Corrections History

History of Corrections in Minnesota

In the mere forty years of which the publication "Corrections Retrospective 1959-1999, Minnesota Department of Corrections" is based, Minnesota's corrections history has vastly changed. During this time, one can observe an ever shifting correctional philosophy, how sentencing tendencies tend to reflect changes in attitude, how community members have been involved as corrections volunteers and also the effects of drug and alcohol abuse and addiction on the system. The earliest correctional philosophy can be dated back to the first Territorial Prison in Minnesota. According to Orville B. Pung, the administrators and observers during this time period believed "prisoners should be treated humanely and
Sentencing policy is also driven by societal norms, values and the political process. The Community Corrections Act was passed in 1973 allowing property offenders to be penalized within the community instead of only within in a prison setting. This change allowed for the limited and expensive prison resources to be saved for the violent and threatening offenders. State sentencing guidelines were passed in 1978, along with mandatory minimum sentences for serious crimes, with the goals of trying to alleviate perceptions of inequality and to control liberal release practices. The proportional guidelines were extremely successful. The success can be measured by the shift in ratio of the prison population with regard to property and violent offenders occupying the space. This relationship between violent versus non-violent inmates proportionality in prison populations is at great risk today due to the re-codification of controlled substance laws as an answer to the "crack" menace introduced in the mid-1980s. This drug phenomena will be explored in more detail shortly. Based on these few of many examples, it is obvious that Mr. Cain was
The Columbia University National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse found eighty percent of the inmates in federal and state prisons in 1998 were incarcerated because of drugs and/or alcohol, either directly or indirectly. To make matters even more dismal, only fourteen percent of the inmates who needed treatment in 1998 received it while in prison or jail. These statistics are astounding. Chemical dependency, often times coupled with mental illness, presents a problem for the entire community because most inmates are going to be released back into civilized society. Although why these people are not being treated for his or her personal issue(s) may not be crystal clear, all the constituents of Minnesota should begin asking themselves how he or she can assist in changing this. Everyone would benefit if a common solution is worked towards to stop the ever-swinging door between chemical dependency and criminal activity and at times mental