Inmate. Convict. Offender. Prisoner. Predator. Felon. Jailbird. Criminal. Ex-con. Ex-offender. Ex-felon. These terms are routinely used by mainstream society to describe human beings who have been sentenced to and served a period of confinement in prison or jail. These and other dogmatic labels are purposely and effortlessly applied to irrevocably stigmatize and marginalize the formerly incarcerated individual.
In effect, this coded disparagement further depreciates the person’s morale and self-esteem, long after their release. Feelings of inferiority and rejection can often trigger maladaptive and socially deviant responses.
More than 2.3 million people are currently held in confinement in the United States. Of these, 76 percent are expected to return to prison within five years of release.
Denigrating colloquialisms, reinforced by economic sanctions, make the prospect of successful reintegration dismal at best — futile at worst.
“The acceptance and inclusion of formerly incarcerated persons by their community and overall society is vital to their success when rebounding from prison culture to community culture.”
As an educator and practitioner with more than 32 years of experience working with the criminal-justice-involved population, I am still appalled whenever I hear these words used to describe my clients.
These demeaning terms are employed openly and without reservation by public, private, and nonprofit sector employees alike, spanning all racial and ethnic groups. In particular, policy makers and Many formerly incarcerated people return to the community with an enhanced education, vocational training, and renewed outlook on life. Unfortunately, these atypical profiling and discriminatory practices serve to minimize or negate any progress made by the justice-involved person toward rehabilitation and reformation.
Their attempts to address and correct the thinking and behavior, which caused their entry into the justice system, is undermined by their classification and designation to a socially accepted permanent underclass. This mark of shame and discredit encountered during reintegration is a catalyst for the onset of substance use disorder, anxiety, depression, and other mental defects.
Left untreated, this diminished capacity renders the targeted and vulnerable person a prime candidate for recidivism. Facing everyday responsibilities with little or no supportive network in place proves to be quite challenging, if not overwhelming. Under these mitigating and aggravating circumstances, the individual is more prone to re-offend, relapse, or both.
*“A person returning home from incarceration faces many hardships and being stigmatized by negative names is often a major barrier to successful transition. People returning home from prison are one of the most highly stigmatized groups in American society.”*³
“Society labeling individuals in an inferior manner based on a status or social circumstance is social stigma at its best.”⁴
Link and Phelan (2001) noted that *“stigma is a process that occurs when elements of labeling, stereotyping, separation, status loss and discrimination co-occur together in a power situation that allows the components of stigma to unfold.”*⁵
All the elements of stigma are associated with *“the negative social attitudes attached to a characteristic of an individual, that may be regarded as a mental, physical or social deficiency.”*⁶ One of the most challenging tasks is to change a person’s negative thinking of one’s self if for years they have embraced and accepted the negative labels.
According to the late Eddie Ellis, executive director and founder of NuLeadership on Urban Solutions, in “An Open Letter to Our Friends on the Question of Language,” these terms are acceptable as the “official language of the media, law enforcement, public policy agencies and academia.”⁷
Repeatedly calling someone such horrific names to define who the person is not only indicates that society is not interested in knowing who this formerly incarcerated person is today but also that it is not interested in knowing who they can be tomorrow.
We must continually be reminded of the power of speech. The Bible reads: *“death and life are in the power of the tongue.”*⁸ Repeatedly hearing and responding to a negative definition of self leads one to believe and embrace the negative identity: *“for as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.”*⁹
Eddie Ellis went on to write:
*“In an effort to assist our transition from prison to our communities as responsible citizens and to create a more positive human image of ourselves, we are asking everyone to stop using these perceived negative terms and to simply refer to us as PEOPLE. People currently or formerly incarcerated, PEOPLE on parole, PEOPLE recently released from prison, PEOPLE in prison, PEOPLE with criminal convictions, but PEOPLE.”*¹⁰
Today, the conversation regarding the proper vernacular germane to reentry services continues to evolve. Present day acceptable terms include “returning citizen” and “a person with justice involvement.”
Criminal justice reform should begin with changing the presumptuous language that is used to describe individuals who have been incarcerated. The motive for changing the rhetoric is to assist in eliminating the public outcry, bigotry, contempt, and disdain associated with people who have a history of criminal justice involvement.
Essentially, we must ensure that an already marginalized, underserved, and vulnerable population does not have to continue to identify with a moment that, in many cases, was the worst period of their life. By changing the words that are used to reference them, we can change society’s perception of who these persons are and who they may become.
Attempting to thrive in an unforgiving society where a permanent caste system is enforced basically leaves only two options for the unskilled and unimaginative: one either conforms or continues to commit crimes in order to suppress feelings of degradation and despair.
Perceived stigma prior to release can have adverse complications on one’s social functioning after release from prison and/or jail. Punitive barriers and restrictions placed on persons with felony-conviction status continue to make life unbearable.
Fulfilling activities such as obtaining professional licenses or student financial aid or engaging in civic duties (e.g., voting, jury duty) are essential to the reentry process. The dynamics of being stigmatized and ostracized are very complex for all with a criminal record, but is even more of a challenge if you are African American or Hispanic.¹¹
For example, the federal housing guidelines restrict individuals with felony convictions from coming back home to live with their families. Thus, these returnees are forced into an already overcrowded, unsafe, and unsuitable shelter system akin to prison accommodations — a world where greed, defamation, and discrimination is perfectly legal.
These civil penalties, although not considered punishment by our courts, often make it virtually impossible for those confined to integrate into mainstream society and economy upon release. Once labeled a felon, this collateral consequence can be the most damaging and painful aspect of a criminal conviction.
Collectively, these sanctions send the strong message that, now that you have been labeled, you are no longer wanted. You are no longer a part of “us,” the deserving. Unable to drive, get a job, find housing, or even qualify for public benefits, many ex-offenders lose their children, their dignity, and eventually their freedom — landing back in jail after failing to play by rules that seem hopelessly stacked against them.¹²
On 31 December 2016, the most recent date for which data is available, there were roughly 2.2 million people incarcerated in prisons and jails throughout the United States. Add to that the 4.5 million people being supervised in the community by a parole or probation agency, and 1 in 38 adults is under some form of correctional supervision.
Therefore, in this conversation I purposely use the phrase “our community,” as no community is exempt from the residual injustice that adversely impacts persons with criminal justice involvement and their family, friends, and neighbors.
This is a call to action for a more responsive support structure for the formerly incarcerated, by eliminating labels that diminish perceived expectations for sustainable freedom and community contribution. We as service providers must make a concerted effort to eliminate the negative labels, offending name calling, and dehumanizing stigma from our speech and prose.
Granted, it is not easy to refrain from using a vocabulary relied upon and communicated for one’s entire life. However, with diligent effort, discipline, and determination, it is possible.
I recently attended a major local criminal justice forum. The acting New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision Commissioner spoke with the attendees from various government, law enforcement, and not-for-profit agencies. During his address, not once did he use any derogatory or demeaning terms to reference the subjects. This was the first time I witnessed an official of his level who did not use centuries-old terms, commonplace to the business at hand. I literally had to remind myself that he was talking about persons either incarcerated or under community supervision (on parole, probation).
The well-respected speaker set the tone for correctional and reentry staff to uniformly follow. States must incorporate reintegration approaches throughout all phases of the criminal justice process — such as at time of arrest and sentencing, during incarceration, and post-release.
Those of us who are scholars and practitioners in the field must begin to change our verbiage, as we invoke new concepts and techniques for a 21st-century justice system. Human-service and mental health providers must modify the language of their practice as well, recognizing that positive reinforcement is the social, behavioral, and emotional support needed for lasting rehabilitation, education, and empowerment.
This discussion is unequivocally relevant to reentry, as it offers concrete corrective action for the improvement of public perception and reconciliatory treatment of persons with a history of criminal justice involvement. In a civilized society, the burden of restorative justice should not fall solely upon the one who erred but on crime victims and the community at large, as well.
Changing the Words Changes the Outcome!