Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later, and so it is often argued that these are the best people to talk to teenagers about the dangers of committing a crime. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later, and so it is often argued that these are the best people to talk to teenagers about the dangers of committing a crime. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Ideas about the role former prisoners might play in dissuading young people from crime have been debated and discussed in several societies and countries for decades. Some see it as the best practice, while others find it dangerous or ineffective. People who have experienced the negative and often severe consequences of wrongdoing should be the ones to warn children and teenagers. It may not seem so on the surface, but depending on ex-offenders might cause confusion or send a wrong message. On the other hand, can we entrust issues like this to one type of professional? Do we not need a comprehensive approach? Nevertheless, one should ask who is in a better position to discuss the perils of crime than the people who have been there themselves?

Of course, there are former convicts who, after spending a few months or years in a correctional facility, choose to reform and lead normal lives. They work, study, earn money, start a family and become worthy members of their communities. They share these stories, and it is safe to say they have their effect on audiences. The emotional impact of these stories is often immediate, and that is not a coincidence. Their life experiences are often based on a profound sense of regret, realisation and inner change, making them heartfelt. For these people, crime is not a theoretical concept or an abstract idea to warn teenagers about; it is a personal experience they have to deal with. However, their efforts do not end with telling their life story. They can also provide an objective and practical view of what life inside a correctional facility is, what it is like to lose one’s freedom, be isolated, and miss out on several important social opportunities due to having a criminal record.

Teenagers may be sceptical and more or less unapproachable when it comes to making them listen to certain topics. It is a part of growing up, and nothing a parent or a teacher can say will change that. Teenagers are unlikely to take to heart well-meaning advice from a teacher, a parent or even a policeman. Teenagers can interpret these warnings as fake, as adults exaggerating the reality, or even as adults being afraid of them. However, the former prisoners are different; their voice is genuine, and they have been through it all. People who had to face the negative consequences of their deeds are likely to tell it with a cold honesty. They can easily explain how one stupid or rash move changed their lives for several years, which may be relatable and, in some cases, frightening. The brutal honesty of these stories may be the very reason teenagers listen more attentively and find former offenders and their lives more interesting than what a teacher or a parent has to say on the subject. In many cases, young people are much more interested in narratives rather than formal speeches on morality, rules, and responsibilities.

Relying on former prisoners to educate our children and teenagers about the consequences of crime, however, raises several concerns and difficulties. First of all, there is a consistency problem. In other words, not every ex-prisoner reformed their life for the better; some may have problems with substance abuse, addiction, criminal environment, and, oftentimes, unstable personal relationships. Asking the people who are still fighting inner demons to share their experience with teenagers is likely to cause more harm. There is also a risk that a few teenagers in the audience will start admiring or idolising certain parts of the past of a speaker, if his or her story had a romantic or an action-packed element, unintentionally portraying criminal activities as a glamorous or exciting activity, which would not be the goal of these talks.

There is another issue of how a society looks if its children are to be educated about crime by its criminals? Teenagers might get curious as to why teachers, counsellors, psychologists, social workers or law-enforcement representatives are not being considered. These people have something to offer as well, as they can provide young people with a broader and more structured look at the reasons for certain types of crime. For example, well-trained counsellors may explain how social pressure is formed, how an inability to properly regulate one’s emotions and impulses can lead to harmful behaviour, and how to prevent them early. Police officers, for example, may be of help to make things legally explicit. Community leaders may be of help, as they know their areas of expertise best and can discuss opportunities, responsibility, and discipline. The last thing to do is to exclude any of them.

Agreeing with the aforementioned issues does not diminish the importance of reformed former prisoners. Their experiences cannot be taught in a classroom or learned from afar. People who were in the criminal justice system have seen things that others have only read about in books. This can help them discuss the issue not only as a social one, but as a personal path through various mistakes, opportunities and consequences, and personal recovery. Their role in the life of a young person, in my opinion, is best described as complementary to other educators’ experiences and advice. The life lessons from these types of speakers can be made more meaningful by coupling them with other perspectives, such as law enforcement, community work, or professional counselling, but they are not replaceable.

Physics Wallah offers multiple online IELTS courses for all students. Follow the IELTS pages to better prepare for the exam.