No abstract

Using the 2004 Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities, we examine the association between parenthood and distress and anger among the currently incarcerated. We show how variations in the parenting experience-such as amount of child contact-influence the mental health of incarcerated parents and how these relationships vary by gender. Our analysis indicates that parents who are incarcerated are significantly more distressed and are angrier than incarcerated nonparents. Mothers of children below 16 years of age are more distressed than other inmates. Mothers, but not fathers, report more anger than nonparent inmates. Distress among incarcerated parents is associated with child living arrangements and with frequency of phone, mail contact, and visits from children. Both mothers and fathers whose children are in foster care are significantly more distressed and report more anger than other parents. Results are discussed in terms of implications for policies and programming for incarcerated parents.

Despite a recent decrease in the U.S. prison population, the proportion of offenders who might classify as elderly has increased exponentially during the same period—the likes of which have created new challenges for administrators tasked with the supervision of, and provision of resources to, this demographic. We review the current literature regarding functionality assessments for elderly inmates to highlight the difficulty associated with using existing instruments that are not specifically designed for the prison setting. We further argue that current efforts to identify elderly inmates are lacking, resulting in the potential misclassification of an already vulnerable group. We propose that future functionality assessments within correctional facilities incorporate a number of age-related factors that focus less on chronological age and more on the mental, physical, and social aging processes of incarcerated individuals.

Background Since Braithwaite advanced reintegrative shaming theory about 25 years ago, the theory has almost invariably been retested only in relation to predatory offending. Few studies have tested the relevance of the theory for non‐predatory offending. Aim This study aims to explore the utility of reintegrative shaming theory in explaining non‐predatory crimes. Our main research question was: is acknowledgement of shame apportioned by others associated with reduction in non‐predatory offending? Methods We used zero‐inflated negative binomial modelling to analyse data from a national, longitudinal, population‐based study of 1,726 adolescents. Results Overall, peer shame acknowledgement at age 18–21 was a significant predictor of no non‐predatory offending at ages 21–27. Contrary to our expectation, however, similar recognition and incorporation of parental shame was not related to absence of such offending. Implications Our findings add further weight to the validity of reintegrative shaming theory, showing its broader value explaining criminal behaviour—and desistance from it—beyond the original model.

No abstract