Prison Contraband: Prevalence, Impacts, and Interdiction Strategies

Peterson, Bryce E.; Kizzort, Megan; Kim, KiDeuk; Shukla, Rochisha

doi:10.1080/23774657.2021.1906356

Cited by 5 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This distinction in job responsibilities could explain why probation security assistants experienced more CIs as compared to correctional officers in this study. It is also notable that threatened with a gun was reported in both the 1−9 and 10−50 occurrences primarily by custody staff but also noncustody staff; it is known that contraband exists in many forms on the premises (within and/or outside) of prison facilities 44 . These findings highlight the need to examine CIs among noncustody and/or PPO staff in addition to custody staff since both groups were exposed to direct and indirect forms of trauma and violence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is also notable that threatened with a gun was reported in both the 1−9 and 10−50 occurrences primarily by custody staff but also noncustody staff; it is known that contraband exists in many forms on the premises (within and/or outside) of prison facilities. 44 These findings highlight the need to examine CIs among noncustody and/or PPO staff in addition to custody staff since both groups were exposed to direct and indirect forms of trauma and violence. Recent trauma work in public safety has emphasized the focus on frontline workers, in this case custody staff, as the focal point of trauma and violence prevention.…”

Section: Exposure Differences Among Custody and Noncustody Staffmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Critical incident exposure among custody and noncustody correctional workers: Prevalence and impact of violent exposure to work‐related trauma

Jaegers

Ghaziri

Katz

et al. 2022

American J Industrial Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Correctional workers are at high risk for exposure to trauma, both as direct violence and as threats to their safety and well‐being. The distress associated with these critical incidents (CIs) affects mental and physical health. Current tools are limited for detecting CIs in this workforce and are therefore insufficient for addressing correctional worker trauma. Methods Community prison employees (N = 105) self‐reported CIs using the adapted Correctional Worker Critical Incident Survey (CWCIS). We examined: (1) prevalence of CIs and occurrences, (2) differences in exposures to CIs by custody and noncustody staff, and (3) differences in job satisfaction, posttraumatic stress (PTSD), lower back disease, and health behaviors, such as missed work and sleep. Results CIs occurred among most staff (59%) and more often for custody staff as compared to noncustody staff. CIs most often experienced were coworker injury, exposure to disease, and badly beaten adults (frequency 10−50). For the 1−9 frequency category, the most described events were: seeing someone dying, life threatened, and coworker injury. PTSD was identified in 44% of staff, and those who experienced CIs reported lower job satisfaction, greater feelings of PTSD, and more work absences than those not experiencing CIs (p < 0.05). Conclusions CIs and PTSD are prevalent among custody and noncustody correctional workers; and job dissatisfaction, PTSD, and work absence are significantly worse for those who experienced CIs. The CWCIS detected CIs; future study is needed to inform trauma prevention, reduction, and rehabilitation interventions specific to correctional work.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Exposure Differences Among Custody and Noncustody Staffmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical incident exposure among custody and noncustody correctional workers: Prevalence and impact of violent exposure to work‐related trauma

Jaegers

Ghaziri

Katz

et al. 2022

American J Industrial Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Study data are derived from the National Survey of Correctional Contraband (NSCC; Peterson & Kim, 2018). The NSCC aimed to estimate the prevalence and types of contraband known to prison administrators, determine the methods by which contraband is introduced to these facilities, quantify the occurrence of contraband-related violence and misconduct, and understand the implementation of various interdiction strategies.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prison contraband includes materials or items that are “unauthorized by the formal prison administration” (Kalinich & Stojkovic, 1985, p. 440). Peterson et al (2023) further differentiated between contraband items that are (a) prohibited in most settings (e.g., illicit drugs); (b) specifically prohibited in correctional facilities (e.g., cellphones, cigarettes, alcohol, money); (c) prohibited in certain parts of a correctional facility (e.g., tools taken out of a prison industry building); and (d) prohibited when modified in a way that threatens the safety or security of the institution (e.g., materials turned into weapons or used to make alcohol; see also Lincoln et al, 2006; Shukla et al, 2021). Many of these items can be used by an incarcerated resident to enact violence against staff or other residents, create illicit economies, reinforce power dynamics, and facilitate criminal activities inside and outside the facility (Centre for Social Justice, 2015; Dillon, 2001; Dittmann, 2019; Gore et al, 1995; Grommon et al, 2018; Kalinich & Stojkovic, 1985; Peterson et al, 2023; Pyrooz & Decker, 2019; Shukla et al, 2021; Swann & James, 1998; Turnbull et al, 1994; Wolff et al, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Sociology of Contraband: Examining the Correlates of Illicit Drugs, Cellphones, and Weapons in U.S. Prisons

Peterson,

Kim,

Shukla

2024

The Prison Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contraband negatively affects the safety and security of correctional institutions. Extant research has relied on descriptive analyses or limited measures of contraband. Drawing upon established theories of institutional misbehavior—the deprivation model, importation model, and management perspective–the study examines facility-level and correctional population characteristic correlates of contraband in 301 prisons across six U.S. states. Findings confirm the relevance of individually examining risk factors by type of contraband, including drugs, cellphones, weapons, and total contraband. Lower security prisons, prisons providing substance use treatment, and those employing more women staff had fewer contraband drugs, weapons, and cellphones. Providing outside work opportunities and work-release programs also reduced contraband weapons.

show abstract

“…Boundary violations encompass a wide range of behaviours, from those which may be considered "minor infractions" to criminal behaviours, but all have the potential to cause harm to prisoners, staff, prison institutions and the public. The introduction of contraband items, for example, could lead to increased drug use and violence in prisons, contributing to a dangerous environment for those within (Peterson et al, 2021). Staff who are involved in behaviours such as excessive use of force or sexual contact with prisoners risk their livelihoods and their freedom (Rembert and Henderson, 2014), while prisoners made subject to such violations can experience severe, long-lasting victimisation in custody which can continue beyond release on license (Fedock et al, 2019(Fedock et al, , 2021.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Professional boundary violations in prisons: a scoping review of the literature

Kelly

Potter

2023

JCP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Professional boundary violations – intentional blurring, minimising or exploiting of institutions’ ethical and legal frameworks – have the potential to cause significant harm to prisoners, staff, prison systems and the public. There has been little empirical research on the nature, extent and impact of boundary violations in UK prisons. The purpose of this paper is to synthesise and critically review studies which have sought to explore, measure and predict boundary violative behaviour, with a view to direct future research and inform prison policies and practices. Design/methodology/approach Four internet-based bibliographic databases were used for this review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Twenty studies published between 2001 and 2022 were included in this review. Findings There is a lack of comprehensive self-report measures around prison boundary violations. Staff and prisoner characteristics, as well as prison-specific conditions, are linked with boundary violations. Staff training, improved working conditions and amnesty programmes as well as bolstered surveillance and restricted cross-sex staff deployment were among recommendations to reduce boundary violations. “Insider” researchers offer insight and access opportunities, but they also pose ethical implications. Current studies have research design, participant sampling and measurement scale limitations which compromises the applicability of findings. Prisons need robust policies on defining, reporting, punishing and recovering from boundary violations. Collaboration between prison institutions and academics, using individuals with experience of both professions, is essential to understand, predict and reduce boundary violations. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first review of empirical studies on professional boundary violations in prison.

show abstract

Prison Contraband: Prevalence, Impacts, and Interdiction Strategies

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

Critical incident exposure among custody and noncustody correctional workers: Prevalence and impact of violent exposure to work‐related trauma

Critical incident exposure among custody and noncustody correctional workers: Prevalence and impact of violent exposure to work‐related trauma

The Sociology of Contraband: Examining the Correlates of Illicit Drugs, Cellphones, and Weapons in U.S. Prisons

Professional boundary violations in prisons: a scoping review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About