Abstract
The book, The Forgotten Men: Serving a Life Without Parole Sentence, is relevant and timely. Margaret E. Leigey forces the reader to examine his or her belief systems and to decide whether to support life without the possibility of parole. This examination and decision are complex because of the rarely questioned assumption that the death penalty is the most severe punishment that may be imposed on a person. The author reminds the readers that the sentence of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP) is the most punitive punishment.
A key strength of Leigey's book is the methodology. She does an excellent job of illuminating the brutal reality behind this sentence by conducting in-depth face-to-face interviews of 26 men serving life without parole sentences on two separate occasions in 2006 and 2011. All of the men interviewed were serving their sentences in one of two facilities located in the Midwest. The use of qualitative methods allowed Leigey to artfully describe the respondents who were all over the age of 50 and all had served at a minimum of 15 years of their sentence at the time of the first interview. All of these men had been convicted of murder. Importantly, the author is not suggesting society forgive them of their crimes but rather examine whether those convicted of such crimes deserve a chance to redeem themselves and become productive law-abiding members of society.
The book is aggregated into six chapters with an epilogue and appendix. The first chapter provides an overview of the mass incarceration in the United States, and more specifically, the dramatic increase in the number of individuals sentenced to life without parole sentences. Within this chapter, Leigey provides a historical context of the rise of the use of LWOP sentences. In particular, she highlights utilitarianism and deterrence theory as providing a backdrop for the justification of the development of LWOP sentences. The basic arguments for imposing life without parole sentences are also laid out in this chapter. By presenting the arguments, she laid the foundation for the topics covered in later chapters.
Chapter 2 provides a description of the incarcerated men who they were prior to their incarceration as well as the behavior that led to their conviction. The author applies life course theory and the burnout hypothesis to show that those serving LWOP sentences may be less likely to recidivate than other types of offenders. Included within this discussion is a presentation of previous research that supports the proposition that those serving LWOP sentences deserve a second chance if we are looking at their dangerousness/threat they pose to the community.
Chapter 3 focuses on the “pains of imprisonment,” a concept developed by Gresham Sykes (Sykes, 1958). This is an important learning chapter for students as many of the current myths presented in the news and movies are addressed. Based on the media's depiction, for example, incarcerated men's top complaint would be the lack of having a heterosexual relationship. Leigey effectively debunks the idea that incarcerated men could care less about their families. Another issue that Leigey discussed that is rarely presented in the literature is the concept of “institutional thoughtlessness.” Issues related to this concept are forcing the older men to use the top bunk. One respondent provided this statement as an example, “as a side effect of a blood pressure medication he had become incontinent, taking all those pills, I was urinating about twenty, twenty-five times a day. I couldn’t hold it. I started urinating in the bed. I said this has to stop” (p. 90).
Chapter 4 provides an in-depth look into how these men cope with their deprivations. Rarely do we see depicted in movies, incarcerated men attending religious services, attending art classes, or assisting other inmates. Yet, according to Leigey's depiction, men tend to rely on themselves and religion rather than relying on friendships developed in prison or talking to family. Perhaps cliché, but some mentioned the idea of “do your own time and don’t let time do you” (p. 98). The quote effectively illustrates that this particular group of men believe that if they fail to try and remain active and take care of themselves, then their survival is unlikely. The sentiment of wondering why the need to learn a new trade or earn a degree if the knowledge or skill will never be used was prevalent among some of the respondents.
In Chapter 5, Leigey provides an excellent picture of what it is like to “grow old” in prison. She examines issues related to both physical and mental health. The men discussed their fear of and/or lack of fear of dying. The process of possible commutation of their LWOP sentence was discussed in this chapter as well. All of the men were very well aware of the application process for commutation. However, less than 50% had applied for commutation in 2006. Of those who applied, only one had been successful. Overall, the view that seemed to prevail among the men is that they will forever be judged for the worst mistake in their life, and more importantly, they will never have the chance to show to the world and their families that people are capable of change.
From a learning standpoint, Chapter 6 is arguably the most important chapter of the text as Leigey does a nice in-depth discussion on policy implications. Four separate policy changes were presented. At the forefront of the possible changes is to modify life without parole sentences. Some states permit the possibility of parole once an individual has served 25+ years of their term. From a theoretical standpoint, this particular type of policy modification is a better fit according to Leigey with the rehabilitation punishment rationale. A second policy change that is used in some countries such as England mandate parole for the rest of an individual's life as an alternative to LWOP.
From a researcher standpoint, the discussion about the research methodology in the appendix is important and necessary. Leigey reminds the readers about the benefits of qualitative research while asserting that detailed description can be gained in populations like LWOP inmates. Furthermore, she examines ethical dilemmas researchers face when conducting in-person interviews. Leigey also provides some of the drawbacks of qualitative research and more specifically on her research project such as the low number of participants reducing the generalizeability of her findings.
Overall, Leigey's book provides an important look at the life of incarcerated men serving life without parole sentences, which leads one to question the need for LWOP sentences. This is a must read for graduate students and those considering pursuing a career in the criminal justice field, particularly in the field of corrections. This book would also function as a solid supplemental reader for an advanced undergraduate course in corrections.