Audit of a Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy Course Within a Prison

Maroney, Monique; Luthi, Armin; Hanney, Jill; Mantell, Andrew; Johnson, Debbie; Barclay, Neil; Satterfield, Jill; Crane, Rebecca

doi:10.1089/jchc.18.09.0048

Cited by 2 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Levels of psychological acceptance increased (Malouf et al , 2017). One study further found self-perceived improvements in health and reductions in physical body complaints, such as pain (Maroney et al , 2021).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Involving both formal and informal mindfulness practices, MBCT aims to gradually increase participant self-awareness, starting with neutral content (such as bodily sensations) and working towards awareness of one’s thoughts (Segal et al , 2019). MBCT has been implemented within prisons with some success (An et al , 2019b; Maroney et al , 2021; Xu et al , 2016) and typically takes place via 8 weekly 2–2.5 h sessions and frequently involves homework, as well as a day-long retreat.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whilst the main goal may be the intended therapeutic change, the participation in prison interventions may also provide a novel opportunity for personal guidance and mental stimulation, which may be beneficial to individual well-being (Dobmeier et al , 2021). For example, within the reviewed studies, despite suicidal ideation being common in prisons, only one study permitted the inclusion of actively suicidal participants (Maroney et al , 2021). This decision could be seen as appropriate, as MIs and meditation may exceed the mental capabilities of actively suicidal and depressive individuals (Kenny and Williams, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of the literature reviewed did show promise within this domain, with the majority studying appropriate points of participant change. Only the study of Maroney et al (2021) measured subjective, general well-being which may have prevented their results from being confidently attributed to MI attendance alone (Angner, 2011). Overall, MIs have been able to indicate continued positive outcomes up to between 3 and 6 months later (Eisenbeck et al , 2016; Maroney et al , 2021; Gallego et al , 2023), somewhat mirroring previous research demonstrating continued positive outcomes years after ACT and MBCT participation in civilian groups (Kyllönen et al , 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, many prisoners show high levels of impulsivity, trait anger and antisocial cognition (Jang, 2019), as well as poor stress management skills (Nidich et al , 2016). The commonality of these traits risks the expression of mental distress as challenging behaviours (Samele et al , 2016), including self-harm, violence and suicide (Maroney et al , 2021; Webb et al , 2011). These actions pose issues regarding behaviour management in prisons as well as inmate and staff safety concerns.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Group-based mindfulness interventions in prisons: a selective critical review

Harding-White,

Mojtahedi,

Carson

2023

JFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The use of mindfulness interventions (MIs) as means to manage unwanted or undesirable affect and behaviour has increased in popularity recently. This has resulted in the trial of MIs as a means to benefit well-being within prisons, with some intention of reducing recidivism. This study aims to examine current research regarding the use of MIs within prisons. Design/methodology/approach A total of 14 studies were manually selected for review inclusion according to their determined eligibility. All studies were required to have taken place in a prison and to include an explicit mindfulness intervention, including mindfulness theory and practice. Findings Most interventions reviewed demonstrated success, particularly when tailored to the unique needs of a prison environment. Positive changes reported included improvements in participant mental health symptoms, as well as reduced stress and increased mindfulness skills. Some preliminary evidence was provided to indicate the potential longevity of some of these benefits. This review further highlighted some significant questions regarding the generalisability of the proposed suitability of MIs within prison environments including practical delivery constraints and the lack of acknowledgment of the unique challenges and circumstances faced by prisoners. Practical implications The findings of this review show positive potential for the use of MIs within prison populations, where these are well-linked to mindfulness theory and to the needs of inmates. The review also suggest that MIs should be investigated thoroughly, examining potential negative implications alongside positive changes. There needs to be further review of the role of MIs within prison populations to ensure their suitability in the custodial environment. Originality/value MIs are somewhat inflated in terms of predicted outcomes and sometimes applied to potentially unsuitable groups. A significant gap within the literature also persists regarding potentially negative implications associated with MIs, particularly within unique prison populations. Prison treatment programmes should be developed with careful consideration of unique prisoner needs in comparison to a general population.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%