What do you think?
Rate this book
Correction: Parole, Prison, and the Possibility of Change
FROM THE CRITICALLY ACCLAIMED AUTHOR OF HIGH-RISERS comes a groundbreaking and honest investigation into the crisis of the American criminal justice system–through the lens of parole. Perfect for fans of Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow and Bryan Stevenson’s Just Mercy
The United States, alone, locks up a quarter of the world’s incarcerated people. And yet apart from clichés—paying a debt to society; you do the crime, you do the time—there is little sense collectively in America what constitutes retribution or atonement. We don’t actually know why we punish.
Ben Austen’s powerful exploration offers a behind-the-scenes look at the process of parole. Told through the portraits of two men imprisoned for murder, and the parole board the holds their freedom in the balance, Austen’s unflinching storytelling forces us to reckon with some of the most profound questions underlying the country’s values around crime and punishment. What must someone who commits a terrible act do to get a second chance? What does incarceration seek to accomplish?
An illuminating work of narrative nonfiction, Correction challenges us to consider for ourselves why and who we punish–and how we might find a way out of an era of mass imprisonment.
The United States, alone, locks up a quarter of the world’s incarcerated people. And yet apart from clichés—paying a debt to society; you do the crime, you do the time—there is little sense collectively in America what constitutes retribution or atonement. We don’t actually know why we punish.
Ben Austen’s powerful exploration offers a behind-the-scenes look at the process of parole. Told through the portraits of two men imprisoned for murder, and the parole board the holds their freedom in the balance, Austen’s unflinching storytelling forces us to reckon with some of the most profound questions underlying the country’s values around crime and punishment. What must someone who commits a terrible act do to get a second chance? What does incarceration seek to accomplish?
An illuminating work of narrative nonfiction, Correction challenges us to consider for ourselves why and who we punish–and how we might find a way out of an era of mass imprisonment.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published November 7, 2023
65 people are currently reading
2049 people want to read
About the author
Ben Austen
8 books35 followersBen Austen has written for numerous publications, including the New York Times Magazine, Harper’s Magazine, The Atlantic, GQ, and Wired. He lives in Chicago.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 99 reviews
November 24, 2023
Ben Austen traces the history of parole along two routes: (1) the rise of mass incarceration, increasingly harsh sentencing, and uglier conditions of imprisonment; (2) the stories of two men imprisoned for decades, who after repeated parole hearings are finally freed.
Why, he invites us to ask, is loss of freedom not in itself a sufficient punishment? Why must the conditions of confinement be brutal?
A few items from my notes:
Decades-long incarceration wasn't always the norm, even in the US; a predicate of such long sentences is that people can't change. At parole hearings, the crime takes center stage and the question is whether the prisoner can tell a more compelling story -- so a favorable result hinges on narrative skill when "the present [is] forever being pulled back into the past." How hungry and tired are the parole board members? If you're the fifth person whose case is being heard that day, and the parole board has released two others, will the board feel compelled to pull back lest they be seen as too "soft"? Someone seeking parole now is doing so in a climate where extremely long sentences have been normalized and prison capacity has been treated as limitless.
Austen takes in the history of the victims'-rights movement, which grew partly out of feminist efforts to improve the treatment of victims of sexual assault and intimate partner violence but which came to be equated with policing and punishment, not just better treatment of crime victims. He points out that the victims'-rights movement as presently constituted treats victim and criminal as mutually exclusive categories, as though no one who committed a crime had ever themselves been victimized. There were commonsense changes, such as notifying victims of trial dates, but also changes that made it harder and harder for people who had committed crimes to reintegrate into civil society. And Austen points out the dishonesty of a movement that overlooks those most often victimized. For instance, "nearly every law named for a victim of a horrific crime since the 1980s is named for a white crime victim."
You can see why I kept having to pause the audio to take notes, and why you may find yourself gasping with relief when Johnnie Veal and Michael Henderson, the two men whose stories Austen tells in greatest depth, are finally granted parole.
Correction was often painful listening, but it never dragged. The audiobook narration is excellent, with the tiny, flinch-inducing quibble that Brett Barry thinks "just deserts" is pronounced like the geographical feature. (PSA: It's "deserts" as in "what someone deserves." Not the sweet course at the end of a meal, either.)
Why, he invites us to ask, is loss of freedom not in itself a sufficient punishment? Why must the conditions of confinement be brutal?
A few items from my notes:
Decades-long incarceration wasn't always the norm, even in the US; a predicate of such long sentences is that people can't change. At parole hearings, the crime takes center stage and the question is whether the prisoner can tell a more compelling story -- so a favorable result hinges on narrative skill when "the present [is] forever being pulled back into the past." How hungry and tired are the parole board members? If you're the fifth person whose case is being heard that day, and the parole board has released two others, will the board feel compelled to pull back lest they be seen as too "soft"? Someone seeking parole now is doing so in a climate where extremely long sentences have been normalized and prison capacity has been treated as limitless.
Austen takes in the history of the victims'-rights movement, which grew partly out of feminist efforts to improve the treatment of victims of sexual assault and intimate partner violence but which came to be equated with policing and punishment, not just better treatment of crime victims. He points out that the victims'-rights movement as presently constituted treats victim and criminal as mutually exclusive categories, as though no one who committed a crime had ever themselves been victimized. There were commonsense changes, such as notifying victims of trial dates, but also changes that made it harder and harder for people who had committed crimes to reintegrate into civil society. And Austen points out the dishonesty of a movement that overlooks those most often victimized. For instance, "nearly every law named for a victim of a horrific crime since the 1980s is named for a white crime victim."
You can see why I kept having to pause the audio to take notes, and why you may find yourself gasping with relief when Johnnie Veal and Michael Henderson, the two men whose stories Austen tells in greatest depth, are finally granted parole.
Correction was often painful listening, but it never dragged. The audiobook narration is excellent, with the tiny, flinch-inducing quibble that Brett Barry thinks "just deserts" is pronounced like the geographical feature. (PSA: It's "deserts" as in "what someone deserves." Not the sweet course at the end of a meal, either.)
July 6, 2023
Highly recommend. This is a wonderful big picture/little picture exploration of modern "corrections" of prison and parole, and how the tides have turned from being rehabilitative confinement to retribution, punishment, and sometimes even vengeance (particularly when it comes to victims). So often the parole board will not focus on the changes the individual has made and their fitness to enter back into society as functional citizens, but rather on relitigating the crime, and prolonging suffering on account of what victims want, even if the victims themselves are being dragged through years of litigation and suffering by reliving the crime again and again through things like parole hearings.
Recently sentencing took place for the person who killed two of my friends in a drunk driving accident. It left their children orphans. It was horrific. News sources reported on the sentencing and the comments filled quickly with people advocating more time in prison, to account for the time my friends lost with their children and their children with them. But the thing is, the amount of time a person spends in prison will never, ever bring them back. It will not right the wrong. It is a theft that can never be repaid. Does making a person suffer for an arbitrary amount of time fix the right, if the time is not focused on rehabilitation with an end goal of reintroducing a better person to society? Studies show prolonging suffering -- while it may feel just and like an eye for an eye to some victims -- does not increase victim satisfaction or relieve their personal suffering. In fact, in this book it took one family member saying enough, our suffering is not being relieved (and in fact is being made worse) by dragging out this other person's suffering for the rest of our lives. We want it do, we are told through countless stories and social norms that it should. But it doesn't. What, then, is the goal?
To be clear, this is not an argument against punishment. People should be held accountable. But what is accountability if the time served ceases to be productive? If, when they come up for parole and have done everything right, they are told that the crime was too bad, to terrible, and essentially no amount of good behavior, education, and rehabilitation will ever make up for the crime? What is the point of dangling parole at all, if we are really hellbent on throwing away the keys?
That is the big picture.
The smaller picture follows two men in their bids for parole in their old age; these are men who have been locked up for 50+ years, doing time to crimes committed as teenagers. The book lays out clearly the statistics of risk and recidivism for the elderly is practically nill, whereas both the logistical cost of incarceration is astronomical. These are men who bettered themselves, who did everything possible to make amends, to be better, and still, they faced years and years and years of rejected parole bids, often in ways that were arbitrary and more aligned with the political climate of any one time than anything to do with them or their case. One case involved the killing of a police officer, so police would fill the parole board hearings on principle, as if to say, no matter what you do to better yourself, we will punish you until you die.
Simply put, we have stripped corrections of corrective behavior. We give people "tickets" for the smallest infraction (using a phone on a work break nearly made one man lose his opportunity for parole) as though this will make them better people. We strip people of their humanity, and punish them again and again and again for the same crime, even though you cannot be tried in court for the same offense more than once. It is a loophole, and an inhumane, brutal one.
And to go back to victims rights -- this book does not go easy on victims, and I'm glad for it. It is important not to allow people the power to seek revenge and retribution for their own causes, however just they may seem. Being a danger to society is one thing, seeking to mete out suffering in revenge for a crime that cannot be undone is cruel and unusual, and should not be the norm.
Incarcerated people are people; people who have done terrible things, but still people. If we acknowledge that, then we must acknowledge that there is a possibility for change, and corrections ought to put people on that path, not as an afterthought to retribution but as the primary goal. And that means providing a clear and meaningful path to eventually being free. It should not be based on political vibes of the times, on who is on the parole board, on whether a parole board member already granted parole to three people prior and is now feeling like they should tip the scales for the next person to even things out. It should be based on clear and honest benchmarks and behavior expectations, on penitence, on evaluating a person's humanity not through the lens of the worst thing they ever did (which they have already clearly been punished for) but on the merits and risks of introducing them back into society. Not everyone will be deemed eligible. There will always be people who do not merit reentry. But those should not hurt those who have done what is expected of them, who have changed, and who deserve a second chance.
This book highlights the complicated crimes (alleged and proven) and seeks to bend the tides towards justice. Real justice, justice that sees the possibility of change, both for prisoners and for society.
Other countries have successfully done this. It is not absurd or impossible.
It is so very possible.
Recently sentencing took place for the person who killed two of my friends in a drunk driving accident. It left their children orphans. It was horrific. News sources reported on the sentencing and the comments filled quickly with people advocating more time in prison, to account for the time my friends lost with their children and their children with them. But the thing is, the amount of time a person spends in prison will never, ever bring them back. It will not right the wrong. It is a theft that can never be repaid. Does making a person suffer for an arbitrary amount of time fix the right, if the time is not focused on rehabilitation with an end goal of reintroducing a better person to society? Studies show prolonging suffering -- while it may feel just and like an eye for an eye to some victims -- does not increase victim satisfaction or relieve their personal suffering. In fact, in this book it took one family member saying enough, our suffering is not being relieved (and in fact is being made worse) by dragging out this other person's suffering for the rest of our lives. We want it do, we are told through countless stories and social norms that it should. But it doesn't. What, then, is the goal?
To be clear, this is not an argument against punishment. People should be held accountable. But what is accountability if the time served ceases to be productive? If, when they come up for parole and have done everything right, they are told that the crime was too bad, to terrible, and essentially no amount of good behavior, education, and rehabilitation will ever make up for the crime? What is the point of dangling parole at all, if we are really hellbent on throwing away the keys?
That is the big picture.
The smaller picture follows two men in their bids for parole in their old age; these are men who have been locked up for 50+ years, doing time to crimes committed as teenagers. The book lays out clearly the statistics of risk and recidivism for the elderly is practically nill, whereas both the logistical cost of incarceration is astronomical. These are men who bettered themselves, who did everything possible to make amends, to be better, and still, they faced years and years and years of rejected parole bids, often in ways that were arbitrary and more aligned with the political climate of any one time than anything to do with them or their case. One case involved the killing of a police officer, so police would fill the parole board hearings on principle, as if to say, no matter what you do to better yourself, we will punish you until you die.
Simply put, we have stripped corrections of corrective behavior. We give people "tickets" for the smallest infraction (using a phone on a work break nearly made one man lose his opportunity for parole) as though this will make them better people. We strip people of their humanity, and punish them again and again and again for the same crime, even though you cannot be tried in court for the same offense more than once. It is a loophole, and an inhumane, brutal one.
And to go back to victims rights -- this book does not go easy on victims, and I'm glad for it. It is important not to allow people the power to seek revenge and retribution for their own causes, however just they may seem. Being a danger to society is one thing, seeking to mete out suffering in revenge for a crime that cannot be undone is cruel and unusual, and should not be the norm.
Incarcerated people are people; people who have done terrible things, but still people. If we acknowledge that, then we must acknowledge that there is a possibility for change, and corrections ought to put people on that path, not as an afterthought to retribution but as the primary goal. And that means providing a clear and meaningful path to eventually being free. It should not be based on political vibes of the times, on who is on the parole board, on whether a parole board member already granted parole to three people prior and is now feeling like they should tip the scales for the next person to even things out. It should be based on clear and honest benchmarks and behavior expectations, on penitence, on evaluating a person's humanity not through the lens of the worst thing they ever did (which they have already clearly been punished for) but on the merits and risks of introducing them back into society. Not everyone will be deemed eligible. There will always be people who do not merit reentry. But those should not hurt those who have done what is expected of them, who have changed, and who deserve a second chance.
This book highlights the complicated crimes (alleged and proven) and seeks to bend the tides towards justice. Real justice, justice that sees the possibility of change, both for prisoners and for society.
Other countries have successfully done this. It is not absurd or impossible.
It is so very possible.
November 21, 2023
The burning question in correction by Ben Austin is win is enough enough? If incarceration is to rehabilitate and it is a proven fact that those who have spent many years in prison and get out after 55 has a zero return rate then why are we incarcerating those who are 60 and 70 years old. Especially when it cost more to incarcerate an elderly man as opposed to a younger man. Not to mention older men in prison outnumber those perceived to be at a violent age… None of this makes sense. with personal stories mainly set in Chicago been Austin sets out to see if the scales of justice are truly balanced and I would say the resounding answer is no. This was such a great book from the story of Johnny Knowles to Frank Mendez and many others I love then Austins box he gives a fair in balance account not only telling you what the perpetrator did and how the victims feel but every point of view involved. This is no copy and paste author then you can tell Mr. Austin has done his due diligence and even win something slightly seems opinionated coming from the author it isn’t overpowering or trying to persuade the reader I love that in a non-fiction book and this is definitely one of them. I have read this authors books before and have never been disappointed this was truly a great read. I want to thank the author the publisher and NetGalley for my free arc copy please forgive any mistakes as I am blind and dictate my review.
December 6, 2023
Thanks to NetGalley and MacMillan Audio for the ARC. It hasn't affected the content of my review.
This was a really good listen, although I'm finding it difficult to break down in to a coherent synopsis. Perhaps the audiobook wasn't the best choice for this particular book, at least for me if I was wanting to retain information. But overall, this was a compassionate, well-researched and thought provoking read, all about how (essentially) people who have been imprisoned are still people. There is a lot of talk about parole and whether or not indefinite sentencing is humane, which is something I'd never thought about before. There is also a lot of talk about the efficacy of prisons themselves, which I have read about before. But the parole stuff was all new.
Recommend this one definitely if prison abolition and justice system reformation is something you're interested in.
This was a really good listen, although I'm finding it difficult to break down in to a coherent synopsis. Perhaps the audiobook wasn't the best choice for this particular book, at least for me if I was wanting to retain information. But overall, this was a compassionate, well-researched and thought provoking read, all about how (essentially) people who have been imprisoned are still people. There is a lot of talk about parole and whether or not indefinite sentencing is humane, which is something I'd never thought about before. There is also a lot of talk about the efficacy of prisons themselves, which I have read about before. But the parole stuff was all new.
Recommend this one definitely if prison abolition and justice system reformation is something you're interested in.
November 24, 2023
I am incredibly grateful to have received an early copy of 'Correction: Parole, Prison, and the Possibility of Change' by Ben Austen, courtesy of Netgalley & Macmillian Audio. This book is a must-read that I'll recommend to anyone interested in literature. It offers crucial insights that every person should be aware of, particularly regarding the flawed nature of our correctional system—a problem far more entrenched than I had initially realized.
For those untouched by the criminal justice system, the struggles of the incarcerated may be invisible, and there's a tendency to oversimplify these issues, attributing them solely to personal failings. However, Austen's work reveals that the truth is far more complex.
The book masterfully blends thoroughly researched historical information, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, with the real-life stories of Johnny Veal and Michael Henderson. These individuals, who each spent around 40 years in prison, exemplify the failings of an imprecise and discriminatory parole system. Their stories illustrate how difficult it is for such a system to fairly determine when someone is rehabilitated and ready for release.
What I particularly appreciate about Austen's book is its balance between hard facts and a palpable human touch. A major issue with our criminal justice system is its tendency to dehumanize those behind bars. Whether or not one agrees with the proposed solutions within these pages, it's impossible to read this book without gaining new insights that clarify the complexities of our criminal justice system.
The narration by Brett Barry deserves special mention. His engaging delivery enhances the book, bringing to life both the research and the human stories within. Barry's narration adds an essential human element to the narrative.
'Correction: Parole, Prison, and the Possibility of Change' is more than just an informative read; it's a profound exploration of the human elements within the criminal justice system. Ben Austen not only presents a meticulously researched critique of the system but also humanizes a topic that is often reduced to statistics and stereotypes. The stories of Johnny Veal and Michael Henderson, in particular, are powerful testaments to the systemic issues within parole and rehabilitation processes. This book is a significant contribution to the ongoing discourse about criminal justice reform, offering a nuanced perspective that challenges readers to look beyond the surface. Whether you are deeply familiar with the subject or new to the conversation, Austen's compelling narrative and Brett Barry's engaging narration ensure that this book is not only enlightening but also accessible. I highly recommend 'Correction' to anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the complexities and humanity within our criminal justice system.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Published: November 2023
Length: 12 hrs 31 min
https://www.literarypawspectives.com/...
For those untouched by the criminal justice system, the struggles of the incarcerated may be invisible, and there's a tendency to oversimplify these issues, attributing them solely to personal failings. However, Austen's work reveals that the truth is far more complex.
The book masterfully blends thoroughly researched historical information, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, with the real-life stories of Johnny Veal and Michael Henderson. These individuals, who each spent around 40 years in prison, exemplify the failings of an imprecise and discriminatory parole system. Their stories illustrate how difficult it is for such a system to fairly determine when someone is rehabilitated and ready for release.
What I particularly appreciate about Austen's book is its balance between hard facts and a palpable human touch. A major issue with our criminal justice system is its tendency to dehumanize those behind bars. Whether or not one agrees with the proposed solutions within these pages, it's impossible to read this book without gaining new insights that clarify the complexities of our criminal justice system.
The narration by Brett Barry deserves special mention. His engaging delivery enhances the book, bringing to life both the research and the human stories within. Barry's narration adds an essential human element to the narrative.
'Correction: Parole, Prison, and the Possibility of Change' is more than just an informative read; it's a profound exploration of the human elements within the criminal justice system. Ben Austen not only presents a meticulously researched critique of the system but also humanizes a topic that is often reduced to statistics and stereotypes. The stories of Johnny Veal and Michael Henderson, in particular, are powerful testaments to the systemic issues within parole and rehabilitation processes. This book is a significant contribution to the ongoing discourse about criminal justice reform, offering a nuanced perspective that challenges readers to look beyond the surface. Whether you are deeply familiar with the subject or new to the conversation, Austen's compelling narrative and Brett Barry's engaging narration ensure that this book is not only enlightening but also accessible. I highly recommend 'Correction' to anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the complexities and humanity within our criminal justice system.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Published: November 2023
Length: 12 hrs 31 min
https://www.literarypawspectives.com/...
April 7, 2025
My public library's community read for 2025.
I was pleasantly surprised by Correction. I read Austen's High-Risers and found it a little long but Correction moved along at a better pace. I did have to take occasional breaks from the grim and infuriating subject matter. The US needs prison reform, parole reform, criminal justice reform.
One of the two men featured in the book was imprisoned at Hill in Galesburg, so Galesburg comes up a few times. Native son Carl Sandburg is also mentioned and quoted (page 274). I find it funny that Austen says "Galesburg was home to Knox College...." instead of "Galesburg is home to Knox College..." (page 274).
I was pleasantly surprised by Correction. I read Austen's High-Risers and found it a little long but Correction moved along at a better pace. I did have to take occasional breaks from the grim and infuriating subject matter. The US needs prison reform, parole reform, criminal justice reform.
One of the two men featured in the book was imprisoned at Hill in Galesburg, so Galesburg comes up a few times. Native son Carl Sandburg is also mentioned and quoted (page 274). I find it funny that Austen says "Galesburg was home to Knox College...." instead of "Galesburg is home to Knox College..." (page 274).
June 15, 2024
Good synthesis of parole throughout American history interwoven with the stories of two incarcerated men and their attempts to earn it. The author is clear about where they stand on a myriad of topics discussed, which I think is helpful in a book like this.
While it’s not from a Christian perspective, for me this book brought up questions inextricably tied to my faith. What would real justice look like, for both offenders and victims? What is the purpose of prison, and what would it look like to actually advocate for it? How often is fear my primary motivator when considering criminal law?
I don’t think there are easy answers to any question concerning criminal justice. I just want to look through the lens of God’s heart for justice and ability to redeem.
While it’s not from a Christian perspective, for me this book brought up questions inextricably tied to my faith. What would real justice look like, for both offenders and victims? What is the purpose of prison, and what would it look like to actually advocate for it? How often is fear my primary motivator when considering criminal law?
I don’t think there are easy answers to any question concerning criminal justice. I just want to look through the lens of God’s heart for justice and ability to redeem.
October 1, 2023
Everything about this read is exceptional. I went in with no expectations, and left feeling better informed and happy with the structure of the book. Thank you to NetGalley and Macmillan Audio for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Correction: Parole, Prison, and the Possibility of Change by Ben Austen is a peek into the world of the American Criminal Justice System via the parole sector. Ben Austen shows the many flaws of our country's criminal justice system while focusing on one distinct part of it, and he does it so well. This non-fiction not only states facts, but it gives evidence through the eyes of people whose lives have actually been impacted and changed because of parole. I think this would be a great read for anyone in an educational system learning about criminal justice or anyone curious about the topic as this is such a digestible read.
A note on the narrator, Brett Barry. I feel like the stereotype for non fiction audiobooks is that it will be monotoned and boring. This was not the case for Correction. Brett Barry's voice perfectly matches the tone of the book while being engaging. I highly recommend the audiobook!
Stating facts and opinions can be informative all day long, but Ben Austen's ability to portray what he wants to say while creating a wholly unique experience through a case study like approach was exceptional. It is mostly clear how the author stands on this subject, so don't expect a bias free read. But despite that, and partially because I also stand with a lot of the author's beliefs, this was a 5 star read. He is clearly knowledgeable on this subject, and with his first hand experience in relation to how parole works in America, it was very educational.
Correction: Parole, Prison, and the Possibility of Change by Ben Austen is a peek into the world of the American Criminal Justice System via the parole sector. Ben Austen shows the many flaws of our country's criminal justice system while focusing on one distinct part of it, and he does it so well. This non-fiction not only states facts, but it gives evidence through the eyes of people whose lives have actually been impacted and changed because of parole. I think this would be a great read for anyone in an educational system learning about criminal justice or anyone curious about the topic as this is such a digestible read.
A note on the narrator, Brett Barry. I feel like the stereotype for non fiction audiobooks is that it will be monotoned and boring. This was not the case for Correction. Brett Barry's voice perfectly matches the tone of the book while being engaging. I highly recommend the audiobook!
Stating facts and opinions can be informative all day long, but Ben Austen's ability to portray what he wants to say while creating a wholly unique experience through a case study like approach was exceptional. It is mostly clear how the author stands on this subject, so don't expect a bias free read. But despite that, and partially because I also stand with a lot of the author's beliefs, this was a 5 star read. He is clearly knowledgeable on this subject, and with his first hand experience in relation to how parole works in America, it was very educational.
January 15, 2024
An important and upsetting read about a system that operates largely outside of public awareness.
August 5, 2023
What is the core purpose of incarceration? Is it punishment? Reform? An example for others? Should people be defined by the worst thing they've ever done? Ben Austen dives deep into each of these reasons and how they shape our ever-changing perspective on prison and parole in the United States.
I would rate the book a 4.5 overall, mainly because a few parts were repetitive and there were a few statements that felt politically charged and supported by opinions rather than facts. Nevertheless, I found myself convinced by Austen's overall message and I started rooting for the interesting people we were introduced to throughout the book. I applaud the author for presenting a compelling case for prisoners, while at the same time addressing and respecting the victims and their families.
Austen combines historical perspectives and current debates while also following the story of two long-term prisoners trying to get approved for parole. Impressively researched and extremely impactful and important read.
"Just as prisoners must change and reform... so must the system."
Thank you NetGalley and Flatiron Books for the opportunity to read an advanced reader's copy in exchange for an honest review!
I would rate the book a 4.5 overall, mainly because a few parts were repetitive and there were a few statements that felt politically charged and supported by opinions rather than facts. Nevertheless, I found myself convinced by Austen's overall message and I started rooting for the interesting people we were introduced to throughout the book. I applaud the author for presenting a compelling case for prisoners, while at the same time addressing and respecting the victims and their families.
Austen combines historical perspectives and current debates while also following the story of two long-term prisoners trying to get approved for parole. Impressively researched and extremely impactful and important read.
"Just as prisoners must change and reform... so must the system."
Thank you NetGalley and Flatiron Books for the opportunity to read an advanced reader's copy in exchange for an honest review!
November 1, 2023
I have read a few books on the American carceral system, and while I do find it interesting, I was worried this would be too dark or too dense or too dull. It was none of those things! In fact, it was utterly fascinating and I kept coming back to it night after night to find out what happened to the two felons Mr. Austen followed. One had been convicted of helping to shoot and kill two police offers at a riot at Cabrini Green, although he maintained his innocence. The other did admit his fault in accidentally shooting and killing an acquaintance in the course of a robbery. Guess which one got parole? If you’ve ever watched Shawshank Redemption you might guess correctly–the one who admitting his part in the murder. It is one of the many cruelties our system that people who were wrongly convicted almost never get parole because they won’t say they’re sorry for something they didn’t do.
But why do they have to go through that whole parole process at all? Why can’t they serve their time and be done? We’ve tried that (in fact, in Illinois where both subjects were serving their time, there’s a dual system with older inmates being parole-eligible but younger ones not). It’s been proven that prisoners who are released on parole have a lower recidivism rate. Also they’re better behaved in prison–because they have something to work towards, and something to lose. But on the other hand, what about truth in sentencing? What about the rights of the victims’ families? As one mother said, a murderer can feel regret and feel rehabilitated, but her child was killed forever, so shouldn’t the punishment fit the crime?
People age out of crime. Almost no violent crimes are committed by people over 50. And what purpose is there in continuing to house very elderly inmates with a great deal of health concerns, exacerbated by prison? I mean really, the question is what is the purpose of prison? Is it to rehabilitate? To “correct?” Or just to punish? When looking at model prison systems in Scandinavia, the author notes that the locking up itself is supposed to be the punishment–the prison itself is not supposed to exact additional daily punishment above and beyond the loss of freedom. And yet that’s not how we do it in America.
Mr. Austen does a fantastic job of truly showing both sides of the parole argument. I found myself agreeing with different sides at different times in the book. And I’ve really never thought before about who serves on parole boards, and why, and should the way those people are chosen perhaps be different?
This was an enlightening, eye-opening look at our messed-up system, and how it got this way.
This book is published by Flatiron Books, a division of Macmillan, my employer, so I got it free from work.
But why do they have to go through that whole parole process at all? Why can’t they serve their time and be done? We’ve tried that (in fact, in Illinois where both subjects were serving their time, there’s a dual system with older inmates being parole-eligible but younger ones not). It’s been proven that prisoners who are released on parole have a lower recidivism rate. Also they’re better behaved in prison–because they have something to work towards, and something to lose. But on the other hand, what about truth in sentencing? What about the rights of the victims’ families? As one mother said, a murderer can feel regret and feel rehabilitated, but her child was killed forever, so shouldn’t the punishment fit the crime?
People age out of crime. Almost no violent crimes are committed by people over 50. And what purpose is there in continuing to house very elderly inmates with a great deal of health concerns, exacerbated by prison? I mean really, the question is what is the purpose of prison? Is it to rehabilitate? To “correct?” Or just to punish? When looking at model prison systems in Scandinavia, the author notes that the locking up itself is supposed to be the punishment–the prison itself is not supposed to exact additional daily punishment above and beyond the loss of freedom. And yet that’s not how we do it in America.
Mr. Austen does a fantastic job of truly showing both sides of the parole argument. I found myself agreeing with different sides at different times in the book. And I’ve really never thought before about who serves on parole boards, and why, and should the way those people are chosen perhaps be different?
This was an enlightening, eye-opening look at our messed-up system, and how it got this way.
This book is published by Flatiron Books, a division of Macmillan, my employer, so I got it free from work.
February 12, 2024
I read a wonderful review of this book in the Chicago Reader, and so I decided to get it from the library. And boy oh boy am I glad that I did.
Correction is perhaps one of the most accessible and approachable books on the history of mass incarceration and how it destroys lives I've ever read. If there was any book I had to recommend to a normie to help them see what's wrong with our criminal legal system, it would be this book. Why? Because Correction is about the post-conviction time in prison and whether or not a person has been determined to be "rehabilitated", and therefore worthy of parole release, by our carceral system. By focusing on the story of two Black men in Illinois, who both are found guilty of murder decades ago, Ben Austen shows us the twists and turns of the legal system and how none of it is designed to ever "rehabilitate" anyone.
As an abolitionist, almost every fact mentioned in this book was not new to me. But the stories were, and they still rocked me. I highly highly recommend this book to everyone. And for my fellow Illinoisian abolitionists, we have got start talking about parole reforms in our state, because holy shit it's gotten bad.
Correction is perhaps one of the most accessible and approachable books on the history of mass incarceration and how it destroys lives I've ever read. If there was any book I had to recommend to a normie to help them see what's wrong with our criminal legal system, it would be this book. Why? Because Correction is about the post-conviction time in prison and whether or not a person has been determined to be "rehabilitated", and therefore worthy of parole release, by our carceral system. By focusing on the story of two Black men in Illinois, who both are found guilty of murder decades ago, Ben Austen shows us the twists and turns of the legal system and how none of it is designed to ever "rehabilitate" anyone.
As an abolitionist, almost every fact mentioned in this book was not new to me. But the stories were, and they still rocked me. I highly highly recommend this book to everyone. And for my fellow Illinoisian abolitionists, we have got start talking about parole reforms in our state, because holy shit it's gotten bad.
November 5, 2024
This book made me think about how policing has changed through the years, how people end up committing violent crimes, the value and terrorizing aspects of prison, and about research that should be conducted to offer alternative solutions for criminals (than prison). I know that putting criminals in prison is a business in America, but I wonder if there was more of an emphasis on teaching these ppl to be normal (non-violent) productive members of society, if that might produce a better outcome than locking them up and essentially encouraging more violence while they're "waiting" for their prison time to end.
December 26, 2023
I randomly picked this up at Barnes & Noble and am glad I did! It really challenged thoughts I had on the criminal justice system and helped me think about the need to identify and continually reassess the reasons behind imprisonment. The author's choice to profile two incarcerated individuals as a way to show the effects of long prison terms humanized the "lifers" and was very effective. I also found the section on victims' rights to be very interesting as well.
February 8, 2024
I absolutely loved this book. I learned so much about incarceration, parole, other countries prison systems, etc. I loved the interlaced stories of the 2 men, Micheal and Johnnie. I found myself rooting for them throughout the book, while educating myself and building my own opinion. One of the best pieces of creative nonfiction I’ve ever read!
November 30, 2023
Great pacing. Austen goes back and forth between two stories of incarcerated men seeking parole, interspersed with other relevant anecdotes throughout the years. A great read as someone who has spent much time traveling between homes in Chicago and St. Louis. (4.5 stars)
September 24, 2024
This is an important read on the recent history of our criminal justice system and how it impacts communities of victims and convicted. It highlights the fluid nature of public opinion and makes a strong case for the need for reform through the cases of Johnnie Veal and Michael Henderson. How much is enough?
(My rating is a solid 3.5. Much of the material covered here is also in Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow)
(My rating is a solid 3.5. Much of the material covered here is also in Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow)
January 10, 2024
An absolute must-read for anyone interested in learning about the criminal justice system. I highly recommend!
4.5/5
Thank you Netgalley for providing a digital ARC.
4.5/5
Thank you Netgalley for providing a digital ARC.
March 1, 2025
I really liked this book! It only took me so long to listen to because my hold lapsed for Libby and I had to wait to get it back. I learned a lot about parole specifically and more about the criminal justice system and abolition in general. I liked the case study method it used- the author did a great job in humanizing people that are very frequently dehumanized.
February 1, 2024
What is the purpose of incarceration? Reform or punishment?
February 26, 2024
A rare universal recommendation. I don't care who you are, how you vote, what you've been through. This country is supposed to have redemption through corrections. I don't care who you are and what you did. If you don't believe in the fundamental humanity of all souls, don't let me hear you preaching about anything else.
January 19, 2025
It took me a long time to finish this book. I could only read a few pages at a time because of how deeply upset it would make me. That being said, it’s going to stick with me for a long time.
September 24, 2023
This was an incredibly interesting book to read and very eye-opening for me. I've never thought of parole as being anything other than something incarcerated individuals would want. I had no idea that, in many cases, it's just another way for the corrupt American justice system to further mistreat and ill-use incarcerated individuals -- particularly those of color.
I hate to use the same word twice, but when I say this book is eye-opening, that's precisely what I mean. Austen, the author, thoroughly explains how parole is actually detrimental to those seeking to get out of prison in a reasonable amount of time. What appears to be a "light at the end of the tunnel" is really just a train coming to hit incarcerated people full-force, so to speak.
He compares the American system of parole with other countries' justice systems and their way of managing crime and criminals -- through mandatory MAXIMUM sentences, actual reform programs that seek truly to reform, and more. I never realized how much more time some incarcerated people serve than they should have to simply because a parole board -- not the judge or regulations governing maximum sentences -- gets to decide their fate.
Don't get me wrong. The book wasn't entirely about the downsides of parole. It also highlights its positive aspects and provides ideas for improving the system so that it can be used in the way in which (most people think) it is intended. If you are even slightly interested in America's mass incarceration system and/or criminal justice reform, this is a must-read book. I really, really enjoyed it. It taught me a lot.
As for the audiobook aspect of the book, that was good, too. The narrator spoke clearly, and there was no background noise or shoddy audio. Everything flowed smoothly without jumpy or jagged editing and no mistakes in cutting the book together.
The narration style was slightly slower than I like, so I had to listen to the book on 1.75 speed. Still, I have no real complaints with the audio aspects of the book. The narrator does a great job of making what could easily become a tedious, slog-through-it subject engaging and entertaining.
A solid four-star book all-around.
I hate to use the same word twice, but when I say this book is eye-opening, that's precisely what I mean. Austen, the author, thoroughly explains how parole is actually detrimental to those seeking to get out of prison in a reasonable amount of time. What appears to be a "light at the end of the tunnel" is really just a train coming to hit incarcerated people full-force, so to speak.
He compares the American system of parole with other countries' justice systems and their way of managing crime and criminals -- through mandatory MAXIMUM sentences, actual reform programs that seek truly to reform, and more. I never realized how much more time some incarcerated people serve than they should have to simply because a parole board -- not the judge or regulations governing maximum sentences -- gets to decide their fate.
Don't get me wrong. The book wasn't entirely about the downsides of parole. It also highlights its positive aspects and provides ideas for improving the system so that it can be used in the way in which (most people think) it is intended. If you are even slightly interested in America's mass incarceration system and/or criminal justice reform, this is a must-read book. I really, really enjoyed it. It taught me a lot.
As for the audiobook aspect of the book, that was good, too. The narrator spoke clearly, and there was no background noise or shoddy audio. Everything flowed smoothly without jumpy or jagged editing and no mistakes in cutting the book together.
The narration style was slightly slower than I like, so I had to listen to the book on 1.75 speed. Still, I have no real complaints with the audio aspects of the book. The narrator does a great job of making what could easily become a tedious, slog-through-it subject engaging and entertaining.
A solid four-star book all-around.
October 13, 2023
Review of the book:
5 stars
This is a great look at the justice, penitentiary and parole systems in the United States.
The reader does not need any previous knowledge of the topic to fully grasp everything discussed in this book.
Austen addresses paints the portrait of all the major problems with the current state of sentences and parole in the country by covering the history of parole and describing with facts how the laws and guidelines changed, and explains how it affects people's lives by giving us many examples, telling the story of incarcerated people. There is a good balance of big picture and personal stories.
This book could be a good first touch with the many issues surrounding prisons, or a good read about specifically the problems with parole for people already interested in ideas of reforming or abolishing prisons.
Review of the audiobook:
5 stars
The narrator's voice is clear and easy to understand up to 2.5x. It is clear who is talking when there are dialogues or conversations even though there is only one narrator.
The book is fully comprehensible in audio format.
Thank you NetGalley and Macmillan Audio for the opportunity to listen to this ARC.
5 stars
This is a great look at the justice, penitentiary and parole systems in the United States.
The reader does not need any previous knowledge of the topic to fully grasp everything discussed in this book.
Austen addresses paints the portrait of all the major problems with the current state of sentences and parole in the country by covering the history of parole and describing with facts how the laws and guidelines changed, and explains how it affects people's lives by giving us many examples, telling the story of incarcerated people. There is a good balance of big picture and personal stories.
This book could be a good first touch with the many issues surrounding prisons, or a good read about specifically the problems with parole for people already interested in ideas of reforming or abolishing prisons.
Review of the audiobook:
5 stars
The narrator's voice is clear and easy to understand up to 2.5x. It is clear who is talking when there are dialogues or conversations even though there is only one narrator.
The book is fully comprehensible in audio format.
Thank you NetGalley and Macmillan Audio for the opportunity to listen to this ARC.
November 8, 2023
🎧 Thanks to NetGalley, Flatiron Books, and Macmillan audio for providing an ARC audiobook of this book, which was published today, on 11/7/23. This is a very heartbreaking but crucial nonfiction read. It follows the stories of two “life with parole” incarcerated men: Johnnie Veal and Michael Henderson. They were both incarcerated in the 70’s and 80’s when they were teenagers. Ben Austen attends multiple parole hearings for these two men and provides a thorough history of parole in America as well as the current limitations and flaws of it.
Overall he argues that every state should reinstate parole because it provides a platform to see the humanity of incarcerated people in a system that often ignores it. It also “is a way to question what incarceration is supposed to accomplish, and to see the ruthlessness and wastefulness in a process that denies our mutual responsibility.”
He concludes that in order for parole to become truly effective, the entire concept of prisons needs to be redesigned with the possibility that anyone and everyone could become rehabilitated and go home. In its current state prisons are not designed with rehabilitation in mind, but are themselves criminogenic.
This book is mandatory reading for anyone interested in becoming an informed citizen about the state of our prison systems and how parole actually works. I am still shocked, outraged, and broken-hearted about what I read. But these are important stories to share because there are real people, with real freedom and lives at stake. Every human deserves a second chance. ❤️
Note: the audiobook narrator, Brett Barry, did an excellent job. He read this book so that it didn’t feel scripted or dry. I loved his inflection and tone.
My detailed notes:
- There is an age distribution for crime. Most crimes are committed by young people, below the age of 35. Older people are of little to no risk of committing crimes and yet it costs 3 times as much to continue imprisoning them.
- American prisons don’t reform people, they actually end up causing criminal behavior (they are “criminogenic”)
- Indeterminant sentences are corrupt and unfair. Because often parole becomes impossible.
- Parole board members have incredible power but their criteria to evaluate whether a prisoner is worthy of parole is often arbitrary. They have no training in law and are not required to have specialties in psychology or behavioral science. Yet they are tasked to evaluate someone on their understanding of psychology based off interviews that last mere minutes.
- In Louisiana it’s easier for a guilty man to be granted parole than an innocent one.
- Many parole board members are biased against the original crime so no matter how many years they’ve served or how much they’ve reformed, these prisoners can never do enough to be granted parole.
- Other countries like Canada and in Europe declared life sentences without parole unconstitutional and yet America continues to offer these sentences.
- The concept of victimhood is nebulous because hurt people hurt people. 90% of all those incarcerated for violent crimes experienced violence in their home as a child. But raising this at a parole hearing can come across as presumptuous. The fact that many of the people imprisoned for their crimes have also been victims of crimes themselves.
- A parole candidates freedom can hinge on whether or not the victim’s family attend the parole hearings.
- The victims movement has been good in some ways but has also brought a lot of harm to the justice system. “Conservatives were able to portray the criminal justice system, and really the entire country, as a binary: of victims and offenders.”
- Most victims rights groups in the 80’s and 90’s were led by middle class white women, so they were not representative of all victims. “In the United States a black person is 6 times more likely than a white person to be a victim of homicide. Black Americans are also more likely to be victims of sexual assault, robbery, motor vehicle theft, and nearly every other type of crime.”
- Victim consciousness has pervaded American culture. But this culture just perpetuates an unhealthy myth that all offenders are evil and all victims are good. Not only that, but it lit the fire for policies that drove mass incarceration and inhumane punishments.
- “Homelessness among the formerly incarcerated is ten times higher than it is among the general population.” This number is higher for women and people of color.
- “Police officers wield the immense power to determine what is known and believed to be true…. It’s not what happened, it’s what the police said happened.”
- “Prosecutors build convictions on the work and word of police. Parole boards, decades later, still reference the statements of facts to help determine who deserves to go free. When the policing is tainted, the entire system is corrupted.”
- “It was the word of a black gang member, a convicted murderer, against that of two Chicago police detectives and their commanding officer, all of them white.” (The context of this statement is a case of two police officers electrocuting a man's penis to get him to confess to a murder he didn't commit. 😳😳😳)
- Because of how strict parole supervision is, many formerly incarcerated on parole end up back in prison for minor infractions. Many had their parole revoked for technical reasons like a missed curfew. They were sent to prison without having committed another crime. Mass incarceration has led to mass supervision.
- “The country created a rigid caste system in which those with a felony conviction continually face barriers to re-entry. With a felony, people out on parole struggle to find employers who would hire them. They are frequently denied food stamps, student loans, and public assistance.”
- Some parole members don’t believe in the concept of rehabilitation. So they end up focusing on the original crime and determining parole based solely on that and not on whether the convicted are still a threat to society or not.
Overall he argues that every state should reinstate parole because it provides a platform to see the humanity of incarcerated people in a system that often ignores it. It also “is a way to question what incarceration is supposed to accomplish, and to see the ruthlessness and wastefulness in a process that denies our mutual responsibility.”
He concludes that in order for parole to become truly effective, the entire concept of prisons needs to be redesigned with the possibility that anyone and everyone could become rehabilitated and go home. In its current state prisons are not designed with rehabilitation in mind, but are themselves criminogenic.
This book is mandatory reading for anyone interested in becoming an informed citizen about the state of our prison systems and how parole actually works. I am still shocked, outraged, and broken-hearted about what I read. But these are important stories to share because there are real people, with real freedom and lives at stake. Every human deserves a second chance. ❤️
Note: the audiobook narrator, Brett Barry, did an excellent job. He read this book so that it didn’t feel scripted or dry. I loved his inflection and tone.
My detailed notes:
- There is an age distribution for crime. Most crimes are committed by young people, below the age of 35. Older people are of little to no risk of committing crimes and yet it costs 3 times as much to continue imprisoning them.
- American prisons don’t reform people, they actually end up causing criminal behavior (they are “criminogenic”)
- Indeterminant sentences are corrupt and unfair. Because often parole becomes impossible.
- Parole board members have incredible power but their criteria to evaluate whether a prisoner is worthy of parole is often arbitrary. They have no training in law and are not required to have specialties in psychology or behavioral science. Yet they are tasked to evaluate someone on their understanding of psychology based off interviews that last mere minutes.
- In Louisiana it’s easier for a guilty man to be granted parole than an innocent one.
- Many parole board members are biased against the original crime so no matter how many years they’ve served or how much they’ve reformed, these prisoners can never do enough to be granted parole.
- Other countries like Canada and in Europe declared life sentences without parole unconstitutional and yet America continues to offer these sentences.
- The concept of victimhood is nebulous because hurt people hurt people. 90% of all those incarcerated for violent crimes experienced violence in their home as a child. But raising this at a parole hearing can come across as presumptuous. The fact that many of the people imprisoned for their crimes have also been victims of crimes themselves.
- A parole candidates freedom can hinge on whether or not the victim’s family attend the parole hearings.
- The victims movement has been good in some ways but has also brought a lot of harm to the justice system. “Conservatives were able to portray the criminal justice system, and really the entire country, as a binary: of victims and offenders.”
- Most victims rights groups in the 80’s and 90’s were led by middle class white women, so they were not representative of all victims. “In the United States a black person is 6 times more likely than a white person to be a victim of homicide. Black Americans are also more likely to be victims of sexual assault, robbery, motor vehicle theft, and nearly every other type of crime.”
- Victim consciousness has pervaded American culture. But this culture just perpetuates an unhealthy myth that all offenders are evil and all victims are good. Not only that, but it lit the fire for policies that drove mass incarceration and inhumane punishments.
- “Homelessness among the formerly incarcerated is ten times higher than it is among the general population.” This number is higher for women and people of color.
- “Police officers wield the immense power to determine what is known and believed to be true…. It’s not what happened, it’s what the police said happened.”
- “Prosecutors build convictions on the work and word of police. Parole boards, decades later, still reference the statements of facts to help determine who deserves to go free. When the policing is tainted, the entire system is corrupted.”
- “It was the word of a black gang member, a convicted murderer, against that of two Chicago police detectives and their commanding officer, all of them white.” (The context of this statement is a case of two police officers electrocuting a man's penis to get him to confess to a murder he didn't commit. 😳😳😳)
- Because of how strict parole supervision is, many formerly incarcerated on parole end up back in prison for minor infractions. Many had their parole revoked for technical reasons like a missed curfew. They were sent to prison without having committed another crime. Mass incarceration has led to mass supervision.
- “The country created a rigid caste system in which those with a felony conviction continually face barriers to re-entry. With a felony, people out on parole struggle to find employers who would hire them. They are frequently denied food stamps, student loans, and public assistance.”
- Some parole members don’t believe in the concept of rehabilitation. So they end up focusing on the original crime and determining parole based solely on that and not on whether the convicted are still a threat to society or not.
June 17, 2024
A very important topic, but it reads like a very long internet article. Treatment of political topics was so one-sided as to become less convincing, even to a reader already “convinced”/on that side.
July 20, 2024
A very good book in the general category of human costs of mass incarceration along with books like The New Jim Crow and Just Mercy. Austen focuses the book on two cases of older men (Johnny and Michael) who committed murders in their late teens and received life sentences. (SPOILER). They eventually receive parole after many attempts. The larger point of the book is to explore the history and complications of parole, which is kind of a weird and confusing thing when you stop to think about it.
The idea of parole is derived from military history, in which prisoners would be released on the promise of not returning to combat. It became part of the justice system as well, but I found it interesting how both tough-on-crime people and prison skeptics both dislike it. The tough on crime people think prisoners should serve the entirety of their sentences, and the prison skeptics believe it creates a gnawing uncertainty and endless disappointment in prisoners' lives. As America's crime crackdown intensified in the late 20th century, however, parole came under increasing fire and more laws required mandatory service of term of life without parole.
While I'm generally in favor of parole systems, especially for older inmates who have aged out of crime but are expensive to keep in jail, but this book really drives home how weird and arbitrary they are. The main characters are both older dudes who generally behaved well and made the most of themselves in prison and seemed "rehabilitated" by any definition of that word. One of them, who may have killed two cops at age 17, never admitted he had done this (and there are some indications he may not have), which may have held up his receiving parole. But the boards themselves are made up of pretty ordinary people without special training, and they make extremely subjective, even political, decisions about granting/not granting. If a parolee somewhere in the state commits a crime, or even if some high-profile crime is committed generally, they often will stop granting parole to anyone. They bring their own, often ill-informed, views about criminology, society, etc.
Their lack of predictability makes it extremely hard for prisoners to know what to do to get parole. Plus, when parolees get out, they have to follow extremely restrictive rules about movement, employment, personal association, etc or they can easily be locked up again. Austen says that about a 1/4 of people in jail at any given time are there for parole violations, which means that a big chunk of . The parole system, as with everything in the criminal justice system, also shows a racial bias, with white inmates being more likely to receive parole. Finally, one of the book's main characters, makes a really good point that parole's arbitrariness makes it harder to survive in prison. Should he, for example, skirt the rules in order to earn money and small luxuries, defend his reputation, and live a slightly better life in prison while risking more "tickets" for bad behavior that will hurt chances of getting parole? Or should he be a good little boy scout, obeying every rule, putting himself at a disadvantage in the Hobbesian world of the prison, all to . It's a choiceless choice.
I really admire Austen for the way he wrote this book. He doesn't have the ideological certainties of the full-on prison abolitionists like Angela Davis. He knows some people have to be locked up, maybe forever. But he also sees how absurd and counter-productive the system often is, even as we slowly start to move away from mass incarceration, to the point where we keep old men who are incredibly unlikely to commit further crimes in jail forever because of what they did when they were teenagers from horrific background with brains that literally weren't fully formed. And he also sees how the screening device for letting them back into society, parole, is arbitrary and odd. Those things, and the realism and empathy with which he tells the story of the two main characters, make this a highly worthwhile book.
The idea of parole is derived from military history, in which prisoners would be released on the promise of not returning to combat. It became part of the justice system as well, but I found it interesting how both tough-on-crime people and prison skeptics both dislike it. The tough on crime people think prisoners should serve the entirety of their sentences, and the prison skeptics believe it creates a gnawing uncertainty and endless disappointment in prisoners' lives. As America's crime crackdown intensified in the late 20th century, however, parole came under increasing fire and more laws required mandatory service of term of life without parole.
While I'm generally in favor of parole systems, especially for older inmates who have aged out of crime but are expensive to keep in jail, but this book really drives home how weird and arbitrary they are. The main characters are both older dudes who generally behaved well and made the most of themselves in prison and seemed "rehabilitated" by any definition of that word. One of them, who may have killed two cops at age 17, never admitted he had done this (and there are some indications he may not have), which may have held up his receiving parole. But the boards themselves are made up of pretty ordinary people without special training, and they make extremely subjective, even political, decisions about granting/not granting. If a parolee somewhere in the state commits a crime, or even if some high-profile crime is committed generally, they often will stop granting parole to anyone. They bring their own, often ill-informed, views about criminology, society, etc.
Their lack of predictability makes it extremely hard for prisoners to know what to do to get parole. Plus, when parolees get out, they have to follow extremely restrictive rules about movement, employment, personal association, etc or they can easily be locked up again. Austen says that about a 1/4 of people in jail at any given time are there for parole violations, which means that a big chunk of . The parole system, as with everything in the criminal justice system, also shows a racial bias, with white inmates being more likely to receive parole. Finally, one of the book's main characters, makes a really good point that parole's arbitrariness makes it harder to survive in prison. Should he, for example, skirt the rules in order to earn money and small luxuries, defend his reputation, and live a slightly better life in prison while risking more "tickets" for bad behavior that will hurt chances of getting parole? Or should he be a good little boy scout, obeying every rule, putting himself at a disadvantage in the Hobbesian world of the prison, all to . It's a choiceless choice.
I really admire Austen for the way he wrote this book. He doesn't have the ideological certainties of the full-on prison abolitionists like Angela Davis. He knows some people have to be locked up, maybe forever. But he also sees how absurd and counter-productive the system often is, even as we slowly start to move away from mass incarceration, to the point where we keep old men who are incredibly unlikely to commit further crimes in jail forever because of what they did when they were teenagers from horrific background with brains that literally weren't fully formed. And he also sees how the screening device for letting them back into society, parole, is arbitrary and odd. Those things, and the realism and empathy with which he tells the story of the two main characters, make this a highly worthwhile book.
January 12, 2025
This read posed a plethora of questions for me, but overall offered so much informing knowledge.
Is prison the answer to stop or lower crime? Has it proved to work after hundreds of years? In my personal observations, the evidence is middling if not that present.
That is why I found and chose to read this book.
Our criminal justice system has always been quite broken, as has many other systems within our world/country, and Austen really hones in on this topic in such a nuanced way I could appreciate. Parole is a facet of this broken system, often abused by those in power to perpetuate the incarceration tallies of humans in America. The author presents solid evidence for us by showcasing Johnny Vale and Michael Henderson's cases and dealings with parole. They are cogs in the machine of criminal justice. Elements that I was not aware of, as those who wait years for their parole hearings must orally argue their case of reform and responsibility of their crimes -- enough so that it convinces the board to vote for their release. How can inmates accomplish this feat in a system that's so against their earnings of education and opportunities to begin with, let alone in prison? I also never considered how difficult it might be for those on parole to transition back to civilian life. How unstable our programs for such individuals may be, which causes the cycle to continue all over again.
Why do we play God with other humans' lives? Who are we to determine who is worthy or not of judgement, who is further along in redemption? These are some questions that popped into my mind while reading, and there are no easy answers to. Ben Austen doesn't even have the clear answer to them, but he presents them in a compelling way that allows us to see the human behind the offender.
One of the strongest suits of this book is, as mentioned earlier, it's nuanced approach to the topic. We get to see how Johnny and Michael's crimes impacted the victims' families for generations, and how those testimonies negatively determined their chances at parole. Should those families be present at such a hearing? Their pain and loss is valid, and this book touches on that as well as the loss that inmates feel for fifty plus years of incarceration. As we learn in life, nothing is black and white -- but instead a deep grey.
Despite this, I did struggle a bit with my own conceptions towards those who might be more violent offenders (and those who are evidently guilty of said crimes, not wrongfully indited). I personally don't feel that one crime fits all crimes, and each are unique to the person behind them. Should those who have hurt children, women, and innocents in a more pleasure filled spree be deserving of these prison reform strategies presented here? I don't know... it's a tough question to find the right answer for. I do believe, after this reading, that a change in our justice system might prove to actually "correct" the circle of repeated crimes done in our country and possibly nip it in the bud.
We just need to find a collective way to work together and end the discrimination... but nothing is so simple as we think.
In overall very insightful book about humans and our complex tendencies.
Is prison the answer to stop or lower crime? Has it proved to work after hundreds of years? In my personal observations, the evidence is middling if not that present.
That is why I found and chose to read this book.
Our criminal justice system has always been quite broken, as has many other systems within our world/country, and Austen really hones in on this topic in such a nuanced way I could appreciate. Parole is a facet of this broken system, often abused by those in power to perpetuate the incarceration tallies of humans in America. The author presents solid evidence for us by showcasing Johnny Vale and Michael Henderson's cases and dealings with parole. They are cogs in the machine of criminal justice. Elements that I was not aware of, as those who wait years for their parole hearings must orally argue their case of reform and responsibility of their crimes -- enough so that it convinces the board to vote for their release. How can inmates accomplish this feat in a system that's so against their earnings of education and opportunities to begin with, let alone in prison? I also never considered how difficult it might be for those on parole to transition back to civilian life. How unstable our programs for such individuals may be, which causes the cycle to continue all over again.
Why do we play God with other humans' lives? Who are we to determine who is worthy or not of judgement, who is further along in redemption? These are some questions that popped into my mind while reading, and there are no easy answers to. Ben Austen doesn't even have the clear answer to them, but he presents them in a compelling way that allows us to see the human behind the offender.
One of the strongest suits of this book is, as mentioned earlier, it's nuanced approach to the topic. We get to see how Johnny and Michael's crimes impacted the victims' families for generations, and how those testimonies negatively determined their chances at parole. Should those families be present at such a hearing? Their pain and loss is valid, and this book touches on that as well as the loss that inmates feel for fifty plus years of incarceration. As we learn in life, nothing is black and white -- but instead a deep grey.
Despite this, I did struggle a bit with my own conceptions towards those who might be more violent offenders (and those who are evidently guilty of said crimes, not wrongfully indited). I personally don't feel that one crime fits all crimes, and each are unique to the person behind them. Should those who have hurt children, women, and innocents in a more pleasure filled spree be deserving of these prison reform strategies presented here? I don't know... it's a tough question to find the right answer for. I do believe, after this reading, that a change in our justice system might prove to actually "correct" the circle of repeated crimes done in our country and possibly nip it in the bud.
We just need to find a collective way to work together and end the discrimination... but nothing is so simple as we think.
In overall very insightful book about humans and our complex tendencies.
January 15, 2024
I received this text from Net Galley to review as an early release.
This text highlights many issues with the incarceration in the United States...
From mass incarceration, to being nearly impossible to be granted parole, then if by chance one is the many loopholes that they must continue to go through in order to avoid violating their release terms. We would assume that somebody who serves their full sentence or who is deemed worthy of release would have an easier time rejoining the society that they have spent so much time away from. Instead, they face barriers to find a job, housing, and other everyday things that somebody who has never been to prison takes for granted. Yes, it's easy to say "they committed a crime, they are getting what they deserve" but after serving their prison time, shouldn't they be allowed a new opportunity without having that constantly looming over their heads?
Austen has us imagine what our country may look like if we had a system like Finland, who begins working on returning their prisoners to society the day they step into prison. They see prison as a place to rehabilitate their people, not as a place to punish them. In turn, they see less overall crime. The idea is that we need to invest in people and give them a second chance, once they prove that they deserve one.
Austen also names multiple parole boards that have held inconsistencies in their release, or non-release, rates depending mainly on the climate of the country at the time. What is purposed instead are set guidelines for all, where after serving a certain number of years or percentage of time, and/or if a prisoner is of a certain age they are granted an opportunity to present their case to a parole board. This does not guarantee freedom, simply the opportunity to tell their story.
The text does also follow the sentences of two males who were accused of working together to kill two policemen. In a case that may have included coerced confessions, witness tampering during the trial, and a lack of physical evidence - we see how difficult it is once a sentence is given, to prove that you are deserving of second chance at living a life outside of prison. Although both men initially denied taking part in the crime, one changed his story when he saw that the parole board wanted to see him feel remorse for his crime. The other maintained his innocence, and served a longer term in prison. Showing that it really does come down to trying to sway feelings vs. anybody taking into account any type of facts that may be presented to them about why this person held onto his innocence for so many years after his conviction. He served about 50 years, when he could have taken a plea bargain, if he would have said he did it, and been out in less than 6.
This text highlights many issues with the incarceration in the United States...
From mass incarceration, to being nearly impossible to be granted parole, then if by chance one is the many loopholes that they must continue to go through in order to avoid violating their release terms. We would assume that somebody who serves their full sentence or who is deemed worthy of release would have an easier time rejoining the society that they have spent so much time away from. Instead, they face barriers to find a job, housing, and other everyday things that somebody who has never been to prison takes for granted. Yes, it's easy to say "they committed a crime, they are getting what they deserve" but after serving their prison time, shouldn't they be allowed a new opportunity without having that constantly looming over their heads?
Austen has us imagine what our country may look like if we had a system like Finland, who begins working on returning their prisoners to society the day they step into prison. They see prison as a place to rehabilitate their people, not as a place to punish them. In turn, they see less overall crime. The idea is that we need to invest in people and give them a second chance, once they prove that they deserve one.
Austen also names multiple parole boards that have held inconsistencies in their release, or non-release, rates depending mainly on the climate of the country at the time. What is purposed instead are set guidelines for all, where after serving a certain number of years or percentage of time, and/or if a prisoner is of a certain age they are granted an opportunity to present their case to a parole board. This does not guarantee freedom, simply the opportunity to tell their story.
The text does also follow the sentences of two males who were accused of working together to kill two policemen. In a case that may have included coerced confessions, witness tampering during the trial, and a lack of physical evidence - we see how difficult it is once a sentence is given, to prove that you are deserving of second chance at living a life outside of prison. Although both men initially denied taking part in the crime, one changed his story when he saw that the parole board wanted to see him feel remorse for his crime. The other maintained his innocence, and served a longer term in prison. Showing that it really does come down to trying to sway feelings vs. anybody taking into account any type of facts that may be presented to them about why this person held onto his innocence for so many years after his conviction. He served about 50 years, when he could have taken a plea bargain, if he would have said he did it, and been out in less than 6.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 3, 2024
I heard Austen interviewed on NPR, and lo and behold, a week or two later, Correction is on the new book shelves at my library.
In part as a concerned leftist of sorts, and in part as a newspaper editor, I already knew the big picture, but even I hadn't checked the exact numbers.
A full 0.1 percent of adult Americans are on parole. Another 1 percent-plus are on probation. And, there's the many more in state and federal prison systems.
Austen focuses on two inmates in Illinois, with occasional cut-outs to the big picture, to tell the story of how hard it is to get parole these days. Three-strikes and other tough on crime laws at both state and federal levels, pushed by both Republican and Democratic legislative majorities, Republican and Democrat governors, and Republican and Democrat presidents, are part of the problem. Included in this is more "life without parole" sentencing, tougher standards to actually get parole when available and more. Add in, as Austen does, that even minor parole violations will send you back to the stir, and you see the problem. (Years ago, I reported a story on a guy in a state jail level facility here in Texas. He'd been on the staff of Gov. Ann Richards several years before that, after getting out on parole for, I believe, an armed robbery plus a manslaughter while in the joint. He was driving without insurance. Back in he went.)
With the two featured people, one in particular, but also with bits from a few others, Austen notes the difficulty on living on the outside. Many jobs are barred to felons by state or federal law. Many states have yet to pass a law to abolish the "black box" question on job application forms, beyond that. Parole itself, and also probation, can have a variety of community service requirements that eat into one's time and also make it hard to land jobs. And, then, there's the whole issue of adjusting to the outside world.
A place called St. Leo's in Chicago is an innovator in offering transitional help, part of what Austen discusses at the end of the book.
Austen concludes by stressing that, at both state and national levels, we've also got to stop the whiplash between tough on crime and the occasional reprieve, and that, to the degree possible as far as implementation, the US needs to look at the rehabilitation aspect of criminal justice systems elsewhere.
This is a must read.
In part as a concerned leftist of sorts, and in part as a newspaper editor, I already knew the big picture, but even I hadn't checked the exact numbers.
A full 0.1 percent of adult Americans are on parole. Another 1 percent-plus are on probation. And, there's the many more in state and federal prison systems.
Austen focuses on two inmates in Illinois, with occasional cut-outs to the big picture, to tell the story of how hard it is to get parole these days. Three-strikes and other tough on crime laws at both state and federal levels, pushed by both Republican and Democratic legislative majorities, Republican and Democrat governors, and Republican and Democrat presidents, are part of the problem. Included in this is more "life without parole" sentencing, tougher standards to actually get parole when available and more. Add in, as Austen does, that even minor parole violations will send you back to the stir, and you see the problem. (Years ago, I reported a story on a guy in a state jail level facility here in Texas. He'd been on the staff of Gov. Ann Richards several years before that, after getting out on parole for, I believe, an armed robbery plus a manslaughter while in the joint. He was driving without insurance. Back in he went.)
With the two featured people, one in particular, but also with bits from a few others, Austen notes the difficulty on living on the outside. Many jobs are barred to felons by state or federal law. Many states have yet to pass a law to abolish the "black box" question on job application forms, beyond that. Parole itself, and also probation, can have a variety of community service requirements that eat into one's time and also make it hard to land jobs. And, then, there's the whole issue of adjusting to the outside world.
A place called St. Leo's in Chicago is an innovator in offering transitional help, part of what Austen discusses at the end of the book.
Austen concludes by stressing that, at both state and national levels, we've also got to stop the whiplash between tough on crime and the occasional reprieve, and that, to the degree possible as far as implementation, the US needs to look at the rehabilitation aspect of criminal justice systems elsewhere.
This is a must read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 99 reviews