Waiving Away the Chance of Freedom

Abstract

Little is known about inmates' decisions regarding seeking release on parole, even though many choose to waive their parole hearings. Using semistructured, in-depth interviews with 25 adult male parole-eligible inmates who had waived a parole hearing, we seek to better understand the reasons inmates forgo the possibility of parole. We frame the study in rational choice theory, which suggests that inmates balance the perceived costs and benefits of remaining in prison versus returning to the community in reaching their decisions. A large majority of inmates attributed the decision to waive their hearings, in part, to concerns about the hearing process (e.g., parole denial likely, fear of negative experience), and most also listed various reasons that made remaining in prison a better outcome compared with release on parole (e.g., prison easier than parole, fear of revocation). The findings suggest that inmates' parole waiver decisions involve multiple factors that merit further examination.

The Waiving of Parole Consideration by Inmates With Mental Illness and Recidivism Outcomes

“…We did not have access to the decentralized data on conditions of supervision that are imposed upon people who are paroled by their supervising officers. Prior research suggests that many people who are incarcerated believe these conditions to be overly burdensome, and this belief may lead many to waive their parole hearing (Best et al, 2014). To reduce this perception, postrelease supervision conditions should be minimal for those parolees who are assessed at low risk of criminal involvement (and higher for those assessed as a higher risk).…”

“…This heightened focus on problematic behaviors by parole boards likely discourages people who are incarcerated with more extensive histories of crime and misconduct from seeking early release via parole. Indeed, qualitative research indicates many may simply waive consideration for parole due to the belief that the parole board will not grant early release to those with an institutional record checkered with disciplinary infractions (Best et al, 2014). Research comparing groups of people who are incarcerated who had either voluntarily maxed out their sentence, involuntarily maxed out their sentence (through repeated parole denials), or been released to parole found significantly lower average numbers of prior arrests, prior convictions, and prior violent offense convictions among parolees compared with both max out groups, suggesting that criminal history may play a role in choosing to forgo parole (Ostermann, 2011).…”

“…The expectation of failure reduces initiation of a task (Dweck, 1975), and in this context, persons who think that is unlikely they will succeed under parole supervision are less likely to pursue parole (Best et al, 2014;Crouch, 1993;Petersilia & Deschenes, 1994). For people who are incarcerated struggling with MI, this pessimistic view can be heightened by perceptions of low self-efficacy and low self-esteem that arise from self-stigma (Corrigan et al, 2006), contributing to higher rates of parole waivers among this population.…”

“…However, many people who are incarcerated, when faced with the decision of whether to be considered for early release through community supervision or to forgo parole and "max out" their sentence, choose the latter. This may be the result of various motivations including a desire by the individual to eschew undesirable and burdensome community supervision requirements, a belief that a decision by the parole board is unlikely to result in early release, or an expectation to fail while on parole and to return to prison (Best et al, 2014). These beliefs may be more common among people with MI who are considering parole, leading them to waive their right to parole at higher rates than those who do not have an MI, and to be rearrested more quickly than those who are released to community supervision.…”