I wonder if the health care provided to prisoners includes detox to take care of drug addictions.
The majority of my research has been California-based, but yes, it absolutely includes detox and substance abuse treatment. Since a lot of people are in prison for drug-related offenses, prisons end up being de facto detox clinics. There are statistics somewhere (I knew them a few years ago and I can't remember them now) that show that once cocaine and heroin became criminalized, or criminalized more strongly (1970?) not only did the prison population skyrocket, but the health care costs went up at a much greater rate than one would expect simply from an increase in the population, and the majority of the increased costs went towards treating patients who were detoxing.
If Michigan were to remove access to the internet and library, wouldn't we then point out that now the prisoners don't have means to improve themselves so they won't go back to crime once they get out?
This idea scares me a lot. I have several clients on my caseload who come from the prison system, and often the majority of their education comes from what they received while in prison. I have a client who finished his GED and went through a technical program for carpentry; he is miles more employable now than he would have been had he not had access to educational opportunities during his sentence.
(And I know I work in California and not Michigan, but retrograde ideas have a way of spreading. For example, Wisconsin triggered a wave of states taking away bargaining rights for public employees.)
You raise valid points. And I'm all for rehabilitation. The issue is that so many kids don't have access to three square meals a day, decent health care, or many of the things that prisoners seem to get with out any issue. Shouldn't we be taking care of the future with more care?
Wasn't CA ordered by the Supreme Court to release tens of thousands of prisoners? I am glad they're trying to detox people, but there needs to be a better way to do it.
I agree with what you're saying, but I think comparing $ spent/student to $ spent/prisoner is misleading. That's all.
I'm totally in agreement with you - I think it's a crap analogy, and I think both schools and prisons have a lot that needs fixing and both are capable of being fixed without being at the expense of the other. I'm just expanding on points you brought up because prison health care was a topic I researched in grad school, and inside every social services employee is a pedantic grad student screaming to get out and show off hir learnings.
I also agree that there's better ways for people to detox - namely, at their own choice and in facilities set up for it and without a black market trade in drugs. Involuntary incarceration is so not the best place for it. But if you lock up drug offenders and don't provide them drugs, they're going to detox, like it or not. The only solution would be to provide them with drugs in controlled environments (similar to methadone clinics). Or not locking up non-violent drug offenders, which IIRC is what CA is trying now, finally.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
(no subject)
Date: 2011-05-31 06:59 pm (UTC)The majority of my research has been California-based, but yes, it absolutely includes detox and substance abuse treatment. Since a lot of people are in prison for drug-related offenses, prisons end up being de facto detox clinics. There are statistics somewhere (I knew them a few years ago and I can't remember them now) that show that once cocaine and heroin became criminalized, or criminalized more strongly (1970?) not only did the prison population skyrocket, but the health care costs went up at a much greater rate than one would expect simply from an increase in the population, and the majority of the increased costs went towards treating patients who were detoxing.
If Michigan were to remove access to the internet and library, wouldn't we then point out that now the prisoners don't have means to improve themselves so they won't go back to crime once they get out?
This idea scares me a lot. I have several clients on my caseload who come from the prison system, and often the majority of their education comes from what they received while in prison. I have a client who finished his GED and went through a technical program for carpentry; he is miles more employable now than he would have been had he not had access to educational opportunities during his sentence.
(And I know I work in California and not Michigan, but retrograde ideas have a way of spreading. For example, Wisconsin triggered a wave of states taking away bargaining rights for public employees.)
(no subject)
Date: 2011-05-31 08:24 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-05-31 10:05 pm (UTC)I agree with what you're saying, but I think comparing $ spent/student to $ spent/prisoner is misleading. That's all.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-05-31 10:20 pm (UTC)I also agree that there's better ways for people to detox - namely, at their own choice and in facilities set up for it and without a black market trade in drugs. Involuntary incarceration is so not the best place for it. But if you lock up drug offenders and don't provide them drugs, they're going to detox, like it or not. The only solution would be to provide them with drugs in controlled environments (similar to methadone clinics). Or not locking up non-violent drug offenders, which IIRC is what CA is trying now, finally.