Writer Biography

Esther Calvert is a junior majoring in Sociology. She was born in England but has lived in Utah for most of her life. She enjoys reading and writing, and she hopes to write an autobiography someday. Her educational goal is to continue on to graduate and to use her experience and her skills to bring about change to the ineffective policies in our current criminal justice system.

This essay was first published in the 2009 edition of Voices and uses MLA documentation.

UP UNTIL JUNE OF 2008, I WAS AMONG the millions of Americans whose past mistakes impacted my life in ways I did not consider when I was younger. I was raised by the Department of Youth Corrections from the age of 13 until the adult correctional system took over the organization of my life when I was 18. I was convicted of a felony at age 20. When I came back into society in 2003, my experiences of the 15 years I was incarcerated defined who I was. I had no hope, no job skills, an inadequate education, and a criminal record where all the mistakes I had made since I was a child were recorded. The stigma others have of “criminals,” my negative perception of who I was as a result of my actions, and the time I spent incarcerated directly affected my opportunity to be employed. I applied for several jobs, yet I was denied each time. Eventually, I stopped trying to find work, and I began to volunteer at Bridgerland Literacy to teach a man how to better his English comprehension skills. I also cleaned cat kennels for a non-profit animal rescue. Regardless of my volunteer work, I was turned down for employment by PetSmart, North Logan Library, and Convergys—though Convergys is one company that admittedly hires people convicted of misdemeanors, but not felonies. During my first year living life “outside” of institutions, I had no social skills, and I did not know how to communicate with the people I labeled as “normal.” Even though I had no idea what “normal” meant, I believed I was not among them. In my perception, having friends, maintaining a job, and having life experiences opposite to mine were what constituted “normal” to me. Becoming “normal,” at the time, seemed equivalent to climbing Mount Everest.

My capacity to feel empathy began to return when I started to foster sick and abandoned kittens in my home for a non-profit animal rescue. I adopted a beautiful kitten whom I named Buddy. He helped me change my life in many ways. My devotion to giving him a better life than what he started out with helped me to believe I had something to offer. For the first year of being “outside,” I did not want to be in the community because I lacked the self-confidence to succeed. I believed I would return to institutions as I had done before. Yet, while I realized that I could deal with living my life inside of a cage, I did not want Buddy to have to live that way, which was what would have happened if I would have been incarcerated again.

In January 2005, I began attending Utah State University. During my first semester, I was unaccustomed to school, and since my education was based on the Youth in Custody program, I did not have experience with exams or homework assignments because neither was a priority and was excluded from the curriculum. I read as many books as I could while I was incarcerated, which was the overall foundation of my education. Reading served as a release that helped me to cope with my experiences, and it enhanced my desire to learn. The sixth grade was the last I completed in the public school system. Because I lacked a formal education, I questioned whether I could succeed in my college courses. I had been out of school for almost 20 years, so I only took two classes in my first semester; I received A’s in both. Up until that time I had not experienced a more joyful moment. I applied for a job as a housekeeper at the University Inn and was hired. I worked at the Inn for one and a half years before I transferred to the Taggart Student Center, where I was employed for another year and a half. Because of the kindness of employers who took the risk of hiring me, and my positive interactions with professors on campus, I began to believe in myself. I was given another chance at 31 when my criminal record was expunged.

Unfortunately, my story is not unusual. There are currently 2.2 million people incarcerated within America’s prisons, many of whom will be released someday and will be in the same situation I was where employment opportunities were next to non-existent (Katel 2). One of the main problems associated with having a felony conviction is recidivism. The definition of “recidivism” is “relapsing into a previous type of undesirable behavior, especially crime” (Stetler). Serving repeated terms of incarceration and probation/parole violations are other examples of “recidivism” because many people are sent back to prison for violating their parole. Some violations that people return to prison for include curfew violations, lack of employment, testing positive for alcohol or other drugs, associating with other probation/parolees, or additional conditions defined by their parole officers.

People released from prison or another long-term institution are not receiving adequate assistance from society to help them with a successful transition. Prison “transforms” an individual into a survival machine because that is precisely the sort of environment prison is one in which from one day to the next prisoners do not know if they will survive. Many prisoners serve years inside of this environment, and they are forced to adapt to looking over their shoulders and being suspicious of others because prisoners never know if or when they will be betrayed by someone they trusted. In prison, trusting another human being is potentially life-threatening. The psychological damage prison has on inmates, known as prison re-indoctrination, and the lack of opportunities available for ex-prisoners returning to the community significantly reduces their chances of acquiring skills that are socially acceptable, skills that are crucial for ex-prisoners to internalize so they can continue to live in society.

Negative attitudes and perceptions that prisoners are “unworthy” of opportunities contribute to recidivism and are rampant in American society. Some common perceptions of prisoners are that they are “lazy,” “lack intelligence,” and “complain” about their living conditions, or that they want to be “coddled,” by mainstream society. An article printed in the Economist reports attitudes many Americans have and who believe in “popular” forms of humiliation: “The reintroduction of chain-gangs, or dressing inmates in pink uniforms and giving them mind-numbing work” are embraced by Americans “because of their punitive effect” (“Coming to a Neighbourhood” par 16). Nothing beneficial occurs in communities or in prisoners’ lives by degrading others. This degradation will only further encourage people to demand retribution, thus contributing to the cycle of prisoners being released and re-incarcerated.

These attitudes are not exempt from Cache Valley, Utah where the crime rates are significantly lower than in many parts of the United States. Some Logan residents display similar disrespect towards prisoners. An inmate at the Cache County Jail wrote a letter to the editor that was printed in the Herald Journal in October of 2008. In response to “Inmate Dunbar’s” article, Daryl Forinash, a Logan City resident, addressed the 54-year-old inmate, comparing him to a “recalcitrant child” who has been sent to “timeout” (par 7). Forinash continues by adding, “And like the child, when you have spent some time considering your actions, you will be allowed to once again socialize with the rest of us” (par 7). My belief is that the words Daryl Forinash chose to use were intended to shame Mr. Dunbar publicly and to imply to “the rest of us” that inmates are second-class citizens and treating them as such is acceptable. Regardless of what a person has been convicted of, they do not deserve to be treated disrespectfully. Every one of us has made our fair share of mistakes; inmates are just more aware of this fact because of their surroundings. Yet, instead of remembering that we have each made our own mistakes, many people seem to have “forgotten” this fact.

In recent years, prominent scholars and researchers have outspokenly criticized the recidivism rates, yet what has been different in their recent criticism is that it has been directed toward the structure of the criminal justice system. In the past, people usually blamed ex-prisoners for their lack of employment or their return to prison without considering the nature of our justice system or the policies which are in place that prevent people from being productive. The most detrimental of the current policies, which was addressed in an article by criminologists Jessica S. Henry and James B. Jacobs, is de facto discrimination from hiring ex-prisoners who are seeking employment.

As many people are aware, on almost every job application, there is a question that asks whether the prospective employee has ever been convicted of a crime, more so a felony. Felons are required to disclose this information, and many employers conduct background checks on their employees where a felony conviction is bound to be discovered. As a felon, I was required to disclose this information regardless of the time elapsed since my convictions. Each time I filled out an application and turned it in for consideration, I knew I would not be asked to return for an interview based on my past convictions. None of the employers knew who I was except for what they read on a piece of paper, and I was not given an opportunity to personally meet them to discuss the ten years that had passed since I was convicted; their decision was already made.

As Henry and Jacobs have pointed out, the question on job applications that asks applicants about their prior criminal convictions is de facto discrimination. This type of discrimination has created “a permanent underclass of ex-offenders who are excluded from the legitimate economy and are funneled into a cycle of additional criminality and imprisonment” (Henry and Jacobs 756). Because of the rejection of an application based upon an applicant’s answer to this question, there is not much hope of an ex-prisoner receiving employment, even in menial labor jobs. The result is, in fact, discrimination based on life experiences and previous situations.

Bruce Western, a Professor of Sociology at Harvard, reinforces this fact by stating that “the key to the successful reintegration of ex-offenders into society is their ability to secure legitimate employment,” and when this opportunity is unavailable for people who have served their time in an institution, banishment from the job market will only increase recidivism. According to an article in the Economist, America’s population is growing in the number of ex-prisoners returning to society. We are witnessing in this ‘army of ex-cons…the final, perhaps unforeseen, stage of the country’s “love affair”’” (par 6) with incarcerating individuals. The current “permanent underclass of ex-offenders” will only continue to rise when more prisoners are released into society. There is significant evidence proving that when ex-offenders have stability in their lives, the chance that they will remain in the community is dramatically increased.

Criminologists Robert Sampson and John Laub have described the significant “turning points” in an offender’s life which can prevent recidivism. These community supports involve “school, family and employment, that alter life trajectories and redirect paths” (Western 413) to those which are more beneficial for the whole of society. When an ex-offender has already experienced years of “prison re-indoctrination,” they have little chance of succeeding in their communities without societal supports. Western concludes his article by discussing where society’s “real investments” can be made, ones “that build skills and improve health and well-being more directly” in people’s lives who are among the most “socially marginal in American society” (418). Each member of our society whether “free” or imprisoned has the potential to contribute to our communities in a positive way when given an opportunity to do so. Solutions that can help bring us as a human race together will in turn help us to value ourselves more and place a higher value upon life in general.

Recent improvements for helping ex-prisoners receive meaningful employment are being implemented in several major cities in America. According to Henry and Jacobs’s article, an ex-offender group in San Francisco, “All of Us or None,” has advocated for a bill to “end discrimination against ex-offenders applying for city and county jobs” under the campaign entitled “Ban the Box.” The “box” they are referring to is the question on a job application that asks whether the applicant has ever been convicted of a crime. Under new laws which have resulted from the “Ban the Box” campaign, employers disclose which jobs will require a background check, yet in order for them to ask for an applicant’s criminal record, the potential employee will have to be a “finalist” in the hiring process, which means a completed interview, and the decision to hire them has been made. When the department for which an ex-offender will be working discloses the potential employee’s name to Human Resources, they conduct a background check, and “if a disqualifying conviction is revealed, the applicant has an opportunity to meet with the Human Resources Department to discuss any mitigating circumstances” (Henry and Jacobs 757). Banning the box will be most effective in benefiting ex-offenders who have shown improvement in adapting to life outside of prison, and this policy “filters” out those who have not made the necessary changes that are needed in order to remain in the community.

In Boston City, 5,000 private contractors have also adopted the policy which greatly “enhances the employment prospects of thousands of ex-offender job seekers” (Henry and Jacobs 758). There are several steps that have been implemented to ensure equality between ex-offenders and non-offenders. In cities that have adopted “Ban the Box,” the question of whether an individual has been convicted of a crime is no longer on job applications. Ex-offenders who are “job ready” have the opportunity to be evaluated and considered solely on qualifications that are relevant to employment while excluding criminal convictions that have resulted in past discrimination. And “under new guidelines, even when a criminal record might be relevant to a particular job; before making a final hiring decision, city agencies must take into account the time elapsed since a conviction occurred…and evidence of rehabilitation” (Henry and Jacobs 758). It is my belief that this new proposal ought to be accepted as a common practice in the United States.

During the last five years, I have progressed more than I had at any time in my life. There are many people who have helped me to achieve the goals I once believed were unreachable. My previous employers wrote a letter to the judge on my behalf so I could get my record expunged, and one of my professors in the Sociology department also wrote the judge a letter. They were not obligated to do this for me, yet I will always remember their kindness.

I am still amazed by the grades I have received throughout the three- and one-half years I have attended Utah State University. Whereas I once doubted my intelligence, I have surpassed the expectations I once had of myself: I am majoring in Sociology with a G.P.A. of 3.9; I am an Undergraduate Teaching Fellow in the Sociology Department; and I plan to attend graduate school in the next few years.

The place where these solutions need to start is within members of our communities. If people continue to harbor negative beliefs about “criminals,” this will do nothing to help the problem of discrimination, this negativity will only exacerbate it more and thus promote further marginalization. Value and respecting others are what will increase a more cohesive society and will have more positive results than the overall current mindset of “disposable” individuals. Helping others to realize that their contributions are valuable through reintegration instead of through shaming and humiliation will be more beneficial to everyone in the long-term.

Works Cited

“Coming to a Neighbourhood Near You.” Economist, vol. 359, no. 8220, May 2001, pp. 23–24. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=4403937&site=ehost-live.

Forinash, Daryl. “Inmate Gripe Falls Flat.” The Herald Journal, 10 Oct. 2008, http://hjtownnews.com/articles/2008/10/06/opinion/leters_to_the_editor/letter0110.

Henry, Jessica S., and James B. Jacobs. “Ban the Box to Promote Ex-Offender Employment.” Criminology & Public Policy, vol. 6, no. 4, Nov. 2007, pp. 755–761. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00470.x.

Katel, Peter. “Prison Reform.” CQ Researcher 6 Apr. 2007. http://library.cqpress.com.cqresearcher/cqresrre2007040609.

Stelter, Gilbert A. “London (England).” Microsoft Encarta Online Dictionary, Microsoft Corp. 12 Mar. 2004, http://www.encarta.msn.com/dictionary.

Western, Bruce. “Criminal Background Checks and Employment among Workers with Criminal Records.” Criminology & Public Policy, vol. 7, no. 3, Aug. 2008, pp. 413–417. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00518.x.