Posted on: June 25th, 2013 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
Our Waterloo Region community has a lot to say about most any topic you can think of, but, we are particularly passionate when it comes to talking about making change for a healthier and stronger community. We’re pretty good at moving to action too, not just talking about it!
The Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council believes monitoring the root causes of crime can aid the community in addressing crime, victimization and fear of crime through awareness, discussion, leadership and action. Once the root causes are understood more clearly, resources can be applied to areas where the community is doing poorly. A Snapshot in Time: The Root Causes of Crime in Waterloo Region identifies the root causes of crime right here in Waterloo Region and provides a tool to aid local policy makers in targeting interventions to where they are most needed and where they can have the greatest impact.
In addition to being a monitoring tool the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council is using this report to aid members of the public in comprehending the complex connection between social and economic circumstances and crime. The report was written in a straightforward manner with each of the root causes containing an explanation of why it was included, a graph showing the statistics for Waterloo Region and a short story giving details on what is going on behind the numbers. Additionally, Wade McAdam created the following information graphic to help tell the story of the root causes in an easily accessible format.
A Snapshot in Time is also designed to be a catalyst for conversations in Waterloo Region about the root causes of crime. Over the next ten weeks tune in to this discussion through our blog series where community leaders, community residents and leading experts across Waterloo Region weigh in on the root causes of crime outlined in the report. Numbers only tell part of the story. It’s the human stories and context that make them come alive, create insight and move us to action.
I hope you will join us. We’re standing by… waiting to hear what you have to say!
Posted on: April 24th, 2013 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
This is the official position statement of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council given at a public consultation on the question of a casino in the City of Kitchener. The remarks below were given by WRCPC Executive Director, Christiane Sadeler on behalf of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you tonight on the topic of a casino in Kitchener or the Waterloo Region. I am representing the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council; I also live in downtown Kitchener.
The Crime Prevention Council opposes the opening of a casino within Waterloo Region. However, in the event that a casino should be opened here, we recommend that the development and operations of the casino must incorporate crime prevention considerations and harm reduction strategies from the very beginning.
We have provided you with a full copy of the position statement and also included some materials that we believe are relevant in this context. The position statement is also available on our website (www.preventingcrime.ca). In the interest of time I can only highlight a few aspects of the position.
There has been no dialogue that did NOT at some point mention the concern that crimes increase in the proximity of casinos. Your own city online survey mentions safety along with considerations of health, city image and so on. Fear of long term impact on our quality of life is often as detrimental as crime itself. Perceptions can become reality. Right or wrong the connection between casinos and crime is part of public discourse. And perceptions are hard to change. We know that by now.
But what does the evidence tell us?
This is where it gets a little more grey. The research findings about a connection between crime and casinos are mixed, if not inconclusive. It would not be correct to claim that casinos have a DIRECT impact on crime, at least not an impact that would differ from that of other large entertainment facilities, at first sight. Direct links between crime and any one community action are hard to come by and must always be seen in the context of decreasing crime rates in the last decade.
We therefore must look beyond the direct connections to what we know about risks. What puts us at risk of crime, victimization, and fear of crime? It is here that the public health research is compelling and worthy of your in-depth consideration. We know that over 30% of profits in gambling come from problem gamblers and those at risk for gambling addictions. We know that these individuals share characteristics that are best defined as root causes of crime. We have detailed them in our position statement along with a report about root causes. We encourage you to consult both.
Simply put, whenever we increase the vulnerability of those already at risk, the financial and human burden to them and their families are quickly matched by the community and social costs. While casinos may not directly lead to increases in street level crime, they do lead to increases in other social ills and crimes, such as, intimate partner violence, addictions, etc. From a prevention standpoint these should concern us as much as public safety and disorder issues.
Problem gambling erodes the health of individuals and those close to them and by extension, of the communities in which they live.
The Ontario Lottery Gaming Commission does not deny that gambling addictions exist and that they come at a cost. These are brochures that are provided right at the Windsor Casino entrance, alerting patrons to these risks.
So, gambling facilities come with warning label. They also come with treatment recommendations if the warning labels were not effective. This is not forward thinking. This is resigning ourselves to the fact that along with these facilities will come problems.
Prevention is cross-generational. Are we OK with a baby born in 2013 becoming the casino patron of 2033? If the answer is, even remotely, “we are not sure”, then we need to hit pause and look more deeply at the research and the rationale for considering a casino here in the first place. Will the benefits justify the costs? Are we informed by the “8-80” concept? Is it a good decision for the 8 year old in our community AND for the 80 year old in our community no matter what walks of life they come from?
Most people who gamble may not engage in criminal activities. But those at risk of gambling addictions are vulnerable to many other issues that come at a social cost, crime among them.
We believe that for the crimes committed by the offender he or she is responsible; for not dealing with the root causes of crime when these are known to us, all of us are responsible.
However, if the decision is to bring a casino to our city the Crime Prevention Council recommends that prevention and harm reduction methods are included in the development and operations from the very beginning. In the position paper, we have outlined 12 harm reduction recommendations. These include considerations about alcohol consumption, placement of ATM machines, opening hours, self exclusion programs etc. The first recommendation is to establish a region wide advisory group with expertise in problem gambling prevention to provide input from the beginning, including during the RFP process.
In conclusion, the decision that you are faced with, in the mind of the Crime Prevention Council, is not to be taken lightly. It is a decision that will affect the well being of generations beyond all of us present here tonight. Waterloo Region is one of the safest and ultimately prosperous communities in Canada. We have become known for innovation and forward thinking. There is little innovative about a casino. We are on a solid path of creating and maintaining a safe and healthy community. It is hard to imagine that we can lose by passing on the idea of a casino. It is easier to imagine what we might lose if we take this on.
Thank you for your time and we wish you well in your decision making.
My recent trip to Canada held one major surprise and the image, vivid after more than two weeks, of a kid in a red shirt.
I returned from a meeting-packed three days in Winnipeg, where I keynoted two conferences (one at Winnipeg University’s “Thinkers’ Conference”), participated in panels, shared thoughts with people working with at risk kids, and engaged in discussions with political and policy leaders. I also had the pleasure of spending a good bit of time with the Conference’s closing keynoter, Shulamith Koenig, an absolutely amazing woman, the recipient of the 2003 UN Prize for Human Rights.
When I’m on a speaking trip, I always want a jammed schedule: I refuse to air-drop in, give a speech and leave. I’m eager, no, more, I need to steep myself in what’s going on locally: I always learn, returning home spurred on by new ideas, new approaches.
I asked Bob Axworthy, the tireless conference coordinator and my “minder” for the three days, to give me in addition to everything else he had scheduled, the opportunity to speak with a few young people. “I’ll take you to Saint John’s in the city’s North Side,” he said. “Good bit of crime. Low graduation rates. Located in the highest crime area of the city.”
I had difficulty pulling myself away from a conversation at “New Directions“, and so arrived late at North High. The principal quickly took me upstairs, where I met a somewhat guilty-looking Axworthy. “Here’s a microphone. You’re on!” “I’m on?” He held open the door, which led to a stage in front of which sat “a few kids” – about 350 of them at a school assembly.
After whispering to Axworthy that I was going to get even with him, I began with a personal note, describing the profound influence Dr. Martin Luther King had on me and my career. Not much resonance. So I shifted to them.
I had no notes, but this is what I recall of the hour with the kids. “I’m glad you’re here,” I began. “Many of your friends aren’t. Many, if not most of you, have been through a lot of stuff. Some of you have mothers on crack. Some of you may have a dad in jail. Some of you may have seen friends or relatives hurt badly, maybe even killed. Some of you have been on drugs. And some of you have been abused physically or even sexually.
“But guess what? You’re here. You’re in school. And for some of you, that takes about every ounce of strength you’ve got. What’s even more important is this: what you’ve been through, the tough stuff, gives you a skill. You’ve got a friend who’s into drugs? If you’ve been there, you can help. If you’ve been hurt or lost a dad you can help another who’s going through the same thing. You’ve got pain. We all have some. You have more than most. It’s not going to go away fast, so use it to help others. You see, your pain must not be wasted. And helping another go through the hard stuff will ease your pain like nothing else.
Then I shifted. “Let’s look at what it takes to make it. We’re going to share thoughts about resiliency. A big word. Who knows what it means?” Most hands were in total lock down until one kid ventured, “Hope.” “Close. We’re getting somewhere.” Then this, from a half-slouching, half-grinning kid in a red tee shirt: “It means making it when you’re not supposed to.” “Brilliant,” or something like it, I replied.
The Search Institute, the nation’s premier strength-based/resiliency research entity, points to 42 resiliency characteristics. I have my top five, and began to share them with the kids. I tried hard to involve as many of them as possible, but got only six or seven hands, maybe more. But one thing was clear: Red Shirt dominated, legitimate domination, for without wanting to show it, he watched me like a hawk, and was right on top of most questions…and the answers.
“Number one, a goal,” I began. “You are bound and determined to complete something. It can be small, like making the soccer team, passing your English class. Or it can be larger: graduating, getting a job, being the first in your family to go to college. The point is this: you are determined to make your goal. You are focused. You’re going to get there. Nothing’s going to stop you. If you don’t have a goal, anything can knock you over or knock you down.
“Second, an adult who is always there. Can be a parent, a coach, one of your teachers here, an uncle, a grandmother. Someone you can go to always, especially when you’re hurting”. I didn’t ask for hands, as this is a conversation for an intimate group.
“Third, a skill, something you can point to”. ‘I can sing. I can shoot hoops. I can make people laugh. I am a brilliant mathematician, and can I ever act! Discover what you’re good at and celebrate it.
“Fourth, optimism.” Got a few hands on the definition of optimism. “Optimism can be a form of hope. I have hope. I know things will get better. Or optimism can be described in a theological way as in ‘I know God holds me in his hand.’
“Fifth, altruism.” No takers on the definition of altruism. I told them that it meant that they had something that someone else needed and that they had a responsibility to help, that real living meant being there for others, too. “It also means that you know you have good stuff. If you share it, it means you feel good about yourself, that you have something someone else needs.”
We ended. I was given a Saint John’s “Tiger” tee shirt and “Tiger” mug just before the kids poured down from the tiers.
I asked the principal to grab Red Shirt. I had to talk to him. She steered him to me. I took his hand in both of mine, and I pulled him close. “I don’t know who you are. But I know this: you’re smart, really smart. And you read a lot.” Slight nod and an almost embarrassed smile. “And,” I said. You’re trouble. I can feel it. But man, you’re brilliant and you can do something huge with your life. Look at what you did today. You were the star. Some big words and big concepts. And you nailed most of it”. I got an ambiguous half-smile and a curious look. He moved on and out, leaving with a knot of his buddies.
As we walked down the stairs to the car, the principal told me that Red Shirt was the biggest gang banger in the school.
Scott Larson, President of Straight Ahead Ministries, works with the toughest kids in the State of Massachusetts (among many other states). In a recent article, “The Power of Hope,” written for the Winter 2013 edition of the journal “Reclaiming Children and Youth,” Larson said, “…having a sense of vision for a future is much more powerful [a] motivator than the mere commitment NOT to repeat the painful past…Hope requires saying yes to a future worth having, rather than merely no to that which is not wanted. And generally that future is one that is beyond the limits of past experiences. This is where the challenge to finding hope lies.” Larson asserts that staying out of trouble, getting out of the gang, staying away from drugs and not getting locked up is not enough. We’ve got to help kids see a different future and then “…have someone walk with [them] through the changes necessary to access that future.”
Strange. I’ve seen and interacted with thousands of kids over my life time. But for some reason Red Shirt sticks with me.
I’m going to ask Axworthy to follow up with him. Maybe become his mentor. Axworthy owes me that. Someone owes Red Shirt that.
Jack Calhoun was a keynote speaker at the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council Annual Justice Dinner in April 2010.Reprinted with permission from Jack Calhoun and Hope Matters.
Posted on: March 18th, 2013 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
I recently received a pamphlet from the federal government in my home mailbox titled “First Nation Elementary and Secondary Education Consultations” announcing an effort to seek citizen input into Aboriginal education on reserves. This is an area covered by the federal government whereas for other populations, education is a provincial matter. The hope is for proposed legislation to improve educational opportunities for Aboriginal children and youth. To quote from the brochure, “We all need to continue working together to create the structures and standards to support strong, accountable education systems on reserve that ultimately contribute to the success of individual students and their communities”. As a long-time educator I applaud efforts to increase accessibility to quality education but the brochure got me thinking about other areas the government might seek consultation about regarding Aboriginal peoples.
The Toronto Star has run an excellent, but disturbing, series called “Unequal Justice” that cites data on the rate of incarceration among Aboriginal people that should shock us. It’s worth a read. For example, Aboriginal boys make up just 2.9% of the general population, but 15% of admissions into custody. That’s 5 times higher than the rate of other young males. Black youth are incarcerated at a rate of 4 times more than the general population. For white and other ethnic youth there is no such increase. The Star series provides an excellent snapshot of current data to cause one to ask some basic questions about our justice system. It reminds me of the quote from the 60’s: Is it justice or “just us’?
The picture is even more disturbing for Aboriginal girls who have an admission and incarceration rate 10 times higher than other females in the general population. And this trend rises while the rate of crime is declining overall. Think about that for a moment…. We are putting more people in jail even though fewer crimes are being committed. And, those we incarcerate at higher rates tend to be non-whites. Are we supposed to believe that some people are genetically predisposed to committing more crime? Now, that would indeed be wacky science and we’ve been down that road too many times in our human history already. No, genetics is not the reason. The reason is rooted in society being reactive rather than proactive. Instead of allowing conditions to reach crisis proportions before we notice them we should all be engaged in fostering those conditions that support the needs of all people in Canada. Only that will lead to lower incarceration rates overall, and, specifically for populations that are over represented in our justice system.
In adult jails, the rate of incarceration for Aboriginal peoples is 6 times higher and 4 times higher for persons of colour than that of other populations. In reading this your first thought may be, “wow, that’s a lot of victims out there”. There is no victimless crime and no-one should diminish their suffering. But, would there be so many victims if the system wasn’t so broken? Shouldn’t we be looking at how we got here and how to prevent it from here?
I have never received a brochure from the government asking me for my input on why we incarcerate some members of our society more than others. I have never received a brochure asking my opinion on living conditions on reserves. I have never received a brochure seeking my views on treaty rights. I have never been asked about how we treat prisoners in regards to double-bunking, reduced educational opportunities or counselling services while incarcerated. It kind of begs the question then… why I am being asked only about educational opportunities provided to Aboriginal youth?
Sure, good education will help mitigate against one of the major root causes of crime, and I applaud that. But so will good housing, safe water, help for mental health and addictions and so on.
All of which leads me to wonder whether we are asking the right questions. By focusing only on education are we turning the light away from all of the other life issues that work against public safety? Multiple problems need multiple and integrated solutions.
If, for example, we know that it costs us between $90,000 and $230,000 to incarcerate one person, then why are we not talking about diverting at least some of those resources into programs and social development efforts that will keep people from committing crime in the first place?
I am waiting for the brochure to enter my mail box that will not piecemeal the issues but provide me with an honest to goodness comprehensive picture about the root causes that put some populations are at a social disadvantage for which we all pay dearly in reaction, and more importantly how we can go about changing that.
Now, THAT would be a consultation worth having.
Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.
Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.
As Kathleen Wynne assumes office as Ontario’s 25th premier the time has never been better for the Ontario government to overhaul and modernize its approach to crime prevention.
And that overhaul is long overdue.
The current model of crime prevention at the provincial level is a fragmented collection of silo-restricted programs and services with multiple competing interests and little coordination. In many respects it hinders and makes it more difficult for communities at the local level to effectively engage in crime prevention through social development.
It doesn’t have to be that way. In fact, the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council offers a perfect case study into what can happen when disparate groups with unique mandates seek and find common ground — thereby ensuring all appropriate forces are brought to bear on issues of common concern.
And what could be more important to a society than stopping crime – before it happens?
Adopting the WRCPC model of proactive mitigation at the provincial level would provide the government with a very simple, low cost solution to the current gridlock and would position Ontario as one of the world’s foremost “smart on crime” jurisdictions.
All it will take is some political will and an agreement among stakeholders that when it comes to fighting crime it’s far more effective to work together to prevent crime before it happens than to scramble in competition for scarce resources to clean up the mess after the fact.
To that end, the new Wynne government would be well served to move immediately in establishing a new Ontario Crime Prevention Secretariat (OCPS).
The OCPS would be staffed by experts seconded to the secretariat from government ministries that currently or would potentially develop policies and / or offer programs associated with addressing the root causes of crime.
This simple redeployment of existing resources could be accomplished with minimal new investment and would allow and facilitate a new administrative framework whose sole purpose would be ensuring elimination of A) inter-ministerial overlap, B) inter-ministerial competition and C) inter-ministerial lack of communication on crime prevention issues, policy development and program delivery.
If you look at the organizations comprising the multi-disciplinary Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council (which could very easily be termed the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Secretariat) it’s easy to see instant parallels with existing Ontario government ministries (all of which have a piece of the “root causes of crime” puzzle in one form or another).
The new OCPS could conceivably be comprised of staff seconded from any or all of the following government ministries (alphabetically):
Aboriginal Affairs
Attorney General
Children & Youth Services
Citizenship & Immigration
Community & Social Services
Community Safety & Correctional Services
Education
Health & Long Term Care
Health Promotion & Sport
Municipal Affairs & Housing
Seniors’ Secretariat
Training, Colleges & Universities
Women’s Directorate
Of course, taking this “secretariat” approach would also help the government more readily tackle the recommendations made by the Hon. Alvin Curling and the Hon. Justice Roy McMurtry in their “Roots of Youth Violence” report.
Unfortunately, this recommendation for an Ontario Crime Prevention Secretariat – while personally well received by past Ministers of Community Safety and Correctional Services – has never made it to the inner circles of government.
As Premier Wynne ushers in a new era in Ontario politics here’s hoping this proactive, cost-saving and “smart on crime” approach to crime prevention through social development finds its way to her desk and into government policy.
John Shewchuk is Chief Managing Officer of the Waterloo Catholic District School Board and a past Chair of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council. John Shewchuk’s article reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.
Posted on: December 21st, 2012 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
At this time of year almost every time we turn the on the TV we see a film based on the season. My favourite is “It’s a Wonderful Life”. I’m sure you know it.
It’s a Christmas classic about a small-town guy (George Bailey, played by James Stewart) who falls into some financial difficulty on Christmas Eve through no fault of his own. His partner in his Building and Loan Association and Uncle, Billy, has lost his deposit on the same day the bank examiner is coming to inspect their books. Without the deposit they will be in serious legal trouble. His competitor, Mr. Potter, who acts as the town’s ‘Scrooge’ and owns the bank where Uncle Billy was depositing the money, finds the lost money and keeps it to himself. The Building and Loan Association loans money to people Mr. Potter won’t so that they can have a decent home and create a community of people caring for and about each other.
This sends George into despair and he contemplates taking his life in the hopes his insurance will cover the deficit and save his family from ruin. Up in Heaven (yes, in 1946 we could talk openly about that) an apprentice angel named Clarence is waiting for a chance to earn his wings. He is assigned to George so that he may save him from this terrible choice. He does so by creating a situation where George has to save his life and George, being the guy he is, doesn’t’t hesitate.
George tells his new friend Clarence about his troubles and feeling that he is a failure. Clarence hatches a plan to show him what life in his town of Bedford Falls would be like had George not been there to be a friend to so many. The town had become a gambling den, rife with crime and poverty. It’s a sad life without George and he has an epiphany that brings him back to reality willing to face consequences for something he did not do.
However, in the meantime his wife and friends have banded together to raise the missing money that saves George from disgrace and jail. In the climatic scene that closes the film (spoiler alert) as the family and friends are gathered by the Christmas tree, a bell on the tree rings and Zuzu, George’s youngest daughter tells him every time a bell rings an angel gets its wings. As he looks down into the basket of money raised by his friends and family he spots Clarence’s favourite book with an inscription “No man is a failure who has friends”. You may remember the scene. George is a friend to many in his hometown of Bedford Falls and at that moment he experiences the fruit of all the friendships he has made over the years. It is a powerful story, almost a parable, about as far away from “Bad Santa” as you can get.
The concept of “friends” and the influential role they play in our lives and our projects aligns with the initiative of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council’s launch of the “Friends of Crime Prevention” network. This idea grew out of the work done by the ad hoc Governance Committee, led by the efforts of Peter Ringrose and others. Their task was to increase the engagement of the citizens of the Region without adding to the Council’s membership, which is already comprehensive. The ad hoc committee did not use the term “acquaintances” or “associates” but purposefully used “Friends” because of its power.
Think of your close friends. These are people who share your passion and principles and who will stand with you even when things are tough; in fact, especially when things are tough. These are the people the WRCPC is looking for as friends of Crime Prevention.
What is a Friend of Crime Prevention?
A Friend can be an individual, community agency, business, municipality. Anyone with a passion for community
A Friend sees the connection between the work that they do and the opportunities to work together for a safer community
A Friend wants to become part of a larger network of peers
A Friend wants to stay informed about recent events, trends and research
A Friend takes action to create change in their own neighbourhood, community, workplace or organization.
No one organization, including the WRPS, John Howard Society, school boards, among many, can solve the problem of crime by working alone. We need their expertise and input but we also need that of businesses, social agencies, churches, colleges, universities and, perhaps equally as important, neighbourhoods made up of citizens like you and me who want to live in a safer, more civil society.
Another goal of the WRCPC is to provide strategic leadership in bringing many voices to the table and providing timely and relevant support, resources, research and sponsorship of events that will be the clearinghouse of ideas and projects for crime prevention in Waterloo Region. As you know, the WRCPC is looked to around the world as an exemplar of an organization that mobilizes the community to prevent crime.
The Friends of Crime Prevention initiative is a demonstration of the Council’s commitment to meeting the goals of its Strategic Plan. This network of friends, working collaboratively with each other and the Council shows that it takes a village to also create a community. It gives us access to a broader alliance of people sharing a common purpose who can bring a new array of knowledge and skills to collectively own the goal of truly creating safe streets and communities, more by collaborative actions than legislation.
Like George Bailey, we believe in the power of community. We know communities are groups of friends who want the best for each other and know that safe streets and neighbourhoods are born from connectivity. Research based upon the “Broken Window Theory” demonstrates that citizens, taking an active and intentional role in their community, help make it safer. In that theory, if no one intervenes to keep a neighbourhood safe, then it will continue to deteriorate and can become criminalized as the sense of community is lost since there is no collective ownership of the neighbourhood.
By becoming a “Friend of Crime Prevention” you can, as Gandhi said, “ be the change you wish to see in the world”. It’s a pretty simple process. Just visit www.preventingcrime.ca/friends, and join.
And, on December 24th, grab some popcorn and enjoy “It’s a Wonderful Life”.
Oh, and some Kleenex too. You’ll need it.
Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.
Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.
Posted on: December 17th, 2012 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
I’ve been asked this question. Not these “exact’ words, but it certainly felt that way when I was asked to ‘provide a rationale’ as to why we use yoga as part of our programs at inREACH, a street gang prevention program in Waterloo Region. Here’s the rationale I gave… which also seems to be backed up by a lot of good solid evidence.
All of the youth we work with at inREACH have deficits in the area of emotion regulation. In its most problematic form this may result in anger and aggression which can cause them to come into conflict with the law; less obviously, but just as seriously, many of the same youth suffer from chronic anxiety and depression. Additionally, many of the youth turn to heavy substance use as the only tool at their disposal to manage powerful feelings. In order for youth to reduce their drug use and manage their emotions well enough to enable them to make good choices when problem solving, they must learn self-calming techniques.
Yoga teaches relaxation and breathing techniques which youth are able to use in a variety of settings as strategies to regulate their stress-response system. By decreasing their level of physiological arousal (heart rate, blood pressure) youth are able to increase their capacity to stay calm in stressful situations and thus make better choices about their behaviour. Evidence suggests that yoga can reduce maladaptive nervous system arousal, thus making it easier for youth to strengthen healthy coping strategies and reduce their dependence on substances to maintain emotional equilibrium. As a result of its efficacy, yoga is increasingly being offered in accredited children’s mental health treatment centres such as Lutherwood in Waterloo, in custody facilities such as Roy McMurtry Youth Centre in Bramptom, and in community-based gang prevention programs, such as Breaking the Cycle in Rexdale.
One of the best parts of working on the inREACH project has been the opportunity to collaborate with local service providers, businesses and community residents to expose the young people we work with to experiences that they would not otherwise have access to. The results have sometimes been surprising. For example, last winter we began working with Meaghan Johnson at Queen Street Yoga to teach yoga and mindfulness to one of our groups for young people at-risk for gang activity.
The youth we work with have responded very well to the experience. We found that by beginning our groups with yoga and mindfulness exercises they were more grounded and focused for the psycho-educational material that followed. Many learned that they could use breathing as a strategy in stressful situations, while others continued to practice yoga on their own time. Beyond the tools they may have taken from it, however, all were able to experience what, to me, is the most powerful aspect of yoga – accepting and honouring who you are, in your body, at this particular moment in time, without judgment.
Now, I could have provided a purely economic rationale for teaching yoga to “thugs”. Something along the lines of… Yoga – 1 teacher @ $100/hour x 6 sessions/5 youth = $600.00 ($120 per youth ) Incarceration – 5 youth @ $350/day x 5/days = $8,750 ($1,750per youth)
… and let the math speak for itself.
However, wouldn’t you rather see a young person who can understand the connection between emotional triggers and behaviour, self-regulate emotions with consciousness, make healthy decisions and learn body awareness techniques that can be used for a lifetime?
I know I would. I believe our community would be a safer place if more of our young people had the opportunity for this kind of experience.
This is an excellent talk from New Leaf Yoga teacher Laura Sygrove about the power of yoga to connect the mind & body in very practical ways and start a healing journey in a healthy constructive way.
Author: Shanna Braden is a social worker at Lutherwood who works for inREACH, a collaborative project of local community partners to prevent gang activity in the Region of Waterloo.
The Smart on Crime blog posts for December are coming to you from the staff team of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council. We work on a wide range if issues and topics – some fascinating, some curious, but never dull! The posts in the next couple weeks will give you just a taste of some of the things bumping around in our brains from day to day.
It’s our gift to you, dear readers. Look for the posts starting next week.
Posted on: November 1st, 2012 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
Being tough on crime often means talking about keeping criminals off the street, protecting the rights of victims and deterring offenders from either offending in the first place, or re-offending upon release. All of these things, however laudable, sound great on talk radio. In my very unscientific poll listening to a recent local talk radio program where the host interviewed the Honourable Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of Canada about toughening the Safe Streets and Communities Act (Bill C-10) about 90% of the callers supported this tough stance that would result in more offenders going to prison. Now, these are serious offenders, not joy-riders or B+E specialists. These are the people found guilty of violent offences. Tough to argue against that. But, have these callers thought about where we are sending these offenders and at what cost, or do they give much thought at all to prison, beyond it being the destination for bad guys (and girls in increasing numbers)?
“Canadians should be interested in who is ending up behind bars. Questions about whom we incarcerate and for how long and why are important public policy issues…Visible minorities, Aboriginal people and women are entering federal penitentiaries in greater numbers than ever before. Twenty-one percent of the inmate population is of Aboriginal descent and 9% of inmates are Black Canadians. In the last five years, the number of federally incarcerated women has increased by about 40% while the number of Aboriginal women has increased by over 80% in the last decade. In fact, if not for these sub-groups, the offender population growth rate would have flat-lined some years ago.”
Think about that for a moment. Does this not seem out of whack to you? How often have we heard our politicians or talk show hosts calling attention to these stats? Not very, at least in my memory. How long can we keep sweeping this issue under the proverbial rug before we need an SUV to climb over it? Why is this not on the national radar?
Mr. Sapers goes even further to paint a picture of today’s inmate:
“More offenders are admitted to federal penitentiaries more addicted and more mentally ill that ever before. 36% have been identified at admissions as requiring some form of psychiatric care of psychological follow-up. 63% of offenders report using either alcohol or drugs on the day of their current offence…These needs often run ahead of the system’s capacity to meet them.”
Given this, would it not make sense for the government to invest some of the money it is using after the fact to house these people to invest at the front end in some form of proactive therapy that can address alcohol and substance abuse issues as these are often linked to mental health problems? We know that it currently costs the government (in reality you and me, the taxpayer) about $98,000 to incarcerate one male (female prisoners are much more expensive to house, in fact about twice the cost) for one year in a medium security federal prison. By the way, these figures come from Public Safety Canada. I am not making them up. If that money were invested in mental health and addictions counselling (and it wouldn’t even cost near that amount) for a person when symptoms first arise, it would save exponential amounts of money after the fact in costs of incarceration. This isn’t bleeding heart liberalism. It’s simple mathematics. You should know that there is a range of costs for persons incarcerated that is dependent on whether or not they are in a federal or provincial institute, whether they are male or female and the level of security and so on. I think there are more options out there that are less expensive and arguably more effective.
Look for example at InREACH, the anti-gang project running in Waterloo Region. In 2009, the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council received nearly $3.8 million from the National Crime Prevention Centre (Canada) for a 45 month time period to create and implement a collaborative street gang prevention project that involved a collaboration among various community agency partners. You can read about the initiative yourself so I won’t take you through all it offers in terms of its programs like addictions counselling, mental health supports, job skills training, community mobilization and so on. Visit the site though. You will be impressed.
In a recent monitoring report of the project prepared by Karen Hayward, she notes that 210 youth have been referred to the program since 2010. If, and it’s a very big if, all of these youth would have gone on to commit crimes which would land them in a medium security federal penitentiary the cost to the taxpayer would be $20,580,000. Okay, that’s a stretch. It depends on lots of factors so I am asking you to give me some leeway here. So, let’s say only a quarter of these youth could be diverted successfully. The cost is still $5,145,000. Oh, by the way, this is per year. So, if for example we say that the program diverted 25% of these youth from a federal penitentiary over three years, at a program investment of roughly $3 million and without it, the government (again, you and me) would be on the hook for $15,435,000 – does it not look cost effective? And, interestingly enough, inREACH is scrambling for funding since the money is running out. It begs the question as to why, when simple economics tells us it makes more sense to invest upfront dollars that will save the taxpayer huge amounts later on. I know there are a lot of suppositions in my example that may fail to take various factors into consideration, but the message is still clear: pay now or pay a lot more later.
Mr. Sapers helps make my argument. “Expenditures on federal corrections totalled almost $2.5 billion in 2010-11, which represents a 43.9% increase since 2005-06.” Have we seen the same percentage increase going to mental health and addictions support? Well, it appears not. According to the Canadian Psychiatric Association, the federal government has cut mental health services at Correctional Services Canada including three doctors, 28 nurses, six psychologists, three social workers and two occupational therapists. These numbers don’t include the 18 nurses and five psychologists affected by the closure of Kingston Penitentiary who will lose their jobs.
When one considers, as Mr. Sapers’ report notes, that 4 of 5 offenders have substance abuse problems, 50% of federally incarcerated women report a history of self-harm, over half identify a current or previous addiction to drugs, 85% report a history of physical abuse and 68% experienced sexual abuse at some point in their lives, any cuts to mental health supports seem short-sighted. And I am not even touching on the story of Ashley Smith, as an example of what can happen to a person with mental health needs in our prison system.
As much as I think many callers to talk shows debating the tough on crime agenda reasonably want to protect victims, it might be time for them to think about what happens after the cell door slams. After all, at some point these people are coming out and will be standing in line with us at Tim Hortons or riding the bus with us. From a strictly selfish point of view, do we want them to come out healthier, more able to handle stress and addictive tendencies, more compassionate and remorseful, or just angrier and more damaged?
Is it time to stop pretending prison is our best option? What are we pretending not to know?
Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.
Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.
Do politicians and a debate about policy and policy changes impact public opinion? Anthony Piscitelli asked this question at the end of the previous episode and now he reveals his answer!
Indeed, policy changes made at the political level appear to have some influence on public opinion and attitudes toward crime and the criminal justice system. Politicians have a role in leading public opinion but they also have a role in following it. When politicians float a ‘trial balloon’ policy, it is often in an attempt to test the waters of public opinion of a particular issue. Remember Bill C-30? The ‘cyber surveillance’ bill was tabled early in 2012 but was quickly pulled off the table due to a huge public outcry and several social media campaigns. It has yet to reappear….
The main message of these ‘By the Numbers’ videos is still this: the relationship between public opinion, policy and political decision makers is complex – more than complicated! Know that your opinion matters, listen carefully about issues that matter to you… and learn to read between the lines – or, the numbers.
Thanks for watching! Do you have any ‘by the numbers’ worthy topics you are curious about? If you have something you would like to see covered in an episode of ‘By the Numbers’, leave a comment below or contact us info [at] smartoncrime.ca.
A huge thank you to the staff & team at Gibson Sound & Vision, Waterloo for accommodating us at their store to record this video!
The Smart on Crime blog posts for December are coming to you from the staff team of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council. We work on a wide range if issues and topics – some fascinating, some curious, but never dull! The posts in the next couple weeks will give you just a taste of some of the things bumping around in our brains from day to day.