Receiving Social Support after Short-term Confinement: How Support Pre- and During-confinement Contribute

Abstract

License: Article 25fa pilot End User Agreement This publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act (Auteurswet) with explicit consent by the author. Dutch law entitles the maker of a short scientific work funded either wholly or partially by Dutch public funds to make that work publicly available for no consideration following a reasonable period of time after the work was first published, provided that clear reference is made to the source of the first publication of the work. This publication is distributed under The Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) 'Article 25fa implementation' pilot project. In this pilot research outputs of researchers employed by Dutch Universities that comply with the legal requirements of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act are distributed online and free of cost or other barriers in institutional repositories. Research outputs are distributed six months after their first online publication in the original published version and with proper attribution to the source of the original publication. You are permitted to download and use the publication for personal purposes. All rights remain with the author(s) and/or copyrights owner(s) of this work. Any use of the publication other than authorised under this licence or copyright law is prohibited. If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons.

Maintaining External Connections During Incarceration: Latent Class Analysis of Visitors for Women and Men in Prison

“…The role of friends in providing support and prosocial influence is less clear. Although friend visitors can be an important source of expressive support, they less often provide instrumental support than family members (Hickert et al, 2019). Further, some network theory suggests that friends, as individuals who are more likely to share similarities with the individual, may reinforce those similarities (Lin, 1982), perhaps even antisocial ones.…”

Family Visitation Patterns during Incarceration in Denmark

“…Many emphasize moral support, maintaining or building relationships with children, and of course spending time with a missed loved one as primary goals of prison visits (Christian, 2005;Comfort, 2008;Tasca et al, 2016). Visitation has been shown to be associated with better family relationships and more social support post release (Hickert et al, 2019;Mowen & Visher, 2016), highlighting how visitation can play a significant role in holding the family together during and after incarceration.…”

“…Visitors to prisons and jails in Denmark have to obtain visitation permits (which are facility-specific and may be withheld from visitors with certain types of criminal backgrounds) and will be searched for contraband upon entry (Kjær, 2012). Inmates in Denmark have the right (granted by law) to at least one visit per week lasting at least one hour but preferably two, which aligns with general visitation policies in the Netherlands (Hickert et al, 2019) and falls in the middle of the U.S. spectrum (Boudin et al, 2013).…”

Confinement as a two‐stage turning point: Do changes in identity or social structure predict subsequent changes in criminal activity?*

“…Relatedly, releasees find themselves without income and must rely on family and friends to meet basic needs, including housing (Harding et al., 2014; Western, 2018). Yet relationships are also disrupted during confinement (Braman, 2004; Christian, 2005; Dixey & Woodall, 2012; Hickert et al, 2019; Pleggenkuhle et al, 2018), and these challenges persist when releasees attempt to reconnect during reentry (Comfort, 2016; Harding et al., 2019; Travis, 2005). Exceptions exist, with research documenting that some individuals experience improvements in social bonds from before to after confinement (Brunton‐Smith & McCarthy, 2017; Hickert et al., 2019; La Vigne et al, 2005; Mowen & Visher, 2016).…”

“…Yet relationships are also disrupted during confinement (Braman, 2004; Christian, 2005; Dixey & Woodall, 2012; Hickert et al, 2019; Pleggenkuhle et al, 2018), and these challenges persist when releasees attempt to reconnect during reentry (Comfort, 2016; Harding et al., 2019; Travis, 2005). Exceptions exist, with research documenting that some individuals experience improvements in social bonds from before to after confinement (Brunton‐Smith & McCarthy, 2017; Hickert et al., 2019; La Vigne et al, 2005; Mowen & Visher, 2016). Nevertheless, the anticipated external social and structural changes from preconfinement to the immediate reentry period are expected to be primarily unfavorable and, therefore, limit future attachment to conventional roles and increase involvement in crime (Laub & Sampson, 2003).…”