NCJ Number
200386
Journal
Criminal Justice Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Dated: May 2003 Pages: 199-211
Date Published
May 2003
Length
13 pages
Annotation
This article reviews the development of home detention with electronic monitoring in New Zealand and discusses the findings of research on this practice conducted by the authors.
Abstract
Home detention as a means of facilitating the early release of prisoners was piloted in Auckland, New Zealand, from 1995 to 1997. The pilot effort involved the release of prisoners to home detention as a condition of their parole licenses. A passive system of monitoring (not electronic monitoring) was used. The evaluation of the pilot concluded that full-scale implementation of home detention would not be a realistic option, primarily because there was not evidence that the prison population would be reduced; further, home detention was found to be of variable value as a reintegrative option. Moreover, 11 of the 37 participants were subsequently charged with new offenses. The politicians were not persuaded by these arguments, however, so on October 1, 1999, home detention was introduced in New Zealand with little public or national debate. Once an offender is released to home detention, he/she wears a security anklet and is monitored through a dedicated telephone line or cellular network 24 hours a day. Detainees must remain at an approved residence for those 24 hours unless they have been granted permission to leave to attend programs or engage in other essential activities. Detainees are supervised by specially trained probation officers. During 2001 the authors of this article conducted research that explored the development, operation, and impact of home detention with electronic monitoring in New Zealand. The research collected demographic data on people involved in home detention; examined the decisionmaking processes in granting and declining home detention; explored the impact of home detention and monitoring on detainees and their families or sponsors; and assessed the overall effectiveness of home detention. The authors selected and read 80 home detention reports; interviewed 21 detainees, 21 sponsors, 6 probation officers, and 2 security staff; and observed over 20 Prison Board members in their discussions of home detention cases. The research concluded that home detention has worked well for families by keeping them together, but it also places extra burdens on women and children especially. Policymakers should listen to both consumers and advocates of home detention and reassess the effectiveness of this option based on families' experiences with its implementation. 28 references