The media is in the business of ‘blood leads’. As a result, many pressing social problems and promising initiatives are short-lived. Incarcerated populations, such as inmates and patients in mental health institutions and de facto incarcerated people, such as those in Alzheimer’s care homes, are largely invisible. However, the number of inmates in the United States is As of the end of 2022, there are over 1.2 million. And here we are, the clear leader in the world. Our prisoners make up 20% of the world’s prisoners..
new story, Inside America’s Most Unlikely Prison Experiment at the Financial Times opens a window into this world and highlights the contradictions of American policy toward prisoners. This piece is about the charity Puppies Behind Bars. The reason I know about Puppies Behind Bars is because they have been offering this program for several years since it was founded in 1997. The goal was to train the dog to be a guide dog for the blind..One The logic behind using prisoners is that they can give the puppies the attention they need to become good guide dogs. If done correctly, it’s a 24-hour job. Not all candidates, even with great training, will succeed. And of course, the second reason had to do with prisoners. They learned to care for other creatures and gave them up when they “graduated.”
The article revolves around how Gloria Stoga, founder of Puppies Behind Bars, decided to bring Puppies Behind Bars to Green Haven, one of the toughest facilities in the country, where half the population is serving life sentences. Puppies Behind Bars has strict criteria for selecting its inmates. Inmates must not have attacked prison staff or attempted to escape, must have had no offenses for one year, and must not have been charged with a sexual offense or violence against children or animals. According to a previous story, they were further tested on their willingness to dispose of dog poop and bodily fluids. Oh, and he must have at least three years in prison remaining.
The Financial Times article does not explicitly state that the inmates caring for the dogs are moved to a separate ward, as was the training model in 2004, as previously reported for Puppies Behind Bars. According to the Smithsonian Museum:
Two keepers (the primary caregiver and a backup) are assigned to each puppy. Inmates who live with dogs in housing separate from the general prison population take their dogs almost everywhere, from prison shifts to dental appointments. Training is held once a week for 6 hours. Breeders learn how to teach their dogs how to climb stairs, come when called, and not bark or beg. One inmate whose puppy was to be sent to a guide dog school in France learned to give commands in French.
The reason Stoga is interested in this core prison population is because, as this article explains at length, training these puppies is an extremely difficult and demanding job. Even long-sentenced inmates can serve as trainers for years if they perform well. So while the failure rate (so far) among Green Haven inmates who are selected for the program is high, as this article shows, those who do pass will likely remain trainers for a relatively long time. And since this appears to be the toughest group Stoga has ever worked with, perhaps she and her fellow Puppies Behind Bar staff will become more adept at selecting this type of inmate, and if so, successfully recruiting other maximum-security prisons to participate (the article notes that Puppies Behind Bar has operated in other maximum-security facilities, but implies that Green Haven is more difficult, if not more so due to its size).
Prison warden Mark Miller is a staunch supporter.
Miller decided to bring PBB to prison and arrived at Green Haven in 2021. He heard about a dog the program sent to help the widow of a fallen officer. The gesture resonated with him. “I’m not a diehard libertarian,” he says. “My thought was, ‘Where are these dogs going, and who are they helping that really needs help?’”
There were operational examples. Boredom is a root cause of the worst behavior in prison. Miller found that having programs like college at Green Haven kept the men active and engaged, and reduced violence, suicide, and drug abuse.
In the United States, the “internal management” argument that the program improves inmate behavior and thus improves staff working conditions remains the most politically powerful. It is also still considered progressive in a country where many believe violent criminals have no rights beyond their prison cells.
Note that the article avoids mention of rehabilitation, which is an additional justification for dog prison sentences. Old Smithsonian Stories Nonetheless, as a trainer, I note that a small number of inmates have had a disproportionate impact on the overall facility.
Since November 1998, Jim Hayden has watched the dogs work their magic at the Fishkill Correctional Facility, a 1,750-inmate facility in Beacon, N.Y. With only 25 inmates who are breeders, “the dogs have had a calming and humanizing effect on the entire staff, including me,” says Hayden, the program’s assistant superintendent. “They break these guys down, they break their hard shells. The level of love and devotion they have for these dogs is something I never expected.”
A 20-month analysis sponsored by Iams, a pet food company that donates food to PBB, supports Hayden’s observations: Inmates who had dogs had higher overall well-being than those who did not work with dogs. PBB inmates were more compassionate, more responsible, and believed they could change their lives.
Tony Garcia, 42, owned four PBB dogs until he was released from Fishkill in January after serving 16 years for armed robbery. He now supports his wife and four children by painting apartments and has applied for a full-time job as a caseworker for an organization that helps ex-offenders. Garcia says: “My patience, hope, and willingness to work hard came from participating in that program.”
Jake Charest, 27, who is serving nine years of a seven- to 21-year sentence for attempted murder, has a second dog named Skip. “All of us in the program are sorry for what we did, but we don’t just say it, we show it,” he said. “These dogs make our time here almost bearable.”
The Smithsonian notes that the Puppies Behind Bars program has not reduced recidivism, which seems like a very unreasonable expectation considering the small number of participants in Fishkill overall.
Your humble blogger must confess that he has very little knowledge of this world. I personally know of countless people who have been to prison with one hand and still have a finger left. Two were very wealthy, and one was quite wealthy, so none of the three had to worry about not having enough money to pay for shelter, food, and transportation. Only one had a history of violence. He was a very good jack of all trades who hired his mother to do various odd jobs when she was preparing to sell her house. He had a very bad temper (I never saw one), was prone to getting into bar fights, and did not mind being in prison.
Given that America’s prisons are not in the business of rehabilitation, it is not difficult to understand why so many people end up back in prison after their release. Even people without sociopathic tendencies are likely to have difficulty settling into a normal life, especially when it comes to finding regular paid work. If they are or have been on the fringes of a gang or drug trade, if they find it difficult to earn an income in a law-abiding way, they are likely to fall back into it, even if they have decided not to.
I highly recommend you read the entire article. It is beautifully written and the author clearly thinks about the purpose of punishment and whether rehabilitation and redemption are possible. For example:
Being in prison distorts your beliefs, like trying to see something clearly underwater. I will never know the truth about these people. But I have come to believe that no one can equal the worst thing they have done. No one is as good as the best thing they have done. This is something you never have to teach a dog.
_____
One I must confess that I stopped donating after returning from Australia. This story does not go back far enough to cover the change in mission from dogs for the blind to dogs for veterinary and law enforcement roles. However, from the author’s mention of the dislike and opposition of many prison guards and guards for the program that gave criminals the opportunity to play with dogs, it is not hard to infer that Stoga felt it was necessary to appeal to the gatekeepers by training the dogs for a role that was seen as serving the wider police community.
