| HMP Dovegate, from the Serco website. |
Updated 4/07/24
By Michael Liebowitz
A Connecticut prisoner for some 25 years, Liebowitz was formerly housed at Osborn Correctional Institution in Somers, CT. He has been a free man since November 2022.
Sadly, Melissa Palmeri passed away on Sunday, March 24th. She was only 44 yrs. old. Her obituary can be read, here. Please consider making a ten-dollar donation to help Melissa's son, Vinny and Michael. Donate here.
Along with Brett McCall, Liebowitz is also co-author of "Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime", available at Amazon. Dr. Stanton E. Samenow, PhD reviewed the work in a 3/12/21 article in Psychology Today magazine. In his review he writes, "I have found that Liebowitz and McCall are keen observers with a positive objective - to help others become more effective in helping people like themselves to change and become responsible human beings. This book is definitely worth a read." Michael's second book, "View from a Cage" is now in print.
Liebowitz is also a regular guest with Todd Feinburg on WTIC AM 1080. Podcasts of Todd's segments with Liebowitz can be heard, here.
Remunerate Correctional Officials
and Employees Based on Results, i.e., Reduced
Recidivism
“There aren’t very many
occupations where the more an organization fails to achieve its overarching
objective the more its employees stand to make. Corrections is one of them. As the system is presently designed, the
earning potential of those who work in our nation’s prisons is tied directly to
high prison populations and high rates of recidivism. And so long as that remains the case, society
will continue to see the kind of abysmal results it has witnessed since the
advent of the modern correctional era.
“Prison systems should be
structured in a way that incentivizes reductions in recidivism. Presently they are not. Politicians and corrections officials may pay
lip service to the importance of reducing the number of offenders returning to
our nation’s prisons, but the fact is the system is set up in a way that
encourages high prison populations.
“Whether prisons are
operated by government officials or privately run, the incentive is to maintain
or increase prison populations. Not only
do substantial incarceration rates mean increased earnings for correctional
officers and other rank and file institutional staff (who are beneficiaries of significant amounts
of overtime) [but] private prisons get paid on a per inmate per diem basis. So the more inmates they house, the
higher the profits for shareholders. By
contrast, lower recidivism means lower earnings for most of those directly
involved, regardless of whether it is a publicly or privately-run institution.
“To be clear, we are not
suggesting that high rates of recidivism are a consciously pursued goal on
anyone’s part. We don’t see the problem
as a nefarious conspiracy. To ascribe
intention to any of this seems to us to grant too many people entirely too much
credit. What we are saying is that
people respond to the way in which things are incentivized, and that the
present arrangement is tantamount to disincentivizing the development or
implementation of meaningful strategies to reduce the rate of recidivism. Stated a bit differently, the present design
inadvertently rewards inaction. Simply
put: When one is likely to make more money from doing nothing than he is from
doing something – especially something as challenging as trying to motivate
offenders to undertake the work necessary to change – it isn’t hard to guess
which path he is going to take, i.e., the path of least resistance.











