What is the history of radio frequency electronic monitoring, and what were the problems of early home-bound electronic monitoring?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Using radio frequencies to track objects began in the 1920s, when the U.S. Army monitored airplanes and large ships; biologists also used this technology to track animals. The first use of using electronic monitoring in humans can be traced back to the early 1960s, when it was used to detect changes in oxygen levels, body temperature, and other vital signs. In 1964, Robert Schwitzgebel was the first to develop and patent electronic monitoring technology to record a parolee's location using a one-way transmitter. Some patients being released from mental institutions were also tracked using electronic monitoring, but the technology was still quite limited during this time.
In the mid-1970s, a two-way transmission system was developed, which led to the idea of using electronic monitoring around the ankle. A New Mexico judge saw a picture of a wrist transmitter in a 1977 Spiderman comic book and convinced a computer salesman to develop the device. The wrist device was first used in 1983 for offenders convicted of driving under the influence and white-collar crimes. When the probation officer called the house, offenders verified their whereabouts by inserting the wrist device into a receiver that sat next to the telephone. These early units were called home-based radio frequency electronic monitoring systems because they verified if the offender was at home.
There were many problems with early EM programs. First, they required that offenders have a landline telephone, something that critics argued discriminated against indigent defendants who could not afford landline service. Second, passive EM was only able to trace whether an offender was within a certain number of feet of the receiver connected to the offender's telephone. Home-bound EM systems were not able to track where offenders went once they left their homes. Third, early wrist systems were not unique to each offender, and more than one wrist system could be used on the same monitoring system. Thus, there was no way to guarantee that the probation office was communicating with the "correct" person.