Family Group Decision Making Helps Prison Inmates Reintegrate into Society
Deni Thurman-Eyer Laura Mirsky, International Institute for Restorative Practices, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Posted 2009-09-21
Related Links
» Family Group Decision Making Helps Prison Inmates Reintegrate into Society (PDF)
Family group decision making (FGDM), known in New Zealand, the UK and
Europe as family group conferencing or FGC, is proving to be a
beneficial restorative practice to help reintegrate prison inmates back
into society. This article addresses restorative FGDM/FGC programs in
prisons in Adams County, Pennsylvania, USA, and in Hungary.
Beginning in New Zealand in 1989 in the youth justice and child welfare
systems, FGDM/FGC operates according to the premise that the direct
involvement of a family group works better to solve a family’s issues
than the efforts of professionals alone to solve those issues for people. A key ingredient of an FGDM meeting is “Family Alone Time,”
when the family group is left alone, without professionals in the room,
to devise plans to solve their own issues. These plans are then
evaluated by professionals for legal and safety concerns.
Community Service Foundation, a model program of the IIRP, provides
FGDM conferences for youth and families in Pennsylvania. (Please see www.familypower.org for links to articles about FGDM/FGC.)
It Takes a Village, a private service provider based in Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania, provides FGDM for youth and families. Agency program
manager Dewaine Finkenbinder began using FGDM with adjudicated
prisoners in Adams County in 2003. Adams was the first county in the
nation to utilize a cross-system approach involving both the department
of children and youth services and justice agencies, said Finkenbinder.
In FGDMs at Adams County Prison, family members meet with the
prisoner and prison officials. Prison officials have an opportunity to
relate the inmate’s positive behaviors and accomplishments during his
or her incarceration, enabling the family to focus on achievements
rather than the behavior leading to imprisonment. Finkenbinder said
that this strength-based approach is proving transformational in Adams
County’s criminal justice system.
Finkenbinder discussed FGDM’s impact for a family when the
breadwinner goes to prison: FGDM meetings provide a structure for
developing a support system to keep the household going. A children and
youth (C&Y) caseworker approached Finkenbinder when a mother of
three children was about to be re-arrested for driving while
intoxicated and was facing 45 days in prison and 45 days’ probation.
Anticipating the family’s needs during the mother’s incarceration, an
FGDM meeting was held to bring the extended family together to work out
a plan, which C&Y accepted. The plan provided a way for the
children to stay with family members rather than be dispersed to
different foster families. After the mother was released from prison,
an adult probation officer found her drinking – a violation of
probation. Since a plan was already in place as a result of the FGDM
conference whereby family members would care for the children, the
probation officer needed only to make a call to redeploy that plan. The
family was able to prevent a crisis.
The FGDM process also supports the needs of inmates entering the work
release/reentry phase of their incarceration, allowing them to spend
part of their assigned work release time in their homes, so they can
pay bills, make meals and otherwise keep their households going.
Concluded Finkenbinder: “This is a practice, not a program. This is the
way we do business in Adams County.”
Community Service Foundation (CSF) and the IIRP have introduced FGDM to
prison populations in Hungary, led by Vidia Negrea, director of CSF
Hungary. (Negrea’s first work with CSF Hungary was a two-year
demonstration project with delinquent and at-risk youth [http://www.iirp.org/library/csfhungary.html].
She has since provided restorative practices training to thousands of
prosecutors, judges, lawyers, probation officers, teachers and
administrators throughout Hungary, using IIRP videos and other
materials translated into Hungarian, as well as interactive exercises.)
In 2008, supported by the Hungarian Ministry of Justice, Negrea trained
20 prison probation officers (POs) in FGDM, i.e., how to develop a plan
with inmates and their extended family for reentry into society.
Negrea said that there was some resistance to the training among the
POs, who were used to a more authoritative stance. Of the 20 officers
in the initial training, five were ready to try FGDM. Those five are
continuing to spread the message of the success of FGDM and build their
own network, showing key colleagues how to succeed with the practice
and spreading FGDM throughout the prison system.
During the initial project 17 FGDMs were held and 16 plans were
completed, including concrete postrelease strategies, with family
members agreeing to take responsibility. The FGDMs improved
relationships and increased communication among family members, between
family and professionals and among professionals themselves.
Negrea has since trained 50 more POs in FGDM — at least two POs in each
county in Hungary. About half the POs in Hungary are using FGDMs for
inmates leaving prison. The referring PO works with a PO who’s been
trained in FGDM and who facilitates the FGDM.
Most POs are very impressed with how well the process is working with
families, said Negrea. Before they used the process, they doubted that
families would be able to deal with their issues. Before FGDM, inmates
were too fed up with the system to make use of the services available
to them. FGDM helped them view the professionals as human beings who
might actually be able to help them. Also, since the families come up
with the plans themselves, they are more motivated to follow through
with them.
The first prison FGDM in Hungary was held April 2008 with a
38-year-old man with substance abuse issues who was being released
after five years in prison. (His fiancée had been killed when he was
driving under the influence, and he was sentenced for vehicular
homicide.)
Negrea and a newly trained PO co-facilitated the FGDM, which went
extremely well. “It was very emotional,” said Negrea. The man’s family
was happy to attend, as they had not been allowed to see him since he
had been incarcerated. His mother, sister and brother-in-law came, as
did four of his childhood friends. Professionals attending included the
newly trained PO, the inmate’s new PO for home supervision, a prison
counselor and Negrea.
The POs had these concerns regarding the inmate: How is his family
going to support him? What will be done about his unresolved issues?
How will he avoid further crime and drug use? How will he earn money?
The FGDM began with a “go-around” (where each person in a circle is
able to weigh in on a topic, uninterrupted). The group addressed the
question: What has happened in the last five years (since the inmate
had been in prison)? The group covered both high and low points;
everyone related what had been easy or hard for them. The inmate’s
sister said it had been hard for her to face people in her village and
at work because everybody knew that her brother had killed someone who
had lived there. The counselor shared how hard the inmate had been on
himself, blaming himself for what had happened. She also said that he
had been easy to work with, and that he had been kind and helpful to
others.
Hearing this, the inmate’s mother began to cry. She said she knew
that her son wasn’t a bad person or a “criminal,” and hearing the
counselor confirm this gave her renewed hope and trust in him.
The professionals provided information for the family about available
services: help for the inmate to find work, get drug treatment and
therapy, for example.
His sister asked about services for herself for the trauma she’d
been through regarding problems in her workplace. The family agreed to
go to therapy together.
Before leaving the room so the family group could have their “Family
Alone Time,” the professionals suggested a main discussion topic for
the family: rebuilding connections. Since the meeting was in prison,
they watched through a one-way window.
After coming up with a plan — a long one including psychological
services — the family presented it to the professionals. The inmate’s
friends said they would find a job for him by the time he left prison,
adding that their attitude toward him had changed because of the nice
things his counselor had said about him.
The family had also decided to write a letter of apology to the
victim’s family, and his sister took responsibility to deliver it in
person.
The new PO was very satisfied with the plan. The old PO gave all the
inmate’s data to the new one for the future. It was a very good
transition from one to the other, said Negrea. Everyone who attended
the conference gave it the highest possible rating.
In May 2009 Negrea held a meeting with about a dozen inmates who were
about to be released from prison to tell them about FGDM, facilitating
two go-arounds. In the first go-around she asked: “What are your
thoughts and feelings about being released?” Some answers included:
“I’ll finally be free.” “I won’t have to share a cell or a toilet.” “I
can be with my children.”
The second go-around question was: “Who was most affected by your
imprisonment?” In their answers, said Negrea, the inmates showed that
this was the first time they weren’t thinking of themselves as victims,
but rather about how their wives, children and parents had suffered due
to their imprisonment. Said one inmate, “My boy is six; he was one when
I left. He’s in a bigger jail than I am. I know he’s scared,” and he
began to cry. Realizing that he needed to restore his relationship with
his son and be a good father, he volunteered to participate in an FGDM.
Concluded Negrea: “For me, all these FGDMs have been learning
opportunities showing the huge impact such meetings can have on a
family. Many of the families felt united again. At a minimum they
realized that they could build a network to support them in solving
their conflicts.” |