What is prison for?

[New Judge]

Just watching “Newsnight” with Paxo. He’s at HM Prison High Down in Surrey. The prison handles mainly prisoners serving short sentences. He is there with Ken Clark talking about the effectiveness (or otherwise) of those prison sentences. On comes Peter Dawson, the prison Governor, who is asked what has been the effect on the prisoners of the short sentences that many of them serve. His reply: “Sending someone to prison always does harm to the person in prison. My job is to mitigate the harm is does to the person in prison and to their family”

And there’s me thinking that it is his job to keep them securely locked up, perhaps encourage them to sew a few mailbags and just ensure they are adequately fed and watered, but he made no mention of those responsibilities. No wonder prisons are so expensive to run if governors believe their role in life is “to mitigate the harm” that prison does to his charges.

I thought the idea of a prison was to inflict a bit of harm the miscreants with whom they deal. Or am I being a bit naive?

[chrissa1]

This is why I didn't really want to comment in the 1st place wyzard. I never advocated or brought up the subject of draconian Victorian style prisons.

[123everton]

There are only three types of criminal, the sick, the needy and the greedy.
Good prisons don't come cheap.
The moment you spend money on penal reform, the Daily Mail will produce an old granny who can't heat her flat.
There's a bloke I know, we used to be mates, he went his way, I went mine.
He's at it big time, has been for years, he lists prisons like they're a CV, he's out on parole (got 10 years for drug tafficking, seved 3) he's still at it now. He offered a mate of mine an opportunity to make money with stolen cards, he declined as he's as straight as they come, he won't change (he loves it), he's fcuking loaded though....

[New Judge]

Thanks all. An interesting range of ansers (as I hoped would come with my somewhat flippant question).

My concernis that Governor Dawson sees his prime (and as far as I heard) his only function as "mitigation of harm" that prison inflicts on prisoners. Looking at 123everton's "mate" who is in need of mitigation from harm, him or his victims?

[jno]

NJ, you got a series of insightful answers from people who have experience of what they're talking about and have given the matter thought.

I don't think it's a governor's job to punish people - that's what judges do. Locking up is the punishment. The governor is the one who has to try to make lives easier (not just the prisoners' but everyone's) when the sentence is over. You might well ask why a prison governor should do this, but it doesn't seem to be anyone else's job.

The ultimate aim ought to be that the prisoner reintegrates into society and pays taxes instead of living off them. Would that be a fair outcome in your eyes?

[123everton]

We're not mates NJ, not anymore, he went his way I went mine.
To be fair to him he's not a violent man, I suppose he's not averse to it, but he's a dealer, not a thug.
He actually got a terrible kicking years ago for dealing without permission, honour amongst thieves eh.

[New Judge]

Quite so, 123. Drug dealing may well not be a violent crime (though, as you have pointed out, it does attract violence). However, one of the matters that judges and magistrates have to consider when sentencing is the harm that the crime bestows upon the victim and the wider community. There is no doubt that dealing drugs probably inflicts the most widespread harm of any crime and the penalties are justifiably harsh.

To return to my original point, it goes without saying that prison inflicts harm upon those incarcerated and on their families. However, the criminal justice system is not a social service, nor is it a mental health facility. Its function is to deal with those who have transgressed and to lock up those who have done so sufficiently to warrant imprisonment (and you have to transgress quite seriously or serially to be sent to prison). The responsibility for the harm caused rests solely and squarely with the perpetrator. Parliament has in part decreed how long that harm will be inflicted by setting maximum sentences and judges and magistrates hone that process when sentencing.

Prison Governors have no right to see it as part of their responsibilities (or in the case of Mr Dawson, it seems, his sole responsibility) to mitigate that harm. Their job is to run the prison as laid down in the various statutes and the principle responsibilities, I would suggest, are as follows, in descending order of importance: security; shelter; nourishment; healthcare; rehabilitation.

Mitigating the harm that prison inflicts is not within the governor’s bailiwick.

[WShee9]

Why is nobody ready to accept what socialist China or North Korea do..and simply and cheaply put a bullet into a lot of their criminals heads?...Solves their problems.. and the counter-revolutionaries too..