Is it possible to turn an old prison system, heavily based on static security, into a modern system of detention houses, where we include the voice of those living there? In Norway, people in detention don’t lose their civil rights apart from their liberty. We have the same rights as any other citizen. However, do we have the same democratic right to be involved in decisions that affect our lives?

The importance of user participation

User participation and emphasis on experience-based knowledge in decision-making is an important democratic principle and contributes to developing and improving the services. Hotel guests have been asked for decades to fill in the guest satisfaction sheet at the end of their stay, thus providing crucial information to the hotel management. User participation is also based on ethical principles about the individual’s autonomy, freedom, and the right to make decisions about things that impact their own life and health. This is increasingly valued in the medical sector.

However, when are formerly incarcerated people invited to comment on their stay? Prisons are not known for encouraging feedback on their services at the end of people’s stay. When developing new ideas or projects within the prison system, there is no tendency to include the people who are really affected by the new system. Are we afraid to be too soft with persons who have committed crimes? Do we expect that the punishment will have better results by excluding the people with lived experience? We don’t think so.

We think differently at RESCALED, a European movement with national offices in the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, Portugal, Norway, Germany and Belgium, and a European Office also based in Brussels. RESCALED advocates for small-scale, differentiated and community-integrated detention houses. When creating detention houses for the future, listening and using the voices of incarcerated people is essential. At Wayback, the Norwegian office of RESCALED, we are six employees with lived experience. We are peaceful co-workers, despite the fact that some of us have violence on our criminal record. There is no excuse for violence, but we know that certain factors can initiate violence. By talking to people in detention and elaborating on the findings, we are able to reduce violence and conflicts in detention.

Exploring the opportunities that we get by involving incarcerated people when developing detention houses, as well as the routines we need to run them, is central to the INSPIRE, an Erasmus+ financed project. People with lived experience are included in every step we take, resulting in valuable input on different aspects of a detention house. For example, the importance of personal relationships between people employed and incarcerated in a detention house in order to guarantee everyone’s safety in the detention house.

Let’s take this a step further. Education or work? The RESCALED detention houses are differentiated, meaning that some may focus more on education than others. How about giving people in detention the choice of which detention house they want to stay in? In doing so, the person becomes responsible for making the right decision. Including their voice, comes with a certain degree of autonomy, which is now too often taken away from incarcerated people, together with their liberty.

Systemic change and cost-efficiency

The value of the user voice is not limited to the individual’s autonomy, freedom, and the right to make decisions about things that affect their own life and health. The user voice can also inform fundamental management decisions and systemic change. In Norway, we are facing budget cuts in the justice system every year. The state budget is distributed to the different ministries, yet these ministries fail to collaborate efficiently, as shown by the National Audit Office’s report.

Formerly incarcerated people have contributed to the report. In my opinion, the report would not have been possible without them. They have gained knowledge and experience that is valuable to the prison service. With closer co-operation, we firmly believe that we will find valuable ways of cutting costs. For instance, it is the total cost of a person across the public sector that needs to be considered, not only the cost of the person in the justice system. Formerly incarcerated people are well-placed to shed light on their experienced needs and the related expenses across different ministries.

Following a similar reasoning, RESCALED proposes to integrate all small-scale detention houses in the local community, which will significantly reduce the direct and indirect costs for the justice system. The individual is being integrated in one’s own community and can already establish a relation with the local services.

Distance from one’s own experience

Incarcerated persons and formerly incarcerated persons, what’s the difference between these two groups? I have learned that while you are incarcerated, you may have a good overview of what works and what does not, but you have a lot of time to look at every detail that is wrong. This overview is very closely linked to one’s personal experience. There is a lot of useful information coming from those who are incarcerated. We would like to encourage them to talk about what is good and what from the system we want to keep. A formerly incarcerated person will have more distance from one’s own experience, which is important to reflect upon different opinions and proposals. Perhaps even more importantly, some of us risk retraumatisation, and we know that distance to our past helps us overcome some of these obstacles.