Advertisement

Critical Criminology

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 123–139 | Cite as

Progress or More of the Same? Electronic Monitoring and Parole in the Age of Mass Incarceration

  • James Kilgore
Article

Abstract

Often billed as an “alternative to incarceration”, electronic monitoring (EM) is widely trumpeted as a key method of reducing incarceration costs while maintaining public safety. However, little research has been done which closely examines EM in the historical context of mass incarceration and the paradigm of punishment. This article focuses on the use of EM in parole in that broader context. Through research into the legal and policy frameworks for EM as well as via personal interviews with people who have been on EM while on parole, the author concludes that the present EM practice reinforces the dominant punishment paradigm and places major obstacles in the way of the successful re-entry for people returning from prison. He concludes with some concrete recommendations about changes in law, policy and implementation guidelines that would allow EM to operate in an environment more conducive to rehabilitation.

Keywords

Criminal Justice Electronic Monitoring Parole Officer Mass Incarceration Community Supervision 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alexander, M. (2009). The New Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bales, W., et al. (2010). A quantitative and qualitative assessment of electronic monitoring. Report Submitted to the Office of Justice Program National Institute of Justice US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  3. Ballard, J., & Mullendore, K. (2002). Legal issues related to electronic monitoring programs. Journal of Offender Monitoring, 17.Google Scholar
  4. Braman, D. (2004). Doing time on the outside: Incarceration and family life in urban America. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  5. Burrell, W. (2007). “Introduction” perspectives. The Journal of the American Probation and Parole Association., 31(1), 25.Google Scholar
  6. Burrell, W., & Gable, R. (2008). From B.F. Skinner to Spiderman to Martha Stewart: The past, present, and future of electronic monitoring of offenders. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 46(3/4), 101–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. California Penal Code. (2010). Article 2. Electronic monitoring. Section 3010–3010.9.Google Scholar
  8. Corrections Center of Northwest Ohio. (2011). Policy and procedures. Stryker, OH.Google Scholar
  9. Dart, T. (n.d.). Electronic monitoring. Cook County Sheriff’s report. Accessed at: http://cookcountysheriff.org/dcsi/electronicmonitoring.html on January 2, 2011.
  10. Davis, A. (2003). Are prisons obsolete?. New York: Open Media.Google Scholar
  11. Davis, A. (2005). Abolition democracy: Beyond empire, prisons and torture. New York: Seven Stories Press.Google Scholar
  12. DeMichele, M., & Payne, B. K. (2009). Offender supervision with electronic technology (2nd ed.). Report for Bureau of Justice, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  13. Development Services Group. (2009). Home confinement/electronic monitoring literature review. Report to Department of Justice, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  14. Gable, R. (n.d.). My professional home page. Accessed at: http://rgable.wordpress.com/electronic-monitoring-of-criminal-offenders/. September 6, 2012.
  15. Gibbons Media and Research. (2012). GPS-aided monitoring of parolees: no privacy issues, just a large addressable market. Accessed at: http://www.insidegnss.com/node/3056. September 6, 2012.
  16. Gies, S., et al. (2012). Monitoring high risk sex offenders with GPS technology: An evaluation of California’s supervision program. Report for National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  17. Gilmore, R. (2007). Golden gulag: Prisons, surplus, crisis, and opposition in globalizing California. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  18. Glaze, L., & Bonczar, T. P. (2011). Probation and parole in the United States, 2010. Bureau of justice statistics bulletin. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice.Google Scholar
  19. Gottschalk, M. (2007). The prison and the gallows: The politics of mass incarceration in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Guerino, P., et al. (2011). Prisoners in 2010. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  21. Hallett, M. (2011). Reentry to what? Theorizing prisoner reentry in the jobless future. Critical Criminology. On line 6/1/11. Accessed at: http://critcrim.org/journal on June 15, 2011.
  22. Herivel, T., & Wright, P. (2007). Prison profiteers: Who makes money from mass incarceration?. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
  23. Johnston, W. J. (2004). Let’s talk about … offender pay programs. Journal of Offender Monitoring, 11–20.Google Scholar
  24. Jolin, A., & Stipak, B. (1992). Drug and treatment and electronically monitored home confinement: An evaluation of a community-based sentencing option. Crime and Delinquency, 38(2), 158–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jones, M., & Ross, D. (1997). Electronic house arrest and boot camp in North Carolina: Comparing recidivism. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 8(4), 383–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Justice Policy Institute. (2011). Gaming the system, how the political strategies of private prisons promote ineffective incarceration policies. Justice Policy Institute Report.Google Scholar
  27. Lilly, R. J. (2006). Issues beyond empirical EM reports. Criminology and Public Policy, 5(1), 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lilly, R. J., et al. (1993). Electronic monitoring of the drunk driver: A seven-year study of the home confinement alternative. Crime and Delinquency, 39(4), 462–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Logan, C., & Gaes, G. (1993). Meta-analysis and the rehabilitation of punishment. Justice Quarterly, 10(2), 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Loury, G., et al. (2008). Race, incarceration, and American values. Boston: Boston Review/MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Marable, M., et al. (2007). Racializing justice, disenfranchising lives. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mauer, M. (2006). The race to incarcerate. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  33. Maxfield, M. G., & Baumer, T. L. (1990). Home detention with electronic monitoring: Comparing pre-trial and post-conviction programs. Crime and Delinquency, 36(4), 521–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Murphy, E. (2008). Paradigms of restraint. Duke Law Journal, 57, 1323–1361.Google Scholar
  35. N.A. (1996) An annotated bibliography of electronic monitoring research and literature. Journal of Offender Monitoring, 9(1), 11–28.Google Scholar
  36. National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center. (1999). Online bulletin. National Institute of Justice. http://www.justnet.org/Lists/JUSTNET%20Resources/Attachments/859/Elec-Monit.pdf. Accessed July 9, 2011.
  37. Padgett, K., et al. (2006). Under surveillance: An empirical test of the effectiveness and consequences of electronic monitoring. Criminology and Public Policy, 5(1), 61–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parenti, C. (1999). Lockdown America: Police and prisons in the age of crisis. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  39. Payne, B., et al. (2009). Attitudes about electronic monitoring: Minority and majority racial group differences. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(2), 155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Perkinson, R. (2010). Texas tough: The rise of America’s prison empire. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
  41. Petersilia, J. (2012). Looking back to see the future of prison downsizing in America. Keynote address to National Institute of Justice Conference, Arlington, VA, June 19.Google Scholar
  42. Pew Center on the States. (2011). State of recidivism: The revolving door of America’s prisons. Washington, DC: The Pew Center on the States.Google Scholar
  43. Phelan, S. (2010) Who profits from ICE’s electronic monitoring anklets? San Francisco Bay Guardian. Online, March 16, accessed from: http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2010/03/16/who-profits-ices-electronic-monitoring-anklets-0 on July 9, 2011.
  44. Raab, S. (1991). New York tests electronic ball and chain. New York Times. Accessed at: http://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/10/nyregion/new-york-tests-electronic-ball-and-chain.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm September 10, 2012.
  45. Reiman, J., & Leighton, P. (2006). The rich get richer and the poor get prison: Ideology, class, and criminal justice. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  46. Saletan, W. (2005). Call my cell: Why GPS tracking is good news for inmates. Slate. http://www.slate.com/id/2118117/. Accessed June 15, 2011.
  47. Schmidt, A. K. (1988). Use of electronic monitoring by criminal justice agencies. Report for National Criminal Justice Research Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  48. Shklovski, I., et al. (2009) The commodification of location: Dynamics of power in location-based systems. Paper presented to the international conference on ubiquitous computing, Orlando, FL, October 2.Google Scholar
  49. Staples, W., & Decker, S. (2011). Between the ‘home’ and ‘institutional’ worlds: Tensions and contradictions in the practice of house arrest. Critical Criminology, 18, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. State of California. (2006). Title 15: Crime prevention and corrections. Chapter 1: Rules and regulations. Sacramento: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.Google Scholar
  51. Sullivan, L. (2010). Prison economics help drive arizona immigration law. National public radio Website. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130833741. Accessed July 22, 2011.
  52. Thompson, H. (2010). Why mass incarceration matters: Rethinking crisis, decline and transformation in postwar American history. Journal of American History, 97(3), 703–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Travis, J., et al. (2005). Families left behind: The hidden costs of incarceration and reentry. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  54. Ulmer, J. (2001). Intermediate sanctions: A comparative analysis of the probability and severity of recidivism. Sociological Inquiry, 71(2), 164–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. US Department of Justice. (1980). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics 1979. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  56. Visher, C., & Courtney, S. (2006). Cleveland prisoners’ experiences returning home. Report to Urban Institute. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  57. Visher, C., & Farrell, J. (2005). Chicago communities and prisoner reentry. Report to Urban Institute. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  58. Visher, C., et al. (2004). Baltimore prisoners’ experiences returning home. Report to Urban Institute. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  59. Vollum, S. (2002) Electronic monitoring: A research review. Corrections Compendium, 27(7), 1–4, 23–27.Google Scholar
  60. Wacquant, L. (2009a). Prisons of poverty. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  61. Wacquant, L. (2009b). Punishing the poor: The Neoliberal government of social insecurity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Wacquant, L. (2010). Class, race and hyperincarceration in revanchist America. Daedulus, 139(3), 74–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Western, B., & Wildeman, C. (2007). Punishment and inequality in America. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  64. Western, B., & Wildeman, C. (2008). The black family and mass incarceration. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 621, 221–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for African StudiesUniversity of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign)ChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations