Canada Lacks Restriction on Ex-convicts

Compared to the United States, Canada attempts to provide a less discriminatory transition for offenders

By Tom DiNardo, Staff Writer

Much to the uproar of the surrounding community, two ex-convicts were released in New Brunswick earlier this April. Both men were convicted sex offenders. The first was convicted of sexual offenses in the 1980s and was released once his statutory release had been reached, two thirds of the way through his full sentence. The other was convicted in 2001 for sexual assault. While local communities are nervous about the prospective danger in their area, there is nothing they or local authorities can do about it. It’s up to the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) as to where to send ex-convicts upon release.

Restrictions on ex-convicts

In the United States, these men would be subject to a number of restrictions upon release, including discrimination in housing, employment, and social welfare services. In most states, convicts are forbidden from voting while in jail. As well, in Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, and Virginia, voting rights are only restored to ex-convicts upon individual petition or application to the government.

Ex-felons in Canada, on the other hand, don’t face these restrictions upon release. Rather, offenders participate in a mixture of institution-based, surveillance-based, and assistance-based transition programs meant to help reintegrate them into society.

So far, this method seems rather effective. In a study published by Public Safety Canada, researchers found that only 3.7% of sex offenders in Canada under community supervision were incarcerated for sexual reoffending after participating in reintegration programs for three years.

“Research shows that society is best protected when an offender is gradually reintegrated into the community under supervision, and subject to strict monitoring and control,” said Sara Parkes of Correctional Service Canada (CSC). “When offenders are granted release to the community, there are conditions for that release. Standard conditions are set out in the [Corrections and Conditional Release Act], as well as any additional special conditions that the PBC deems necessary to impose to ensure public safety.”

Social reintegration

Even without restrictions, social reintegration is hard enough. According to Public Safety Canada, ex-felons face a multitude of challenges when they are released from prison. Before conviction, many offenders will have previously experienced social isolation and marginalization. They may also have a history of physical and emotion abuse.

Once released, their struggle to function in society becomes more difficult when faced with new challenges. Offenders have to find housing and employment, sometimes with limited financial means. To make matters worse, an offender’s time in prison has “collateral effects.” Essentially, this amounts to one’s loss of livelihood, loss of important personal relationships, and loss of personal belongings.

Michelle Alexander, in her new book The New Jim Crow, points out that employment is a key factor to whether an individual is pushed to commit a crime. In the book, Alexander discusses the practice of mass incarceration by the US judicial system. She points to “joblessness” as the reason for high crime rate among African American communities. While the book refers to African-American cases specifically, the message is universal. Employment is a crucial component to non-offense. If someone cannot maintain financial and employment security, they will do whatever is necessary to get by.

Lawmakers in the United States are recognizing the current weight of hardships for ex-convicts upon release and the importance that employment plays in successful reintegration. Some are trying to take action to improve this situation. In April of this year, the state of Minnesota Senate passed a bill known as “ban the box.” The bill essentially eliminated a criminal-history box that appears on most job applications. The move is meant to allow those who have committed crimes a fighting chance of rebuilding their lives once they are released from prison. Employers are still allowed to ask about a person’s criminal record in an interview, but it gives the applicant a chance to explain his or herself.

Public awareness

Public awareness continues to be a controversial issue among communities. Bradford County, Florida, now posts red warning signs outside the homes of known sex-offenders. Much like the scarlet letter worn by Nathaniel Hawthorne’s fictitious character Hester Prynne, these warning signs are meant to “name and shame” offenders. They exist to alert residents to the potential risk of living nearby previously convicted offenders. This allows families to take extra precautions and creates awareness for new families moving into the neighborhood.

In 2004, the Sex Offender Information Registration Act established the National Sex Offender Registry. This supplies law enforcement agents with a national database that contains information on convicted sex offenders. It provides police with access to information on current sex offenders such as personal information, photographs, and descriptions. However, this information can only be “used to investigate a specific crime that is suspected to be of a sexual nature only as authorized by the law.” In other words, the door is closed to the public for general awareness.

The United States, in comparison, provides sex offender registries that are available online for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and several Indian tribes. The registry gives the identity and location of known sex offenders. Most importantly, in contrast to Canada, the United States Sex Offender Registry is available to the public.

However, access to this information is becoming a lot easier for Canadians. Last year, the Christian group Canada Family Action launched a website that provided the public with the names and photographs of convicted sex offenders in Canada. While many of the offenders listed have been released, some names are of people still serving time in prison. Canada Family Action believes that the public has a right to know where the offenders are in order to protect their children from any potential danger.

The American “War on Drugs” has spawned many rigid restrictions on ex-convicts in the United States that have been released and are attempting to reintegrate into society. Studies are beginning to show, however, that these limitations may not be in the best interest of offenders and of the public. In Canada, the federal government, the CSC, and the PBC work to successfully reintegrate ex-felons into Canadian society in a way that allows for an easier transition. While each individual case is different, this system may potentially decrease cause for re-offending, thus fostering a better functioning society.

Tom DiNardo has a B.A. in History from McGill University. Tom is passionate about reading, writing, and experiencing all that life has to offer. He is currently living and working in Montreal, Quebec.

Image provided by bizjournals