on the inside: the effect of animal contact on the pains/strains of imprisonment". Journal of Offender Rehabilitation. 59 (8): 433–455. doi:10.1080/10509674.2020.1808558. ISSN 1050-9674.
  4. ^ Furst, Gennifer (2006-12). "Prison-Based Animal Programs: A National Survey". The Prison Journal. 86 (4): 407–430. doi:10.1177/0032885506293242. ISSN 0032-8855. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  5. ^ Hines, L (1998). "Overview of animals in correctional facilities". Animals in institutions: 111–112.
  6. ^ Antonio, Michael E.; Davis, Rosalyn G.; Shutt, Susan R. (2017-08-18). "Dog Training Programs in Pennsylvania's Department of Corrections: Perceived Effectiveness for Inmates and Staff". Society & Animals. 25 (5): 475–489. doi:10.1163/15685306-12341457. ISSN 1568-5306.
  7. ^ "Prison Puppy Program".
  8. ^ "Paws For Life Prison Program".
  9. ^ "About". Marleys Mutts. Retrieved 2024-04-15.
  10. ^ "Pawsitive Change". Marleys Mutts. Retrieved 2024-04-15.
  11. ^ "Animal Advocates of Barnwell County". www.theanimaladvocates.org. Retrieved 2024-04-15.
  12. ^ a b "Learn more about the Canine CellMate program". Canine CellMates. Retrieved 2024-04-15.
  13. ^ a b c Cooke, Barbara J.; Farrington, David P. (2015-05-27). "The Effects of Dog-Training Programs: Experiences of Incarcerated Females". Women & Criminal Justice. 25 (3): 201–214. doi:10.1080/08974454.2014.909763. ISSN 0897-4454.