Abstract:There is now a growing body of literature which is centred upon the negative outcomes that occur for many families, and by extension, children who experience the imprisonment of a father. Typically families suffer the consequences of living with stigma and financial difficulties, while children are often affected by being provided with limited information about what has happened to their incarcerated parent. These factors can combine to increase the chances of children and family members in this position devel… Show more
“…Although, these adverse experiences have been found to be ‘generic’ for relatives of offenders, the indeterminacy of the IPP sentence tends to exacerbate these. The prevalence of mental health issues experienced by the family members of IPP‐prisoners has been identified by McConnell and Raikes (2019), for example, as a common theme arising in their research. Comparing mental and emotional effects on family members of indeterminate versus determinate sentenced prisoners, the Children of Prisoners Interventions and Mitigations to Strengthen Mental Health (COPING) pan‐European study (Jones et al, 2013) concluded that these were experiencing different stress levels.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Distinct relief was experienced by prisoners and families when a determinate sentence was awarded, since it provided a release date to work toward (Jones et al, 2013). As McConnell and Raikes (2019, p. 4) have noted:this is not the case for those subject to IPPs and other indeterminate sentences and their families. They continue to experience the anxiety associated with uncertainty long after they are sentenced.…”
Background: The indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP), was created in England and Wales in 2003. After its abolition in 2012, many IPP-prisoners have become stuck in the prison system, facing considerable problems of sentence progression. The extant literature makes clear that the uncertainty and hopelessness caused by the indeterminacy of the IPP sentence are compounded by the negative impacts experienced by families and others providing support to people serving these sentences. Aims: The mental strains caused for family members by the IPP sentence were examined. Of particular interest is the role and weight of the parole process experience, and its potential mental and physiological health impact on families. Methods: This article draws on findings from two qualitative research projects conducted with families of prisoners serving the IPP sentence in England and Wales. Their experiences will be examined by reference to literature on the mental health impact of indeterminate sentences on prisoners and their families and the wider literature on the symbiotic harms of imprisonment for families. The aim was to add to this by focusing on families' experiences of cumulative stress caused by the sentence. Findings: We demonstrate that the IPP parole process exerts specific weight and mental strains on family members occupying the negative end of the stress spectrum.
“…Although, these adverse experiences have been found to be ‘generic’ for relatives of offenders, the indeterminacy of the IPP sentence tends to exacerbate these. The prevalence of mental health issues experienced by the family members of IPP‐prisoners has been identified by McConnell and Raikes (2019), for example, as a common theme arising in their research. Comparing mental and emotional effects on family members of indeterminate versus determinate sentenced prisoners, the Children of Prisoners Interventions and Mitigations to Strengthen Mental Health (COPING) pan‐European study (Jones et al, 2013) concluded that these were experiencing different stress levels.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Distinct relief was experienced by prisoners and families when a determinate sentence was awarded, since it provided a release date to work toward (Jones et al, 2013). As McConnell and Raikes (2019, p. 4) have noted:this is not the case for those subject to IPPs and other indeterminate sentences and their families. They continue to experience the anxiety associated with uncertainty long after they are sentenced.…”
Background: The indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP), was created in England and Wales in 2003. After its abolition in 2012, many IPP-prisoners have become stuck in the prison system, facing considerable problems of sentence progression. The extant literature makes clear that the uncertainty and hopelessness caused by the indeterminacy of the IPP sentence are compounded by the negative impacts experienced by families and others providing support to people serving these sentences. Aims: The mental strains caused for family members by the IPP sentence were examined. Of particular interest is the role and weight of the parole process experience, and its potential mental and physiological health impact on families. Methods: This article draws on findings from two qualitative research projects conducted with families of prisoners serving the IPP sentence in England and Wales. Their experiences will be examined by reference to literature on the mental health impact of indeterminate sentences on prisoners and their families and the wider literature on the symbiotic harms of imprisonment for families. The aim was to add to this by focusing on families' experiences of cumulative stress caused by the sentence. Findings: We demonstrate that the IPP parole process exerts specific weight and mental strains on family members occupying the negative end of the stress spectrum.
“…Almost half of these had been recalled to custody after release. These offenders often present a continued risk of offending, and are more likely than the average prisoner to experience mental illness and substance addiction (McConnell & Raikes, 2019; Rutherford, 2009), but there is pressure on the Parole Board to move such prisoners out of a penal system which may exacerbate those problems (Annison & Condry, 2022; Straub & Annison, 2020).…”
This study, the first to examine parole decisions for perpetrators of domestic violence in England and Wales, examines how parole boards reach decisions through a thematic analysis of interviews with 20 Parole Board members, alongside logistic regressions of all 137 parole decisions about perpetrators in an 18‐month period. In this sample, recommendations of professionals, especially psychologists, were by far the strongest predictor of a release decision. The nature of offending was also significant in predicting release. Size and composition of the panel may also affect decisions. More panel members, and longitudinal feedback, may encourage more reflective, considered decision making.
“…Parental incarceration is taken as a household dysfunction, closely connected to poor health behaviors like smoking, alcohol dependency and obesity, and poorer socio-economic achievement (lower education and income) in adulthood (Westermair et al, 2018). A recent study (McConnell and Raikes, 2019) showed that the negative impact on children is even worse in the case of an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) scheme where there is no definite release date.…”
Children are often the unintended victims of incarceration, and are frequently subjected to extreme hardship following the arrest of a parent, but their right to information is always compromised in the name of protection. Disclosure of incarceration can be equally challenging for both the family caregivers and the children. This paper presents the data from interviews about disclosure of incarceration, looking at how 10 caregiver–child dyadic pairs interacted and handled disclosure in the process. Disclosure is taken as a continuous process requiring the caregivers and the children to negotiate and make sense of it, rather than a static, one-off decision. Three dimensions of protection have been identified (i.e., protection from future blame, protection of the child, and protection of the inmate), together with the intent to use the disclosure for educational purposes. Although there was not a case where the children protested having limited or no information, they varied in their responses. A lack of interest in asking for essential information and intentional avoidance of the topic of parent’s incarceration have been observed in some children. Self-regulated submission by the child is a result of many factors, including a tacit demand to acknowledge parental authority and a caring intent not to add to the caregiver’s burdens. This article also highlights implications and recommendations for changing professional practice and policy guidelines to promote children’s rights and their healthy growth amidst the challenges of life.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
