This Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2019 photo shows the Massachusetts Statehouse in Boston.
This Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2019 photo shows the Massachusetts Statehouse in Boston. Credit: AP

I strongly support the bill (H.3358/S.826), An Act to Reduce Mass Incarceration, that would give the possibility of parole to all life-sentenced incarcerated men and women in Massachusetts.

There are numerous reasons why this bill is crucial. Regarding our societal economic resources and public safety concerns, many studies show that the proclivity toward violence declines extensively as one ages. Furthermore, incarcerating and housing an aging population is much more expensive.

The human costs to our shared society is an even greater reason to support this bill. When someone has committed harm, they have a responsibility to be held accountable for that harm, and for the impact the harm has caused the family and community. Life incarceration without the possibility of parole emphasizes punishment.

However, punishment as the response to harm is passive. It does not directly ask the incarcerated person to confront the pain and suffering their harmful actions have caused. Parole hearings are opportunities for those who have caused harm to express their responsibility, to directly address those whose lives have been forever affected by the harm and to convey to the community (and parole board) if they have matured and done the hard rehabilitative, recovery work of becoming a trustworthy, safe community member.

Many of them have done this hard work over the years, and are a crucial resource for their communities. Offering the possibility of parole to all lifers also motivates us as a society to use our resources with the incarcerated to offer programs for rehabilitation and trauma healing.

It also challenges us as a society to acknowledge the harm we have caused by systemic legacies of racial and economic injustices and violence. For the past several years, I have been facilitating restorative justice-informed groups for incarcerated men in the state prison, many of whom have life sentences, with only some who have the possibility of parole.

Many of these lifers very much want the opportunity to directly express their sense of accountability and the healing, learning and positive capacities they have achieved over many, many years. Offering the possibility of parole after 25 years to all lifers would offer a profound opportunity for both those individuals who have caused great harm and us as a society to begin to bring true repair and healing to families, communities and our society as a whole.

Rebecca Schachter

Northampton