Ankle Monitors: A Viable Prison Alternative In Certain Cases

Ankle monitors are often used as an alternative to traditional imprisonment, allowing individuals to serve their sentences while remaining in the community. They are typically used for people on probation or parole or those awaiting trial. Ankle monitors are also used for people who have been convicted of a crime but are considered low-risk and not a danger to the community. During the COVID-19 pandemic, some jurisdictions turned to electronic monitoring as an alternative to incarceration to slow the spread of the disease.

Ankle monitors are typically GPS tracking systems that record the location of the wearer. They are often promoted as a more humane alternative to incarceration, as they allow people to live at home and move about more freely. However, some people view ankle monitors as another form of incarceration due to the restrictive rules and regulations that come with wearing one. Additionally, individuals may have to pay for the cost of the monitor, which can be a financial burden, especially for those who cannot afford it.

Ankle monitors are used for those on probation, parole, or awaiting trial

Ankle monitors are often used as an alternative to traditional imprisonment, allowing individuals to serve their sentences while remaining in the community. They are typically used for people on probation or parole, or those awaiting trial. They can also be used for individuals convicted of a crime who are considered low-risk and not a danger to the community.

Ankle monitors use GPS technology to track an individual's movements and location. They are often seen as a more humane alternative to jail, as they allow people to maintain their jobs and support their families. This can make it easier for them to reintegrate into society once their sentences are completed.

However, ankle monitors are not without their disadvantages. They can be uncomfortable to wear and can cause skin irritation. Individuals with ankle monitors are also subject to strict rules and regulations, and any violation of these rules can result in additional penalties or even imprisonment.

In addition, ankle monitors can be expensive, with private companies charging defendants hundreds of dollars a month to wear the devices. This can place a significant financial burden on those who are already struggling economically.

Despite these concerns, ankle monitors are becoming a more common form of punishment for individuals convicted of a crime. They offer criminal defense counsel an extra option and allow judges flexibility in their sentencing.

They are a more affordable option than traditional imprisonment

Ankle monitors are often used as an alternative to traditional imprisonment, allowing individuals to serve their sentences while remaining in the community. They are less expensive than keeping someone in jail or prison, and they allow individuals to maintain their jobs and support their families. This makes it easier for them to reintegrate into society once their sentences are completed.

The cost of keeping people in jails and prisons in the United States has increased significantly over the years, reaching $87 billion in 2015, up from $19 billion in 1980. As a result, legislators have embraced ankle monitors as an enlightened and more affordable alternative. This is especially true in cash-strapped municipalities with large populations of people awaiting trial, such as St. Louis.

However, it is important to note that ankle monitors are not always the best choice. They can be uncomfortable to wear and can cause skin irritation. Additionally, individuals with ankle monitors are often subject to strict rules and regulations, and any violation of these rules can result in additional penalties or even traditional imprisonment.

Furthermore, private companies that provide ankle monitoring services often charge defendants hundreds of dollars a month to wear the devices. If people cannot pay, they may end up behind bars. This has led to criticism that ankle monitors are a form of "digital jail" or "e-carceration", where people are trapped in a system of surveillance and debt.

They can cause skin irritation and discomfort

Ankle monitors are often touted as a humane alternative to incarceration, but they can cause significant discomfort and skin irritation. While most models are designed to be lightweight and adjustable, the constant presence of the device can lead to chafing and skin irritation, especially during prolonged use. This discomfort can be mitigated through regular maintenance, such as cleaning the device and the skin beneath it, but it may still pose challenges for those subjected to this form of surveillance.

The physical discomfort caused by ankle monitors is just one aspect of the broader harm they can inflict. The stigma associated with wearing an ankle monitor can lead to social isolation and stress, exacerbating mental health issues such as depression and anxiety. Furthermore, the fees associated with these devices can be exorbitant, ranging from $3 to $35 per day, placing a significant financial burden on individuals and families already struggling with the economic fallout of incarceration.

In addition, ankle monitors can severely restrict the wearer's movement, limiting their ability to work, attend school, or engage in social activities. The constant surveillance and stringent restrictions can make it difficult for individuals to reintegrate into society and may even hinder their rehabilitation process. The threat of returning to prison for minor technical violations or false alarms looms large, perpetuating a cycle of punishment and control.

While ankle monitors are promoted as a progressive alternative to traditional incarceration, they often fall short of their intended purpose. The physical discomfort, social stigma, financial burden, and restrictions on movement associated with these devices can cause significant harm to those subjected to them. It is crucial to recognize the potential drawbacks of ankle monitors and explore less restrictive alternatives that prioritize fairness, effectiveness, and respect for individual liberties.

They are often used as an alternative to imprisonment during pandemics

During the COVID-19 pandemic, prisons and jails became hotspots for outbreaks. As a result, some jurisdictions began to look for alternatives to incarceration, turning to electronic monitoring as a solution. Electronic ankle monitors are devices that track an individual's movements and location using GPS technology. They are worn around the ankle and are often used as an alternative to traditional imprisonment, allowing individuals to serve their sentences while remaining in the community.

The use of ankle monitors as an alternative to imprisonment has both advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that they are less expensive than keeping an individual in jail or prison, and they allow individuals to maintain their jobs and support their families. This can make it easier for them to reintegrate into society once their sentences are completed. Additionally, ankle monitors can be used for individuals who are on probation or parole or for those awaiting trial, providing criminal defense counsel with an extra option.

However, there are also several disadvantages to using ankle monitors as an alternative to imprisonment. Firstly, they can be uncomfortable to wear and can cause skin irritation. Secondly, individuals with ankle monitors are often subject to strict rules and regulations, and any violation of these rules can result in additional penalties or even traditional imprisonment. For example, failure to keep the device charged or charged for a particular amount of time could land a person back in jail. The rules are often vague and open to interpretation, making it easy for individuals to inadvertently violate them.

Another disadvantage is the cost associated with ankle monitors. In many jurisdictions, individuals are required to pay expensive fees for the surveillance devices, which can add up to hundreds of dollars per month. This can be a significant financial burden, especially for those who are already struggling financially. Furthermore, the private companies that provide the ankle monitors profit from their use, raising concerns about the role of for-profit companies in the criminal justice system.

Overall, while ankle monitors can provide an alternative to imprisonment during pandemics, it is important to carefully consider the advantages and disadvantages of their use. They may be suitable for some individuals, but they should not be seen as a replacement for traditional imprisonment in all cases. The offender's risk of recidivism and the nature of the crime must be taken into account when making this decision.

They can lead to further punishment for minor violations

Ankle monitors are often used as an alternative to traditional incarceration, allowing individuals to be punished without taking up space in an overcrowded jail system. However, they can lead to further punishment for minor violations.

Ankle monitors are usually locked into place to allow for ongoing, accurate monitoring, and some units have built-in sensors that notify authorities if users attempt to remove or tamper with them. This means that even attempting to adjust the monitor for comfort can be seen as tampering and result in a violation. For example, one person shared that they were accused of tampering with their device when they wrapped a sock around their ankle to alleviate the pain of the tight strap.

In addition to the constant threat of being sent back to prison, users of ankle monitors face a host of restrictions and rules that can be difficult to navigate. Any violation of these rules can result in further punishment. For instance, there are often strict requirements for charging the device, and failure to keep it charged can result in a violation. Travelling outside of the permitted area, even accidentally, is also a violation and can lead to further punishment.

The cost of the ankle monitor is typically the responsibility of the wearer, and failure to pay can result in a return to jail. This can create a cycle of debt and incarceration, particularly for those who are already financially disadvantaged.

The use of ankle monitors has been criticised for exacerbating systemic inequities along lines of race, class, and disability. For example, studies have shown that Black people are two times more likely than white people to be electronically monitored.

In conclusion, while ankle monitors are promoted as a humane alternative to jail, they can lead to further punishment for minor violations, creating a system of "e-carceration" that disproportionately impacts marginalised communities.

Frequently asked questions