Reporter goes to prison

March 5, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Contributed by IL staff reporter Rebecca Berfanger

I’ve driven by the Indianapolis Re-Entry Facility on Indianapolis’ near east side more times than I can count. Today, I went beyond the barbwire fence of the former women’s prison.

While this was my first time inside a detention facility for a story – a sad thing to admit for someone who calls herself a legal reporter – I realize this is not the typical facility. When I spoke with the public information officer to get permission for my visit, she only referred to the men as residents, not inmates or prisoners. And, the re-entry program isn’t available for everyone. If one of the men violates the guidelines, he is sent to another Department of Correction facility.

I went there for an article I’m working on for the March 17 issue about a program called Thresholds and Transitions that started just this year. The program includes weekly “Healthy @ Re-Entry” classes that cover various issues, such as HIV/STD education, job placement, substance-abuse treatment, and advice for healthy relationships. The program aims to help the men find out what they need not only to stay out of the system after they get out, but also how to survive roadblocks they’ll need to overcome.

Today’s particular class featured speakers who discussed how to get jobs and substance abuse counseling on the outside. The third part of the class included a guide to other services the residents can use on the outside.

The facilitator of the discussion then asked if anyone had questions about the services listed in a guide they received. One of the participants asked how he could afford a lawyer, knowing he previously had custody issues with his children’s mother.

Then a lightbulb went on over my head. I guessed his question wasn’t the only one in the classroom regarding family law or other civil legal issues. Turns out, based on the reactions of other participants, I guessed right. Having reported on legal aid and pro bono services in Indiana for the last three years, I decided to raise my hand to explain how the services work and how to get information.

Even though I’m not an attorney, I felt proud of our readership and legal community at that moment knowing that these services are available, including information and services available to pro se parties.

After the discussion, a couple of the residents personally thanked me for explaining civil legal aid and pro bono efforts of which they were previously unaware.

Some of the men used words like “blessed” and “excited” regarding the opportunities they’ve had in the re-entry facility to unlearn the behaviors that put them in there in the first place. Maybe just knowing a lawyer on the outside will be willing to at least listen to their civil legal issues could make a difference.

After all, these men will have enough to deal with when they get out … and now they’ll have one more way to get help they need.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Other than a complete lack of any verifiable and valid historical citations to back your wild context-free accusations, you also forget to allege "ate Native American children, ate slave children, ate their own children, and often did it all while using salad forks rather than dinner forks." (gasp)

  2. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  3. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  4. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  5. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

ADVERTISEMENT