Embracing Technology: What’s It Got to Do With Reentry?

By Stephen Carter 

With all four tech-savvy sons long gone from the nest, I use the phrase “just embrace technology” with great caution. Their mother and I are not completely unfamiliar with the delete button, but attempting to connect devices to a new internet provider does often introduce “sailor-style” expressions in our vocabulary. Essentially, we have no choice: embrace it or cease to exist in the digital world. Every day, I am more thankful for our 11-year-old grandson who is fearless and formidable navigating the ubiquitous communication and entertainment devices—problem is he lives 2,500 miles away. 

So, there is something to the notion that any effective advancements in correctional technology will require a group embrace. I am writing this after hours from Singapore at the International Corrections and Prisons Association annual conference. I came prepared to be dazzled and have not been disappointed from both the way registration was managed to the mind-blowing sessions on current and future embracing of technology. 

But before I briefly touch on learning how to hug technology, just a few data points on this year’s conference: ICPA was officially launched in Vancouver, Canada in November 1998 and since then, 26 conferences have been held around the world with Singapore the only city to host us twice. We had 1,024 delegates representing 79 countries. The program includes 139 plenary and individual panel presentations on topics such as Digital Services for Incarcerated Persons to A Primer on AI and Machine Learning in Corrections. But least I mislead, this year’s conference theme is not about technology. 

The conference theme is “Enabling Desistance: Beyond Recidivism”. Right away, the term “desistence” was defined as a process that involves both the individual and the community and how to bridge the connection. Desistence is not a program, but a change in perspective which enables rehabilitation.  

The term is not regularly used when speaking of the US corrections system. We have an abundance of programs focused on a change in an individual’s behavior, but not so much in changing the community’s willingness to accept a re-entering individual.  

Countless reasons can be given for the community refraining from accepting a rehabilitated person back home. Honestly, in many of our states those “reasons” are codified in law. With so many dedicated advocacy groups trying to help bridge the distance from the prison gate to the factory gate, most of us elect not to have skin in that game; and if we do, our willingness to participate is usually based on what we learn from the media, print, or electronic. 

A most inspiring aspect of reentry (and the underpinning of the Singapore Prison Service) in this city/state is their unwavering commitment to informing and then engaging the community in the process of reentry. The origins of the world-famous Yellow Ribbon Project (YRP) were aided and abetted by the song “Tie a Yellow Ribbon Around the Old Oak Tree” which was sung by Tony Orlando at the 2004 Winter ACA meeting in, you guessed it, Orlando, Florida. Representatives of the SPS were in attendance and a literal life changing movement for the community, not to mention the inmates, was clarified. 

Dissertations have been written on the many aspects of the YRP and this column is hardly the place to examine in detail any of the many dimensions of this reverse-engineered approach to rehabilitation. Simply stated, the community was first educated on why and how to welcome their previously incarcerated members back as contributing participants followed by individualized programs for incarcerated persons.  

As the community became aware of the role of rehabilitation through countless events and educational platforms, specialized programs were developed behind the walls, ensuring that with a receptive community, reentry of formerly incarcerated persons truly can be welcomed home. The yellow ribbon is that simple symbol that embraces (and ties) the individual and the community. 

The media plays no small role both through informing the community and preparing the incarcerated person for the eventual “meet-up.” To say that there is room for dialogue between those reporting on correctional matters and those whose opinion on correctional practices are completely based (or biased) on what has been disseminated through various forms of media is a vast understatement. Neither the reported nor the reporters have it right. 

Preparing the community for reentry is critical, and the media is best positioned to facilitate that critical step. Technology is having an enormous impact on how and what is reported on public opinion. Corrections, in the sense of a system, has to invest more time embracing media technology so that the message is factual and transformative.  

One of the best sessions and the most memorable talks was on the need for corrections to move from crisis management to purposeful change. Iridian Grenada is a formerly incarcerated person (decades worth) in Canada and offered that if we want to substantially alter the message, “hire five 14-year-old girls with cell phones” to craft our message. 

Now that is innovative thinking, given with tongue in cheek, but with an acknowledgement that for the correctional community to get beyond the mostly negative message that the media is obsessed with, we may have to embrace technology differently. I have a 14-year-old granddaughter and she is more than up to the task, cell phone and all. Best wishes from Singapore! 

Stephen Carter, AICP is the executive vice president and global strategic development officer at Miami-based CGL Companies.