Are pay-per-view video chats in prisons and jails a valuable link between inmates and their families, a circumvention of the incarceration-as-punishment principle, or another example of money talks? [Details - link]?

“Once video visitation systems are in place, most jails eliminate in-person family visits, securing a captive market for private firms.”

More like an egregious example of abuse.

Every day this country comes up with a new way to disgust me.

It seems like an abusive and coercive thing.

Once again we discriminate against the poorest and most helpless in society. As a free option it is a great idea for those who can’t afford to travel, but to charge for it and eliminate in-person seems doubly punitive.

This seems to be a perfect outgrowth of the prison industry. As governments, from federal on down to local, outsource more and more services, those services become ripe for this type of abuse. The technology is there, and it could be used to enhance the lives of inmates, yet it is being used for profit.

The big problem here is the for-profit prison industry. Their incentives are all wrong. Prisons should be incentivized to reduce recidivism, but for-profit prisons want inmates to keep coming back (just like a motel owner). As I understand it, regular contact with family is a strong indicator for reducing recidivism. This program would likely impede that contact more than it enables it due to cost which would lead to an increase in recidivism.

I agree with @janbb

Maybe they will televise Charles Mansons wedding too. lol

@Coloma Charlie’s wedding license expired. Turns out she just wanted to collect his body for display when he moves on.

A case could be made that it is a violation of the Eighth Amendment, in that it imposes unusual circumstances on prisoners.

It is as outrageous as the exorbitant fees on money transfers to prisoners, and the excessively high cost of prison collect telephone calls.

It’s not a bad idea and it could help families keep in touch with prisoners but it seems that it is being abused. It is wrong to make this a substitute for face to face visits and it is wrong to make a profit from it.

How about the profits go to the victims of the crime…

Otherwise, for-profit prison services should be setting off red alarms…

“Otherwise, for-profit prison services should be setting off red alarms…”

This is America. We don’t want anything that somebody can’t make a buck off of.

for-profit prison services should be setting off red alarms…

They are, in my book; as is the outsourcing of such things as traffic enforcement; ticket collection; city debt management; Social Security administration; the list goes on…

If there’s a buck to be made, let’s sell off parts of our government to do it.

They pay inmates pennies for their work, and charge them plenty for simple phone calls already. It is shamefully taking advantage of these people and their families.

I really can’t see that the prisons should be making money off prisoner’s video chats with family. Break even, yes. Perhaps the families could have a fund raiser and buy the equipment for the prison out-right. Even if you call it a toll, once the early-use prisoners have paid for the system, it should be free or very low cost for all.

I fail to see why it should even be a break even thing. Prisons, like any other municipal service, should be beyond such concerns.

“Municipal services or city services refer to basic services that residents of a city expect the city government to provide in exchange for the taxes which citizens pay.”

Prisons are not a municipal service.
Regardless, if my local sewer, water, trash, recycling, etc. ‘user fees’ are any indication, my municipality appears to be trying to break even.

Why would we provide prisoners with a service for free that non-prisoners are required to pay for?

There are so many ways that the justice system are milking the poor right now. Did you know that in some States defendants now have to PAY for their public defenders? And they can go back to prison once they’re out if they don’t pay for them.

To me, this is another way to wrench money out of the people who can least afford it.

In 2013, Ferguson, [Mo.] with a population of about 21,000, had the highest number of arrest warrants — often served by municipal courts when someone fails to appear in court — in the state relative to its size: 1,500 warrants per 1,000 people.

Also, @keobooks, this will interest you:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

@ibstubro

You knew full and well what I meant, but let’s say “taxpayer-funded endeavor” or “public service” instead. Roads, police, fire departments, etc, are taxpayer funded and you’re not charged for them. They certainly aren’t ran with the intention of breaking even. Is water and sewer taxpayer funded or are they funded through fees? Garbage pickup varies from municipality to municipality. In my city garbage pick-up certainly is not public or taxpayer funded, but rather is a private enterprise with several private firms competing in the area for people’s business.

If it’s a for-pay service, instead of charging the inmates, who have no money, or their families, who are disproportionately poor, we should charge the taxpaying citizens. We’re paying to keep these people off the street and away from us. We’re paying to have them rehabilitated so they have a chance of becoming tax paying citizens as well.

@keobooks and alas, it seems, we’re paying to enhance the bottom line of private prison companies.

“Roads, police, fire departments, etc, are taxpayer funded”, and, as a taxpayer, I pay for them, @Darth_Algar. As my wealth increases, so does my contribution, yet the benefits are equal to everyone.

How do pay-per-view video prison chats benefit the common good? I can’t video chat, as I’m ineligible for high speed internet. Why would I pay for someone else to have the privilege?
More importantly, where do you draw the line, if taxpayers are footing the bill for ‘extras’? I’m sure the privately funded prisons are willing to build theaters if the taxpayers are willing to pay $15 a head for the prisoners admission.

Punishment vs rehab debate, @keobooks.

@ibstubro ”“Roads, police, fire departments, etc, are taxpayer funded”, and, as a taxpayer, I pay for them, @Darth_Algar. As my wealth increases, so does my contribution, yet the benefits are equal to everyone.”

Yes, that’s the cost of living in a stable, wealthy society.

*“How do pay-per-view video prison chats benefit the common good? I can’t video chat, as I’m ineligible for high speed internet. Why would I pay for someone else to have the privilege?
More importantly, where do you draw the line, if taxpayers are footing the bill for ‘extras’? I’m sure the privately funded prisons are willing to build theaters if the taxpayers are willing to pay $15 a head for the prisoners admission.”*

It’s part of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation cuts down on recidivism. Less recidivism benefits society. Sure we could treat inmates like animals and make prisons as harsh as possible. The only thing that accomplishes, however, is to turn people into animals. Increasingly violent animals. When we release our inmates back into society do we want rehabbed people who feel hopeful and want to become productive members of society? Or do we want violent animals?

Don’t mistake me, I’m not saying inmates should be entitled to video chats or anything like that. But if they’re going to be available in the prisons they should be incentivized, not monetized. Present them as a reward for good behavior, not as a commodity to be sold to people who cannot afford it and and have little to no option otherwise.

I firmly believe:
“Once video visitation systems are in place, most jails eliminate in-person family visits, securing a captive market for private firms.”
is just plain wrong. Nothing can or should eliminate in-person family visits.

That said, I don’t think $5 for 20 minutes is onerous, given that inmates are required to buy other luxuries like candy and cigarettes. I can even see setting up a ‘hardship loophole’ for inmates very far from family that is handicapped or destitute.
$29.95 for 20 minutes is bullshit, and a lawsuit waiting to happen if they eliminate in-person visits.

I think the problem is the elimination of in-person family visits. Why are they such a burden on the jail? Or is this entirely profit-driven?

Phone calls cost money, too… so I don’t need video chatting to be free. But pick one – either in-person visits or free phone/video chats.

I can get behind that, @Cupcake.

Yeah, it’s the FORCING people to use video chats that I don’t like. I know people say they aren’t prisoners and they don’t have free video chat, but you also get to see your friends and family in person free whenever you want. I don’t see why these prisons would have to get rid of in person visits except to money grub.

There’s no substitute for in-person visits, even if you never say a word.