For nearly two decades, Osborn’s residents and their families have decried the prison’s conditions.

The goal of prison shouldn't just be to punish people. It should also be to help them become productive members of society so they don't return, but more importantly, to benefit the communities as a whole via education, job training, rehabilitation, etc.

Prisons should protect the public, hold people accountable, and reduce the likelihood of future crime—not simply punish people, hold them for very long periods of time, and release them without preparing them to succeed.

Rehabilitation isn't about excusing crime. It's about reducing the chances that crime happens again, and again. This benefits not only inmates, but also their families, communities, and society as a whole; resulting in a safer, more productive, and thriving society.

We should seriously consider expanding rehabilitation programs, education, and vocational training to give incarcerated people a better chance of succeeding after release.

South Carolina faces challenges with prison overcrowding, long sentences, and not adequately preparing incarcerated people to successfully return to society. I believe we should do more to give people a genuine second chance. SC's current approach concerning sentencing and punishment isn't working.

Norway's rehabilitation-focused approach offers valuable lessons that South Carolina should take seriously.

Shorter Sentences & A Different Approach

Norway generally has a maximum prison sentence of 21 years, with exceptions allowing up to 30 years for certain extremely serious crimes. Its average prison sentence is around eight months, and nearly 90% of unconditional prison sentences are under a year.

Norway also has no death penalty or ordinary life imprisonment. Its approach demonstrates that a country can take crime seriously while emphasizing rehabilitation rather than simply keeping people incarcerated for as long as possible.

Longer prison sentences can contribute to overcrowding as people occupy prison beds for longer periods. When capacity is strained, states may face difficult choices, including spending more taxpayer money or reconsidering whether certain people need to remain incarcerated for as long as they are.

Overcrowding can also put pressure on the resources available for education, vocational training, treatment, and rehabilitation—services that can help people prepare for release and reduce reoffending. Investing in effective programs will also help reduce the long-term financial burden of repeated incarceration.

Normalization and responsibility

Daily life in Norwegian prisons is designed to resemble life outside prison as much as security allows. Prisoners can have opportunities to wear their own clothes, prepare meals, work, study, and exercise outdoors.

The point isn't to make prison a vacation. It's to help people develop everyday responsibilities and habits they'll need when they return home.

Programs, Education, Healthcare, and Essential Services

Norwegian prisoners have access to healthcare, education, and library services through the same public agencies that serve the general population instead of separate prison-run services.

The idea is to help people address the problems that may have contributed to their criminal behavior and give them the skills they need to live independently after release.

The state should evaluate and expand effective programs where need.

Prison Officers Helping With Rehabilitation

Norway emphasizes building relationships between prison officers and inmates. Officers receive training to help them maintain security while supporting rehabilitation, building trust, and preparing prisoners for release.

Conclusion

A successful prison system shouldn't be measured only by how many people it locks up. It should also be measured by how many people return to society without committing another crime.

What do you think SC could learn from Norway's approach to rehabilitation?

I know nothing about prisons, I just came to ask a question. I wanted to ask about food. It appears that it’s somehow legal to basically starve inmates, at least in the US. Aside from the moral issues, it seems like a really stupid waste of a potentially powerful resource. I mean in prison, there can’t be that much to get excited about or look forward to. But I bet a full Sunday dinner with roast beef, gravy, mashed potatoes <insert desirable contemporary dining items> might qualify.

I also know nothing about using food as a behaviour modification tool but I’m interested in mutually positive outcomes. The prison has problems it wants to fix. Why not approach it more like work safety goals? Identify the problems, define the goals, breakdown the steps, measure the progress and celebrate the successes with a nice pudding afterwards. You know what I mean.

Has the prison system experimented with using food to incentivize the population? If we flipped the current situation, doubled the food budget and used it as a reward for results what would change? How it would it impact the current commissary economy? What about the dread pirate Unintended Consequences?

I know I could do a search for studies on the subject but I thought Redditors would be a much more interesting source.