This year, we launched a new research project titled, “Restorative Justice and Reentry: Nurturing Community Care Through Anti-Carceral Organizations,” which explores how a peer-led and restorative justice approach can support the reentry process for formerly incarcerated individuals. The project is collaborative effort with the Transformational Prison Project (TPP) and partially funded by the Tisch College Community Research Center Seed Grant. Our first step was conducting a comprehensive review of the reentry literature. To assist with this work, we brought on Shaheed Abdullah, a recent graduate from Tufts University. In addition to contributing his research skills, Shaheed was navigating his own reentry process as the project began. In this interview, he and I discuss how the knowledge gained through lived experience of reentry is a crucial and often overlooked aspect of research in this field.
B. Arneson: This research holds deep personal significance for both of us, doesn’t it, Shaheed? For me, the connection is rooted in my own family’s experience—two of my brothers have faced immense challenges during the reentry process, often finding themselves caught in a cycle of incarceration. As both a researcher and their advocate, I am committed to understanding how I can better support them. You also have a personal stake in this work, as you are currently navigating the reentry process yourself. Could you share with us the length of your incarceration and your experiences with the cycle between reentry and imprisonment?
Shaheed Abdullah: I have over 30 years of experience with incarceration, which reflects a pattern of recidivism. My personal journey began in a home with alcoholic parents, and my father was addicted to drugs. Their addiction problems led our lives to spiral out of control, and although we owned a house, we were often financially strained, struggling to pay the mortgage and provide basic necessities like food and clothing.
In the 1980s, when I was growing up, my father’s drug use escalated, and I began to take to the streets, associating with a group of friends in my neighborhood. I started selling drugs, initially marijuana, before moving on to cocaine. Eventually, I became addicted to crack cocaine and resorted to committing violent robberies to support my habit. This behavior led to a conviction and a 15-year sentence when I was just 20 years old. I served about 18 months before being granted parole.
During that time, I had aspirations of going to college. I was still young and had dreams of playing football and becoming an architect because I enjoyed drawing. However, I lacked the necessary guidance and support in those areas. While there may have been one or two people who tried to help, I often pushed them away, and they eventually gave up on me or allowed me to continue down my destructive path.
Consequently, I fell back into selling drugs and committing violent crimes, resulting in additional sentences. I struggled with frequent parole violations, primarily because I failed to meet with my parole officer. This cycle continued until I was sentenced again for a violent crime and ultimately classified as a habitual offender, leading to a lengthy prison term.
Reflecting on my life, I realize that I spent my 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s largely incarcerated, with only a few years spent outside. While there were moments when I genuinely tried to stay out, the longest I managed was 18 months at a time.
B. Arneson: You are currently 57 years old, correct? That means you have spent a significant portion of your life incarcerated.
Shaheed Abdullah: Yes, that is correct.
B. Arneson: As a family member, I have been profoundly shocked by the strictness of parole and probation regulations. Witnessing the extent of commitment required—such as the necessity to frequently meet with your parole officer, submit to urine tests, and ensure that ankle monitors are functioning and charged—has been eye-opening.
I find these rules and requirements to be utterly unreasonable. It’s hard to see how anyone can avoid violations under such strict conditions. It’s understandable that, despite their best efforts to stay out of prison, individuals often return to past behaviors, like drug dealing, especially when they lack access to vital resources and support.
How long has it been since you were released from MCI-Concord[i]?
I have been out for six months, and this time has been the most productive of my life. I earned my bachelor’s degree while incarcerated, which has really helped my reentry. As I prepared for my release, I realized I had a strong support system in place. Through the Tufts University Prison Initiative of Tisch College (TUPIT), I found a community that has been essential during this process. Earning my degree gave me confidence and hope, along with valuable skills in critical thinking and analysis that I use every day. These skills have helped me navigate challenges, especially when dealing with housing and employment issues that can be significant obstacles during reentry.
B. Arneson: We will address the obstacles you have encountered later in the interview, but for now, could you share your experience of being hired as a researcher while actively navigating your own reentry process?
When I first started the project with the World Peace Foundation, reading various articles on other people’s reentry experiences helped me identify the issues I was facing. This understanding allowed me to navigate those challenges and remain determined to overcome them. I was aware of the obstacles ahead, which ultimately prevented me from giving up. Although I occasionally felt frustrated and considered quitting, I would regroup and try again.
For instance, I applied for numerous jobs, and while many employers expressed interest, I did not receive an offer letter for months. Similarly, my search for housing has been challenging; I encountered numerous realtors, paid fees, and still have not secured an apartment, which has been incredibly frustrating. Despite these setbacks, I remain hopeful that something will come through.
Engaging in this research has been beneficial, as it has provided valuable insights and a support network from people like you and others in the community. Knowing that others care about my well-being and success has been crucial in keeping me motivated. This involvement has not only helped normalize my experience but has also reinforced my determination to persevere.
Additionally, this experience has empowered me to advocate for the needs of young people who have been incarcerated. I believe restorative justice practices are essential, and I feel that those of us who have experienced incarceration firsthand can effectively guide them through the challenges they face. We can offer the support and understanding that may be lacking from those who haven’t shared similar experiences.
B. Arneson: So, what I’m hearing, Shaheed, is that your involvement in this research has not only supported your own reentry process but has also enhanced your ability to advocate for others who are formerly incarcerated. That aligns with research indicating that lived experience as a formerly incarcerated individual is a key factor in the effectiveness of peer mentoring.[ii]
Shaheed Abdullah: Yes, I now see myself more as an advocate, especially since I’ve gained the understanding and skills to effectively frame these issues.
B. Arneson: Have you noticed any differences in your current reentry experience compared to your previous ones?
Shaheed Abdullah: What has been notably different this time is the emphasis on education and the substantial support I’ve received from the community, family, and friends. In the past, my family dynamics were quite challenging. During my previous incarcerations, I often went two to three years without hearing from any of them—not even a letter. As a result, when I was released, I had no idea where they were, leaving me with little hope or a safety net to fall back on. With no family support or a stable place to gather my thoughts, I found myself on the streets. My mindset during those times was that I would just complete my sentence and return to my previous lifestyle of selling drugs.
This situation is common for many individuals who lack family or community support. The absence of a stable support system can lead them to believe they can easily revert to their old ways and evade consequences. However, it is precisely in these moments that the justice system often intervenes, sending them back to incarceration without addressing the underlying issues that contribute to their struggles upon release.
Many individuals are released with no job prospects or gainful employment to support themselves, which makes it nearly impossible to secure stable housing, food, or healthcare. Without adequate resources and community support, the existing reentry programs often fall short. The system perpetuates a cycle of recidivism, where young people are caught in a trap, returning to old lifestyles without any meaningful support, while more resources are funneled into mass incarceration.
B. Arneson: Would you say there are now more resources available for individuals navigating the reentry process?
That’s hard to say. I tend to be somewhat skeptical about the current landscape. In Massachusetts, there are numerous reentry programs; however, I question whether they genuinely serve returning citizens as intended. Many of these programs seem to be largely driven by state funding opportunities. Organizations may bring people in, claim to provide services, and then continue to receive grant money without making a meaningful impact.
B. Arneson: There appears to be significantly more resources available for formerly incarcerated individuals reentering society in Boston compared to the Southern states where my brothers have been incarcerated. This disparity in resources raises important questions about the support systems in place across different regions.
What aspects of your research on reentry have you found particularly interesting or valuable?
Shaheed Abdullah: We often define reentering society as having access to housing, stable employment, and essential resources. However, there are individuals within society who may lack these things, even if they have never been incarcerated. So, it raises the question: are they considered part of society? This is what I reflect on when we discuss the challenges returning citizens face upon their release. For them, reentering society can be particularly difficult because they need to access housing, job opportunities, and support resources. Without these, their reintegration process can be prolonged, often taking years for some individuals.
B. Arneson: Yes, absolutely! We have read literature on this topic. It reveals that many scholars question the very concept of reentry.[iii] They argue that for some individuals, the question is not whether they are reentering society but whether they were ever truly part of it. Additionally, the high rates of recidivism indicate that many individuals are not genuinely reintegrating into their communities; instead, they are caught in a cycle of incarceration and release.
Shaheed Abdullah: The point is that many individuals never truly enter society. There are those who cycle between places like shelters and the streets, without accessing the resources or housing available in their communities. This raises the question of whether we need to develop new terminology to replace the word reentry. It often seems that people are expected to “pay their debt to society” for committing a crime, but for some, it’s about restoring what was never truly theirs to begin with. You cannot restore what someone has never had.
To effectively reintegrate these individuals, it is essential to provide resources such as stable housing, job training, and educational opportunities. If we are indeed a society that aims to prevent recidivism, this support is crucial. However, it sometimes feels as though we are not genuinely committed to this goal and may inadvertently be creating conditions that lead individuals back to prison.
B. Arneson: If we were to redirect the substantial funds currently allocated to incarceration and invest them in community resources, we would likely see significant improvements in the neighborhoods that have historically been underserved. Many communities could finally receive the adequate resources necessary to support their residents. It’s evident that certain neighborhoods face more intense policing than others, and rather than receiving the support they need, they are often subjected to cycles of punishment. By prioritizing community investment over incarceration, we could foster greater rehabilitation opportunities.
Speaking with you has been particularly enlightening, especially considering your status as a habitual offender. Your experience highlights the cyclical nature of incarceration and the struggle to feel integrated into communities that one may have never fully belonged to. Your story serves as a critical example of the systemic challenges we are discussing.
I have witnessed your struggles to secure meaningful employment that instills a sense of pride, as well as your experiences with housing discrimination. I’ve seen you take time off to meet with your parole officer while under state surveillance, and I am aware of the medical issues you’ve faced due to wearing an ankle monitor. These experiences reflect many of the challenges we have studied.
Shaheed Abdullah: Reentry can be a challenging experience, and often, individuals must navigate it alone. Those who return to prison frequently lack key support systems during this journey. This is why I believe some reentry programs miss the mark; they often prioritize a risk-and-needs-based approach.[iv]
While programs and resources designed to align individuals’ risks and needs with appropriate levels of service are invaluable, they often necessitate a significant time commitment that can overshadow the enjoyment of newfound freedom. As you noted, the routine can become overwhelming, with individuals juggling appointments with parole or probation officers, participating in reentry programs, and attending classes. Consequently, the week can pass, leaving individuals to reflect on their achievements beyond these obligations.
We need to recognize that individuals deserve to enjoy their freedom, to engage in fun and fulfilling activities that restore a sense of normalcy. Laughing, relaxing, and having moments of leisure are vital to their well-being. When individuals can make space for joy in their lives, they are more likely to approach classes and other structured activities as part of a balanced routine. This integration of enjoyment and responsibility is essential for a successful reintegration into society.
B. Arneson: Shaheed, you make an excellent point about normalization.[v] As we discussed the importance of formerly incarcerated individuals engaging in activities beyond just work—finding joy in experiences that an average person might enjoy, such as going to the theater, driving go-Karts, or enjoying a meal at IHOP[vi]—we decided to do something fun ourselves!
This led to a delightful evening at the theater with friends, followed by ice cream. It was an incredibly joyful night, allowing us to simply be together without the pressure of research or the pursuit of resources and community support. This experience highlighted a significant issue faced by individuals reentering society: the pervasive belief that they do not deserve to experience joy or happiness.
Shaheed Abdullah: For me, it provided an opportunity to have fun without the pressures of reentry. It allowed me to forget those challenges and reconnect with my humanity, experiencing genuine feelings like I did before going to prison. Prison represents the lowest point in someone’s life, and without feelings of joy or happiness, it feels like being at the bottom again. Engaging in joyful experiences helps transform a person, addressing the loss caused by trauma and incarceration.
B. Arneson: Are there any aspects of your personal reentry experience that were absent from the literature on the subject?
Shaheed Abdullah: Navigating intimate relationships and building connections can be particularly challenging. Additionally, searching for an apartment presents its own difficulties. Personally, I faced numerous obstacles while looking for a studio, including various fees and the complexities of state assistance in Massachusetts. It’s not that housing resources aren’t available; rather, they can complicate the process of securing housing. Lastly, age seems to affect the level of support I have received. It seems like people are often more willing to help younger individuals with past system involvement than older individuals.
B. Arneson: That makes a lot of sense. There seems to be an assumption that after long periods of incarceration, people will seamlessly reintegrate into society, but that’s rarely the case. Building connections with others can be extremely challenging, especially for those who have been in solitary confinement.
Lastly, Shaheed, do you believe it’s crucial for system-impacted researchers to lead reentry research efforts?
Shaheed Abdullah: Yes, I believe it is essential. We are the true experts in reentry. Those who have not experienced it firsthand often claim to speak for us, but they cannot truly understand the trauma and experiences we endure. Our minds, hearts, bodies, and families have navigated challenges that are difficult to articulate. In many ways, it feels like our experiences are being extracted without genuine understanding. It’s akin to white individuals writing about Black experiences; without that lived experience, true comprehension is impossible. You know, when I was growing up, I used to read these books that were written by slaves. The slaves would speak in broken English, and I often wondered why. These were the worlds that were spoken by those slaves in their own language, conveyed in the way that made you feel what they were going through or what they had experienced. It is the same with incarcerated people telling their own story. Sometimes, we strive for everything to be grammatically correct or academically sound, but that doesn’t reflect the reality of how the story was lived.
[i] MCI-Concord was a medium-security prison that officially closed its operations on June 30, 2024.
[ii] Matthews, E. (2021). Peer-focused prison reentry programs: Which peer characteristics matter most? Incarceration, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/26326663211019958
[iii] Wacquant, L. Prisoner reentry as myth and ceremony. Dialect Anthropol 34, 605–620 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-010-9215-5
[iv] The risk-and-needs responsivity model disproportionately emphasizes compliance with prosocial behavior, prioritizing conformity to socially accepted norms rather than focusing on healing and personal growth. This approach tends to overlook the broader societal context and the harms that come with it. Moffat (2012) argues that marginalized individuals face systemic factors that distort their risk scores, resulting in harsher custodial sentences and heightened vulnerability to breaches, surveillance, and further criminalization. Those deemed high-risk are subjected to increased surveillance and programming, framing their past criminal behavior as a condition requiring more intensive treatment (Jonson & Cullen, 2015).
Hannah-Moffat, Kelly. (2012). Actuarial Sentencing: An “Unsettled” Proposition. Justice Quarterly – JUSTICE Q. 30. 1-27. 10.1080/07418825.2012.682603.
Jonson, Cheryl & Cullen, Francis. (2015). Prisoner Reentry Programs. Crime and Justice. 44. 000-000. 10.1086/681554.
[v] Abrams, L. S., Canlione, K. C., & Washington, D. M. (2023). “I Wouldn’t Change Who I’ve Become”: Released Juvenile Lifers on Joy, Shame, and the Journey to an Integrated Self. Crime & Delinquency, 69(2), 367-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287221104045
[vi] Abrams et al. (2023) examine the fundamental emotions experienced by released juvenile lifers during their transition from imprisonment to society and how these emotions shape their sense of self. One of the standout quotes from the article comes from a 46-year-old man who spent 28 years in prison. He states:
I love pancakes. They ended up taking me to the IHOP. IHOP is the best place on earth. I have been out six months and two days now. Yep, six months and two days. November 28th to May 28th is six months. It’s like six months and a couple of days. Within those six months, I’ve been to IHOP 11 times. I been to IHOP 11 times and each of my family when they come visit me, “Where you wanna go eat?” “IHOP.” I remember last time that my family came they’re like, “We ain’t goin’ to IHOP. We’re goin’ to Red Lobster.” We went to the beach, and by the time we got back from the beach, we were eatin’ at IHOP.
