“Bodies in the Building”: Incarceration’s Afterlife in a Reentry Housing Facility

Purser, Gretchen; Hamlin, Madeleine

doi:10.1086/719858

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among nonmovers, romantic partner incarceration prolongs stays in shared homes by eroding women's finances and generating uncertainties around sentencing and the future of their relationship. This finding extends research on the consequences of incarceration for housing, most of which examines formerly incarcerated individuals themselves (Miller, 2021; Purser & Hamlin, 2022; Western, 2018), by reinforcing that housing insecurity is a central way that coresident romantic partners experience incarceration‐related harms. Our reliance on narrative information provides a more nuanced accounting of housing insecurity after partner incarceration than available in prior survey research (Geller & Franklin, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…Another study finds partner incarceration is negatively associated with homeownership (Turney & Schneider, 2016). These two studies suggest partner incarceration creates substantial housing difficulties, aligned with research on barriers formerly incarcerated people face during the re-entry period (Harding et al, 2013;Miller, 2021;Purser & Hamlin, 2022), but stop short of considering how women manage housing insecurity after partner incarceration and the trade-offs they encounter at home.…”

Section: Housing Insecurity As a Symbiotic Harm Of Incarcerationmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Housing security, and corresponding household living arrangements, are important for both adult and child wellbeing (e.g., Harvey, 2020; Swope & Hernández, 2019). Most research on the housing repercussions of incarceration examines how formerly incarcerated people find homes during the reentry period (Harding et al, 2013; Miller, 2021; Purser & Hamlin, 2022) yet does not consider housing challenges endured by family members of incarcerated people. Co‐resident romantic partners are more likely to endure housing insecurity after partner incarceration (Geller & Franklin, 2014; Western, 2018), but this work largely does not examine how women manage housing insecurity or the consequences of these management strategies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

“We'll make it work”: Navigating surveilled living arrangements after romantic partner incarceration

Schmidt,

Turney,

Monreal

2024

J of Marriage and Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveWe use the case of housing insecurity to examine how romantic partner incarceration results in increased and prolonged surveillance of women at home.BackgroundRomantic partner incarceration prompts surveillance from the criminal legal system while simultaneously eroding women's finances, health, and family relationships. Less is known about how these symbiotic harms of romantic partner incarceration enable surveillance beyond the criminal legal system.MethodWe use longitudinal interviews with 35 (previously coresident) romantic partners of incarcerated men, showing how incarceration prompts unwanted moves for partners, how women manage housing insecurity following partner incarceration, and how they become embedded into living arrangements where they are monitored, evaluated, and controlled.ResultsWe identify three primary findings. First, women experiencing housing insecurity after romantic partner incarceration relied heavily on their social ties (and, to a lesser extent, institutional housing providers) while enduring stressful and prolonged housing searches. Second, the homes that women move into expose them to increased surveillance. Women encounter domestic, caregiving, romantic, and financial surveillance. Romantic partner incarceration prompts large changes in surveillance among women who left independent homes, moderate changes in surveillance among women who left comparatively desirable doubled‐up homes, and prolonged surveillance among nonmovers. Finally, women respond to surveillance by monitoring burdens on hosts and reframing stays in shared homes as temporary.ConclusionTaken together, these findings extend prior research on the symbiotic harms of romantic partner incarceration, how women attached to incarcerated men experience surveillance, and how doubled‐up families sustain shared homes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Housing Insecurity As a Symbiotic Harm Of Incarcerationmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“We'll make it work”: Navigating surveilled living arrangements after romantic partner incarceration

Schmidt,

Turney,

Monreal

2024

J of Marriage and Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“That Shit Ain’t Helping Nobody”: Narratives of Exclusion and Individualism Among Criminalized Men

Couloute,

Talley

2024

Victims & Offenders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Towards a Retributive Concept of Re-entry

Dagan,

Cnaan

2024

The British Journal of Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retributive justice is the preferred penal theory in many countries, especially for serious offences, and is a predominant justification for imprisonment. Retributivists, however, have little to say regarding the state’s role towards returning citizens after release from prison. In reality, paroled individuals struggle with continuing surveillance, poverty, stigma and other significant barriers to housing, employment and health. Thus, rates of recidivism are high. Re-entry services can help, but they are few. Without a proper understanding of the implications of the retributive model, advocates for re-entry services struggle to gain public support or the attention of policy-makers. Recognising that retributivism is not a monolithic theory, and with a focus on the parole period, we argue that key sub-streams of retributivism offer a valuable support for understanding public responsibility for re-entry services. To that end, we offer a conceptual understanding of the core retributive principles that call upon governments to actively assist parolees. We do so by connecting re-entry to the retributive notions of unfair advantage, penal communication and moral reform. Finally, we emphasise two, often neglected, re-entry programmes that fit the core retributive principles and highlight implications for the parole process.

show abstract

“Bodies in the Building”: Incarceration’s Afterlife in a Reentry Housing Facility

Cited by 4 publications

References 36 publications

“We'll make it work”: Navigating surveilled living arrangements after romantic partner incarceration

“We'll make it work”: Navigating surveilled living arrangements after romantic partner incarceration

“That Shit Ain’t Helping Nobody”: Narratives of Exclusion and Individualism Among Criminalized Men

Towards a Retributive Concept of Re-entry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About