Professor Danielle Harris Receives Guggenheim Grant for Research on Sexual Offending

by Danielle Harris

The Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation has approved a grant in the amount of $36,000 to Justice Studies Assistant Professor Danielle Harris for her project entitled “Desistance  from sexual offending across the life course: A multimethod approach.” The study will explore the process of desistance from sexual offending in a sample of 100 men convicted of sexual offenses, referred for civil commitment and released from custody through a gradual release program. The specific program in question operated in Massachusetts from 1974 through 1991 and provided civilly committed sex offenders with an opportunity to gradually adapt to living in the community with authorized absences and periods of supervised community access. She and her colleagues plan to follow up approximately equal numbers of recidivists and desisters. Recidivists will have been released and subsequently reconvicted for a sexual crime (and will be interviewed in custody). Desisters will have been released and not subsequently reconvicted (and will be interviewed in the community).

The post-release experiences of risk and protective factors will be examined, paying particular attention to the variables previously identified in three established theories of desistance: natural desistance; cognitive transformation; and informal social control. Consistent with a pilot study that Professor Harris conducted using a CASA Incentive Grant last year, she will conduct qualitative narrative analysis to explore the presence of themes of desistance that have previously been identified in nonsexual offenders as well as emergent themes unique to this particular sample. She hopes to build on previous results that have underscored the relevance of natural desistance for a small group and the importance of cognitive transformation within the context of treatment for a majority of participants. Additional emergent themes so far include the negative impact of recent policies on participants’ ability to find accommodation, employment, and relationships.

She has previously coded the clinical and criminal files of all participants and is in the process of locating them in the greater Boston area. She will return to Boston during the summer to conduct interviews and administer the MIDSA (Multidimensional Inventory of Development, Sex, and Aggression) to each participant.

In addition to her research, Professor Harris is actively involved in the SJSU Record Clearance Project, where she engages students in assisting eligible people to clear their criminal records. She also teaches a number of key course in Justice Studies.

Professor Harris received her doctorate in Criminology in 2008 from Griffith University, Australia. Prior to that, she completed a Masters degree in Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Maryland (College Park) and a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Justice Studies (with Honors) at the Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane and the University of Westminster, London. Her research interests include many aspects of sexual offending: specialization and versatility; the criminal career paradigm; desistance; female sexual offending; and related public policy. Dr Harris is the Director of Research for the Art of Yoga Project, a nonprofit organization that provides a yoga and creative arts curriculum to girls in custody.

Professor Harris’ work on sexual offending is a powerful example of the important research being conducted in the Justice Studies Department at SJSU; research that not only moves forward theory and practice, but that also has real relevance to marginalized communities and that helps in our collective efforts to achieve social justice through scholarship.

Information about Guggenheim Research Grants can be found here.

Information about the Massachusetts Sex Offender Program can be found here.

Information about the Art of Yoga Project can be found here.

More information about Dr. Harris and this prestigious research award can be found here.

Selected Publications

Harris, D. A., Knight, R. A., Dennison, & S., Smallbone, S. (2011). Post release specialization and versatility in sexual offenders referred for civil commitment. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23(2), 243-259.

Harris, D. A., & Fitton, M. L. (2010). The art of yoga project: a yoga and creative arts curriculum for girls in custody. International Journal of Yoga Therapy.

Record Clearance Project (RCP) Transforms the Lives of Client-Participants and Students

by JS Department

The San José State University (SJSU) Record Clearance Project (RCP) engages undergraduates in assisting eligible people to clear their criminal records.  Begun in January 2008, each semester the work culminates in a court hearing where a judge considers the petitions that SJSU undergraduates prepare on behalf of their clients.

An article by Lena Ramalho, which appeared in the Metro this past Wednesday, highlighted the transformative work done in the RCP.  The article can be found here:
http://www.sanjose.com/news/2012/11/21/record_clearance_project_at_san_jose_state ; PDF version of this cool story can be found here: (see p. 8): http://issuu.com/metrosiliconvalley/docs/1247_mt/8?mode=a_p

The program is driven by San Jose State students and helps clients in the justice system correct and/or expunge criminal records.  The RCP is advised and organized by a dynamic team of professional lawyers, academics, students, ad community volunteers including Margaret (Peggy) Stevenson, JD, RCP Director; Hal Peterson, JD, who practiced law for 15 years in Michigan and then Washington; Mark Correia, Ph.D.Chair of the Justice Studies Department, an Associate Professor, and an expert in police and community relations;  and Danielle A. Harris, Ph.D.,  Assistant Professor of Justice Studies and an expert on sex offenders, contemporary problems in justice studies, and justice evaluation and policy analysis.

RCP Director Stevenson has noted that students have helped 151 clients file petitions in court to expunge criminal records or have felonies reduced to misdemeanors. In the past year, 133 petitions have been filed on behalf of 52 clients. These are important steps in integrating community oversight into the justice system to ensure that all persons receive fair and equitable treatment including sentencing, parole, probation, and record keeping.

Reflecting on her experiences an RCP student stated, “We go through every step with the client. We write the petitions, meet with the lawyer. We’re there with them in the courtroom. When everything is done and they come back to us and say, ‘You changed my life,’ I’m amazed. I can’t believe I changed someone’s life.”

The RCP is a strong advertisement for metropolitan-university community engagement; the integration of SJSU justice studies students into this community project results in transformations for all parties involved.  Here students are engaged in the righteous work of social justice and the active building of equity back into the justice system.

More information about the program can be found here: http://justicestudies.sjsu.edu/research/record-clearance-project/

Information about the SJSU Justice Studies Department can be found here: http://justicestudies.sjsu.edu/

CONTACT THE RCP

Please contact the SJSU Record Clearance Project at sjsurcp@gmail.com or leave a message at (408) 924-2758.

Twitter: @sjsurcp

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Record-Clearance-Project/217577251599493

Shape of the Body

By: Tony Platt, Visiting Professor in Justice Studies

Note:  This is reposted from Tony’s Blog “GoodtoGo

There are only a few days of vacation left before Cecilia and I leave London and head back home to California at the end of August. We try to cram in as many sights and scenes as possible. Tate Modern of course. A young woman I’ve never met before approaches me in the vast expanse of the Turbine Room. Without any niceties, not even a hi or hello, she tells me in some detail how she nearly died from tuberculosis in Czechoslovakia when she was twelve years old. “I could see the pores open on my skin and suck in the air that saved me.” She sounds like a religious fanatic, but she’s not. She stretches out her arms, almost touching me, to show me where it happened. “Like an acid trip,” I offer. “Sort of, not really, and then I woke up in hospital alive,” she says.

I’m interested, I ask for more. So she tells me of a time when she was younger, being pulled out of a sudden deep pit of snow by somebody’s hand. Nearly suffocated. “Whose hand?” I ask. “Nobody’s, it just felt like a hand. My father was many yards away.”

I tell her my stories, how during the last five years I’ve had terrifying car accidents. In one a young guy ran a red light and sideswiped me, totaling the car. In the other I skidded across an icy highway on a dark-black night, off the four-lane road into a void that turned out to be a gentle rise. Not a scratch on me. “I’ve been healthy all my life,” I say, “then two near misses.” I don’t mention the obvious hit – the death of my son five years ago, but it’s on my mind.

Now seventy years old, I’m hyper-aware of how bodies, as Metamorphoses puts it, “can change to assume new shapes.” I try to stay in shape, work out three times a week at the gym, erasing various aches and pains with the jock’s little helper, Ibuprofen.  “Never a day in hospital since I was a child,” I tell the Czech woman, “and just like that, two accidents over which I felt I had no control, and it could have been curtains.”

Coming to a pause in our stories, we shake hands and part without saying goodbye. And just like that, an intimate conversation between strangers is over, both of us willing participants in Tino Sehgal’s improvisational script about what it means to connect with others. Later that evening, after dinner with friends, I begin to feel ill.

The next day I’m shuffling between bed and toilet in our Fleet Street flat. I’m okay when I’m horizontal, but on my feet I’m a little dizzy. Could be flu or a bug or food poisoning. By the next evening, feeling a little worse, now easily tired, I search for fleet street doctors on the web and find the Fleet Street Clinic a hundred yards away.

Soon I’m reporting my symptoms to a young, extremely pleasant doctor from Berlin. As I tell him my troubles, he googles. After he checks my heart rate and taps my stomach, he’s pretty sure I have a virus that has penetrated my inner ear, and that unless it’s a rare chronic variety, I should be okay in a few days. He advises me that it would be better, however, if I didn’t travel back home the next day as planned. He prescribes me £12.50 ($20) worth of painkillers “just in case your stomach hurts” and sends me off with a printout about Labyrinthitis and Vestibular Neuritis from patient.co.uk. My fifteen-minute consultation in a private clinic in London costs me £70 ($111), meds not included.

Later that evening the nice young doc calls me to say that if I don’t feel better in the morning, “it might be a good thing to come in for a blood test.” The next day I insist that Cecilia take her flight back to the States. “I’ll rest for a few days, get rid of this virus, and come home later. I’ll be okay. I know my way around England,” I reassure her, “I don’t feel like an outsider.”

I grew up in Manchester before leaving for California in 1963. I have relatives here. Moreover, two of my closest friends from San Francisco have just arrived to spend the year in London. “Don’t worry,” I tell Cecilia, “Mark and Lydia will help me if I need them.”

Cecilia leaves at dawn. I get up, but the room is spinning. By now, as a later medical report notes, my stools have become decidedly offensive. I pop a couple of Imodium with a view to getting myself plugged up for the journey home. I don’t trust myself to take a shower without falling and I no longer trust the private medical system to provide an inside track to recovery.

At my niece’s urging, I call the National Health System’s help line. A screener takes my details and within an hour I’m being quizzed on the phone by a nurse who takes his time to get all the details right. Later that morning, accompanied by Mark and Lydia, a GP at a local NHS clinic asks a few questions, puts her finger up my ass, and dismisses the diagnosis of inner ear virus. “It’s melena, you’re bleeding in your stomach, you’re clinically anemic,” she says, sure of herself, and refers me to University College Hospital. “The medical team is waiting for you in Emergency.”

I crumple to the ground outside the clinic while Mark tries to run down a taxi. I feel like I have seen the future and it doesn’t work. During the short journey from clinic to hospital, I’m getting worse, more disoriented and physically incompetent than I have ever felt in my life. “I’ll always remember you at that moment,” recalls Lydia a few days later. “You suddenly looked old and frail. Like an old man.” She hesitates. “Something about the shape of your body, the way you bent over. You were deteriorating in front of me.”

By the time we arrive at the hospital, I can’t make it to the emergency room. Mark puts me in a wheelchair and zig-zags me into the waiting room. “He’s deteriorating,” Lydia says to the receptionist. She’s scared. So am I, imagining the worst.

A combination of events – my initial denial that it was blood down there, taking an over-the-counter drug that masked my symptoms, and the private doctor’s quickie misdiagnosis – had combined to put me at risk. The acute medicine team at University College Hospital moves quickly on my case. A relay of doctors confirms that I’m suffering from bleeding ulcers, no other pathology, not the stomach or colon cancer I feared. The nursing staff surrounds me with care and compassion. “Not to worry, darling, you’ll be better soon.”

And they were right. Three days later, seven pounds lighter, topped up with three liters (5.2 pints) of blood, I’m on the mend. Ibuprofen, I’m told, is the likely culprit. “Three weeks of Omeprazole capsules and you should be fine,” says the discharge doctor.

The care I receive from the NHS in England is comparable to the care that I would have received from Kaiser, my Health Maintenance Organization in California. Except a tourist from England with an acute problem would not have been admitted to Kaiser because it’s a members-only organization, linked for the most part to work-related health insurance. And if this same tourist had staggered into another hospital, the first order of business would have been the matter of payment.

At University College Hospital in London, money was never discussed. I remember a nurse informing me that the “overseas team will no doubt visit you,” but they didn’t. I must have racked up quite a bill: x-rays, an EKG, blood tests, gastroscopy, lab analysis, and ICU-like care for the first twenty-four hours.

I tell one doctor that I’m a long-time resident of the United States and a British citizen, but nobody asks to see my passport or check my identification. I don’t have travel insurance. Aside from £60 ($95) required by the Neaman Practice for their diagnosis and £25 ($40) for a big bundle of optional phone and telly services at the hospital, there’s no charge. It costs me about twice as much – a change fee – to re-book my flight home with United Airlines.

After I’m discharged, I revel in the everyday, but feel compelled to return, not as a patient but as a visitor to see Michael who is in the bed next to me during my last twenty-four hours in hospital. We find common ground very quickly. We’re roughly the same age and class background, and share similar experiences as ex-pats, he in Spain, me in California. Our politics are very different – I read theGuardian and New Statesman, he reads the Daily Mail and Spectator – but neither of us is interested in ideological combat. Bigger issues are on our minds.

Michael and I have both been healthy all our lives, never in hospital since we were kids. “I had a pain in my stomach,” he tells me. “Went to see some doctors and they told me I had inoperable cancer. I said no to chemo, what’s the point.” The docs told him he had about three months to live. “How long ago was that?” I ask. “Three months,” he replies, looking me in the eye. “It’s all over for me. I’m going to die very soon. Look,” he says, opening up his puny hospital gown to show me up close how the cancer has bloated his once lean and handsome body. He wants out of the hospital now, this minute. He craves his garden and the intergenerational household that he shares in London with his wife, daughter, and grandchildren.

“And you?” he asks. I tell him the dice rolled lucky for me this time.

My last day in London, we talk personally about our families. I tell him about the death of my son Daniel. Michael tells me how difficult it was to let his granddaughter know about his own looming death. I give him the piece of slick, black-green jade that I always carry with me on trips for good luck. “It’s from a place in northern California called Big Lagoon. I found it on the beach. It keeps me grounded about what’s important,” I say to Michael.

It’s difficult to say our goodbyes, both of us teary. “I wish we had met under better circumstances,” concludes Michael. “Me too,” I reply. When we shake hands, I feel the jade warm in his palm. “I’ll put a hole in it and wear it around my neck,” he says with a lovely smile.

****************
The writer is recuperating at home in Berkeley and is back at work. Michael Johnstone died at Trinity Hospice in London on September 20th.

The resurgence of colorblind racism in the university setting

By:  Claudio Vera Sanchez, Assistant Professor, Justice Studies

Since contemporary university policies use colorblind language, it becomes inconceivable to believe that they produce racial outcomes.  People are so fixated on Barrack Obama and Oprah Winfrey, as beacons of racial progress, that crying racism can now be diagnosed as a symptom of lunacy.  D’Souza (1995) in the famous work The End of Racism asserts that Colin Powell, one of the most powerful African American military leaders in the world, would not have been able to serve a hamburger in the South during the 1960s.  Indeed, exceptionalism has historically been used as a cannon to mask racism.  According to Alexander (2012), the shocking images of police unleashing police dogs on children in the South, people being water cannoned, the yelling of racial epithets, and “whites only signs” shapes our understanding of what racism is.  Since our perception of racism is shaped by the most extreme expressions (Alexander, 2012), it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to imagine how invisibly embedded colorblind policies in a university system can promote racial disparities.

There is something called FTES in California state universities that harms students of color.  FTES is complex and few know how to interpret it.  The bottom line is that a university department, contingent on the state budget, is forced to admit less or more students.  The current trend is to limit the number of students based on FTES.  At first glance FTES appears like a colorblind policy because middle class non-minority students are also impacted.  But semester after semester students of color express their frustration because their classes were dropped due to unforeseen financial circumstances.  When these students solve the problem and attempt to reenroll in classes, it does not matter if they were originally enrolled—those students are turned away because the respective department has already exceeded the FTES.  What is a student to do now that they have paid their fees, and have overcome these bureaucratic hurdles, yet are prevented from enrolling in classes?  Although FTES baselines appear to affect every student equally, they do not.  These policies overwhelmingly cripple students of color, since they are the ones most likely to experience economic hardship and other difficulties associated with enrollment at the beginning of the semester.

Although merit based policies in contemporary universities are cloaked in race neutral language, they foster racial disparities.  During the 1990s UC Berkley recognized that admitting students who had historically been subjected to substandard schooling, based only on G.P.A and SAT scores, would only amplify the racial disparities that characterize major universities.  The rigid and unthinking application of elevated G.P.A. and SAT requirements in state universities, institutions traditionally designed to educate underprivileged and working class populations, limit access to university programs and decimate their mission statements.  The mission statement of the CSU system reads, “Seeks out individuals with collegiate promise who face cultural, geographical, physical, educational, financial, or personal barriers to assist them in advancing to the highest educational levels they can reach.”  Simply substitute the words “seeks out” with “turns away” and “assists” with “prevents” for a more accurate mission statement of colorblind university systems.  Sullivan (1989) found in New York City that 70% of poor black and Latino residents are segregated to high poverty areas; alternatively, 70% of poor whites lived in non-poverty neighborhoods—communities with access to good schools, jobs, banks, grocery stores, and other resources.  According to the 2010 Census, 22% of children in the U.S. live in poverty, and those are disproportionately Latino and African American.  It is also well established that childhood poverty is associated with low-test scores (Brooks Gunn and Duncan, 1997; Duncan and Magnuson, 2005).  If zoning laws and residential segregation contribute to substandard schooling and poverty, is it reasonable to expect underprivileged Latino and African American students to enter the university with high SAT and G.P.A scores?

Major universities, as well as public schools, have become breeding grounds for zero tolerance policies.  In Chicago, where I once volunteered working with youth, young people were getting arrested for participating in food fights.  The administrators reasoned that objects such as an apple could be launched with such force as to inflict harm.  In part, the administrators were operating under the assumption that juveniles’ arms possess the thrust and accuracy of major league baseball pitchers.  In some university departments, if you fail a class two or three times a student can forevermore be disqualified from the major.  It is eerie how university policies bear striking resemblance to legal system’s three strike policies.  Since these zero-tolerance university policies are not explicitly racialized, they conceal those deeply affected by them.  The National Center for Education Statistics (2012) informs us who is most vulnerable in American educational systems—as evidenced by high drop out rates—that is Latinos and African Americans.

Less than sixty years after the historic Brown v. the Board of Education 1954, the schoolhouse doors are beginning to close.  For example, the City University of New York is a college that has historically served Black and Latino students.  The recession created an unintended consequence.  As fees skyrocketed across the nation, middle class students who would have attended private colleges opted to attend universities such as CUNY instead.  CUNY administration responded to the demand by hiking SAT and other entrance scores; the effect was a precipitous decline in Black and Latino enrollment (http://voicesofny.org/2012/06/at-cunys-senior-colleges-fewer-black-and-latino-students/).  The heightened fees and additional requirements employ fiscal language (i.e., racially neutral language), but they cater to middle class students at the cost of extraditing Blacks and Latinos from colleges that historically offered them opportunities.

The struggle for racial representation, at all stages, in major universities, has long abated.  One sees professor Cornell West on television and we become so titillated as to ignore the numbers.  Not long ago, people were asking why there are so few minority professors around.  Field (2007) places the numbers at 2.9% of scholars nationwide as being African American and 1.9% as being Latino.  That means that some university departments have never hired a tenure track Latino or African American professor, let alone tenured one.  No one seems the least bit disturbed by these numbers.  According to Alexander (2012), the once insidious system of racial hostility has been replaced by racial indifference (defined as a lack of compassion and caring about race and racial groups).  Only few recognize or care that the colorblind university policies implemented today may have an effect on the proportion of minority scholars produced tomorrow.

It is easy to overlook how colorblind policies are part of a new educational apartheid.  After all, these policies reflect a remarkable mastery in the excision of race from their language.  Iris Marilyn Young (2000) introduced something called the “birdcage” metaphor.  She states, “if one thinks about racism as one wire in the cage, or one form of disadvantage, it is difficult to understand how and why the bird is trapped.  Only a large set of wires arranged in a specific way, and connected to one another, serve to enclose the bird and to ensure that it cannot escape.”  Presently, it is the colorblind institutional practices, policies, and beliefs that operate in perfect harmony (like wires in a cage), that limit educational access, intensify racially disproportionate numbers, and help to excommunicate Latinos and African Americans from public universities.