Published: October 07, 2006 04:10 pm      

Does Crimnon work? The jury is still out

Some say the program works and works well. Others say there’s no proof it works at all and that implementing it could not only be a waste of taxpayer money, but in the long run could actually prove detrimental.

Which side is right remains a question.

A study to determine if Criminon works in Oklahoma prison systems has some prison workers up in arms.

“We have a program that works,” said Sherri Fabrey, a counselor at the Mack Alford Correctional Center in Stringtown.

“If you have something that works, why mess with it? Especially if you have something coming in that there’s no real proof of working?”

Criminon is a non-profit program dedicated to offender rehabilitation and reform. It is an outgrowth of Narconon and is, like Narconon, associated with the Church of Scientology.

Criminon’s parent organization, the Association of Better Living and Education International, proposed the study at Mack Alford.

ABLE is the group that initially bought the former Arrowhead Lodge, current site of Narconon Arrowhead.

“The main problem I have is that there are no real studies of which I’m aware showing the Criminon program works,” Fabrey said.

The Criminon Web site lists two studies. One, by the Foundation for Advancements in Science and Education, was of juvenile offenders in Utah.

The Foundation is itself tied to Scientology and its founder, L. Ron Hubbard. The “First International Conference on Chemical Contamination and Human Detoxification,” held under the auspices of FASE in Los Angeles in 1995, was comprised of supporters of Hubbard’s detoxification methods.

The supporters agreed at the conference to join together and form what is now known as the International Academy of Detoxification Specialists.

A second study of Criminon, by the Urban Institute, is incomplete, according to a link on Criminon’s Web site.

Founded in 1968, the Urban Institute is a non-partisan social research organization which analyzes a variety of social issues, including economic, justice, health care and immigration. Its research is often provided to lawmakers and others who make policies regarding the public overall.

That FASE study compared 100 young people who received Narconon training to 100 who did not. Of the 100 enrolled in Narconon, 74 completed that training. Of those who did, about one-third did not have a history of re-offending within four years.

That’s about three-quarters of enrollees completing the program, with about one third of those, roughly 25 people, not reoffending within four years — about one-fourth of all enrollees.

Taken another way, two-thirds of those who completed the program in the FASE study did reoffend within four years.

How does that compare with current programs?

People who go through the drug court program in Oklahoma are much less likely (19 percent) to reoffend than any other offenders, according to a 2004 report from the Oklahoma Sentencing Commission. By comparison, 35 percent of persons put on standard probation or parole reoffend, as do about 76 percent of those sent to prison.

A study by Andrew Spivak, of the University of Oklahoma Sociology Department, found that of 46,172 inmates released from prison in the state between 1985 and 1999, 48.1 percent were rearrested by May 31, 2004.

“We’re gearing more toward reentry through a variety of programs,” said Dr. Don Kiffin, who oversees an Oklahoma Department of Corrections program to help train and support ex-offenders as entrepreneurs.

“It’s plain that the more education someone has, the less likely they are to be a recidivist. If we can give them something to help them restart their lives, they’re less likely to go back to prison.”

According to the federal Office of National Drug Control Policy, between 70 and 85 percent of all people incarcerated in 1995 needed some level of substance abuse treatment.

Offenders who receive some type of treatment or education while they’re incarcerated are less likely to reoffend than those who don’t, according to Jerry Massey, spokesman for the Oklahoma Department of Corrections. Some programs, such as educational programs like that overseen by Kiffin, fall directly under the DOC. Others, like the current treatment program at Mack Alford Correctional Center, are actually operated by the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services.

Whichever program offenders receive, the simple fact they’ve successfully completed one lessens the odds that they’ll be back behind bars, Massey said.

A five-year study of the program currently in place at Mack Alford, which was presented to the state board of corrections in September, indicates that 66.42 percent of inmates who completed that program were not rearrested for any crime, as compared to 29.57 percent prisoners released during the same time who needed substance abuse treatment but didn’t recieve it.

Massey said he does not have information on exactly how many prisoners started the current MACC program, compared to how many completed it.

The program is designed to promote effective ways people can deal with problems, including teaching them ways to look at alternate ways of responding to problems.

“Much of what the people at Criminon say is just anecdotal,” Fabrey said. “We know our program works, so I don’t understand why the state is even looking at having this one here.”

“I understand they’ll look at just about any program to see if it will work,” Massey said, adding all Department of Corrections treatment programs are funded largely through grants. “If there’s something else out there that will work, I’m sure the board will be interested,” he said.