Rehabilitation is such an important focus in Canadian prisons today compared to yesteryear.
Years ago the attitude was “throw away the key” and make incarceration as miserable as possible to teach those criminals a lesson.
We’ve all seen the movies, and many of them aren’t far-fetched in their portrayal of what happened behind bars.
Many people still have the attitude that lawbreakers, especially vile ones, should rot in jail, but that thinking is as old as the barbaric treatment inmates once endured.
There are some horrific monsters that have proven they will never be rehabilitated, but the majority of inmates have a chance to make an honest living on the outside. And that’s why correctional centres are doing everything they can to make that possible.
One such program offers federal inmates conjugal visits with spouses and family members in rooms that look like your average living space in any home.
This unique setup strengthens the family bond and increases the likelihood of inmates successfully reintegrating into society. Not only does it foster good behaviour behind bars, it shows inmates what they are missing outside those prison walls.
It gives mothers hope for a better life with their children, it gives husbands hope to provide for their families, and it results in less re-offending.
Last year the conjugal visit program was given the spotlight after notorious BC killer Kelly Ellard got pregnant after one of these conjugal visits with her boyfriend, a parolee.
One wonders if motherhood will ever change her attitude or pave the way for her release back into society.
Conjugal visits, or the more appropriate term, extended family visits, have an interesting history in the United States.
These visits were used in 1918 to encourage work rather than marital bonds. Warden James Parchman at Mississippi State Penitentiary introduced conjugal (sex) visits as an incentive for inmates to work harder. And it probably worked wonders.
Today in Canada, conjugal visits are only offered in federal prisons and involve not just spouses but family members.
While this program no doubt costs the taxpayer more to operate, it is worth the added expense.
Inmates who qualify deserve to be with their families in the hope they will strengthen that bond and won’t re-offend when their sentences are up.
We have to remember that inmates are human beings and need that familial contact regardless of their crimes. They made mistakes and society should do what it can to help them lead productive lives again.
Lyonel Doherty, editor
