U.S. Professor’s Comments On N.Z. Penal Institutions

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29145, 4 March 1960, Page 17

U.S. Professor’s Comments On N.Z. Penal Institutions

jne of the greatest difficulties ■eatening the penal institutions jjew Zealand was the unrealjn public attitude towards »al training and rehabilitation,

jj professor A. Morris of the ( ir of Sociology, Boston Unirsity, in an interview in Christijrch. Professor Morris, who visiting New Zealand under Fulbright award, is spending )e months working in conjuncn with the New Zealand Dertment of Justice and the Unipity of New Zealand. [}e had already had an opporaity to study New Zealand's oblems in this field, said Projsor Morris, for in 1952 he had ide a systematic tour of prisons d Borstals throughout the untry. His purpose during this esen't visit was more general, wever, as it was involving n e research and teaching as >ll as consultations with official dies.

Although the Department of stice was itself well aware of tent overseas trends and delopments, and was moving indigently and constructively to fl l with its problems, there

>re still many conditions hantapping progress, said Profesr Morris. In common with her countries throughout the orld there was in New Zealand rapidly increasing population ith its consequent increased te of delinquency. Facilities ere still not yet measuring up these new demands, however. iis stemmed from the general unformed public attitude toards those who were employed penal institutions. Their work as still regarded as unskilled id lacked the prestige it derved.

Knowledge Available "There is a real need for the iblic to recognise that use must > made of the great body of ■ofessional knowledge now ■ailable,” said Professor Morris, "he penal service must attract ipable and qualified personnel isceptible to the specialised lining and skill involved.” It as a challenging opportunity. > said, to promote the status of ■ison and Borstal staffs beyond at of mere custody. Considering future developents in New Zealand, Profesr Morris said that “what the •ison service can ultimately do not specifically determined by iblic interest. The limit is set f the degree of willingness to rovide adequate facilities and affing.” Rehabilitation, however, was a ctor entirely dependent- on the iblic attitude, said Professor orris. A penal institution was 1 abnormal community. It iuld only temporarily isolate the dividual, but it could not put m back into the community fain without sympathetic public ipport. Frequently the offender id no chance to regain his ature as a human being in his ra community. Citing the problems of renployment in the outside com-

munity after release from prison sentence, Professor Morris said that a normal working reference could be no real guarantee that an applicant was any less prone to criminal activity outside working hours than any former prison applicant. There should be opportunity for every individual and therefore readines on the part of the public to assume some responsibility towards those who had made mistakes. The risk was not what the public thought it was, said Professor Morris. Surely the greater risk was the many young people, equally susceptible to crime, who were running loose and unsupervised in our communities.

A Warning The traditional emotional response of the public to those who had deviated from the norms of human behaviour could not be afforded in this present age, said Professor Morris. It was important for all to beware of giving emotional connotations to words such as crook, prison, etc. “Difficulties will be infinitely increased if we can not learn to accept these offenders back into the community,” he said. The official penal agencies could only prepare the way back again. The inability of the prison service fully to rehabilitate its offenders was perhaps having the reverse effect in that many were less capable of returning to the community.

Amongst other activities during his stay in New Zealand Professor Morris has been conducting a special lecture course for students of law, education and social sciences at Victoria University in Wellington. He has already visited penal institutions in several New Zealand centres and has been associated with the Joint Committee on Adolescent Offenders in Wellington. At Invercargill he ran a three-day seminar for a mixed group of professional people—including psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, superintendents of various institutions and representatives of teaching groups. He is also trying to combine some pleasure with business and is exploring as much of the country as is possible before he leaves for home in August this year.