NCJ Number
85088
Date Published
1981
Length
16 pages
Annotation
Parole decisionmakers must not be so naive as to believe that deep down most inmates seeking parole desire and are capable of conforming to the normative values of society, since the characters of many are pervaded by a counter-ethic in basic conflict with normative society; ethical parole decisions require parole refusal in such cases.
Abstract
Parole board members are traditionally pillars of the community whose characters and outlooks are the epitome of community ideals. Further, parole board members tend to be compassionate persons who want to see others have the benefits of a better life. It is difficult for such persons to realize that many if not most of those inmates who come before the parole board are characterized by perceptions, values, attitudes, feelings, and hopes in direct conflict with the board members and are as unlikely to change the basic posture of their characters as are the members of the board. Disillusionment sets in when new board members learn that a parolee has failed to meet parole conditions. They feel betrayed and deceived. More experienced board members realized that while inmates appreciate being paroled, they do not change their characters because of it. The parole board should note signs that an inmate manifests a deepseated character that makes adaptation to normative society highly unlikely and act to protect society from such a person. While such an action will not please the inmate and will probably not ultimately change his/her behavior, it is an ethical decision because it helps to protect citizens who do live out the normative values of society. Six bibliographic entries are provided.