Treating the Seriously Mentally Ill in Prison: An Evaluation of a Contingency Management Program

Lambert

Criminal Justice Review

2022

Many correctional officers who work in close proximity with inmates are at a heightened risk of experiencing feelings of psychological distress. We analyzed 501 surveys collected from correctional officers within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to identify characteristics of officers who are likely to exhibit signs of depression. Our findings reveal that female officers, as well as officers who work in higher custody levels, are more likely than other officers to report higher levels of depressive symptomatology. We also found that officers who experienced high levels of self-reported job-related stress were more likely to suffer from depression. Officers with attitudes favorable to the mistreatment of inmates also reported higher levels of depression. Officers who perceived their coworkers were engaging in boundary violations were no more or less likely to exhibit signs of depression. Given these findings, we conclude that organizational and supervisory support, coupled with positive incentives and employee assistance programs, may help mitigate the risks of depression for correctional officers, thereby making these salient staff more efficient and effective in the prison workplace.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can’t Shake the Prison Guard Blues: Examining the Effects of Work Stress, Job Satisfaction, Boundary Violations, and the Mistreatment of Inmates on the Depressive Symptomatology of Correctional Officers

Lambert

Criminal Justice Review

2022

“…It also allowed us to share knowledge on practical and theoretical advances derived from research on restrictive housing, helping the DOC make decisions about the contours and functions of the SUP. Second, RCTs are rare in prisons (Farrington & Welsh, 2005;Weisburd, 2000) and within restrictive housing settings more specifically (Butler et al, 2018;Meyers et al, 2018Meyers et al, , 2020. The use of an RCT in this context is important because this strategy reduces the problem of selection bias (Elwert & Winship, 2014;Ridgeway, 2019), which is common in research on restrictive housing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Providing more opportunities for time out-of-cell, quality social interaction, and cultural changes away from coercion should lessen incidence of misconduct and improve indicators of health and psychological well-being. Second, and relatedly, there is a lack of rehabilitative programming geared toward reintegration and increasing pro-social behavior through problem solving and conflict resolution (Butler et al, 2018;Meyers et al, 2018Meyers et al, , 2020. As many individuals are placed in restrictive housing settings because of rule violations and threat assessments, by restricting access to programming, it is unlikely these behaviors or the threat will be reduced.…”

Section: Strategies To Reduce the Use Of Restrictive Housingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reforming solitary confinement: the development, implementation, and processes of a restrictive housing step down reentry program in Oregon

et al. 2021

Background Over the past decade there have been numerous and impassioned calls to reform the practice of solitary confinement in U.S. prisons. This article examines the development, implementation, and processes of a restrictive housing reentry program in the Oregon Department of Corrections. It draws on data from official documents, site observations, and interviews with 12 prison officials and 38 prisoners. The Step Up Program (SUP) seeks to improve the living conditions in restrictive housing over business-as-usual, alleviate physiological and psychological harms of solitary confinement, and use rehabilitative programming to increase success upon returning to the general prison population or community. Results The impetus to change the culture and structure of restrictive housing was primarily the result of internal administrative reform. Prisoners assigned at random to housing assignments offered accounts of their daily activities suggesting that the SUP provides more time out-of-cell and greater access to other services and activities. Program participants preferred the living conditions in the SUP because they had more opportunities for social interaction and incentives for compliant behavior. However, views on the value of programming among respondents were mixed. Conclusions The launch of the SUP occurred in early 2020, which was soon followed by the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, the program was never fully implemented as intended. As Oregon returns to more normal operations, it is possible that the SUP will be able to include even more out-of-cell time, greater socialization opportunities, and increased access to programming and other beneficial activities. As we await the opportunity to conduct prospective psychological and behavioral analyses, this study provides tentative support for the use of step down reentry programs in restrictive housing units. Trial registration Open Science Framework, Preparing adults in custody for successful reentry: An experimental study of a restrictive housing exit program in Oregon. Registered 4 October 2019, https://osf.io/t6qpx/

European Journal of Criminology

“…Academic research has also raised concerns that people's reaction to such schemes and ability to progress can vary depending on their age, mental health, substance use, nationality, offence history, and tendency to be involved in misconduct (Butler and Maruna, 2012;Hutton, 2017;Khan, 2022;Liebling, 2008;Meyers et al, 2020). For example, research conducted in NI revealed some people in prison believed that those who were older, imprisoned for the first time, convicted of white-collar/ driving offences, or foreign nationals were treated more leniently by staff and were better able to progress through the incentive scheme as a result (Butler and Maruna, 2012).…”

Section: Prison Incentive Schemesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, these schemes can have a substantial impact on individuals as they often not only affect the material conditions of imprisonment but can create feelings of unfairness, inequality, and a lack of procedural justice (Bottoms, 2003;Butler and Maruna, 2012;Crewe, 2009;Khan, 2016;Liebling, 2008;Liebling et al, 1999). In particular, concerns have been expressed that some groups may experience worse outcomes than others due to their race, ethnicity, religion, mental health, and/or relationships with staff (Butler and Maruna, 2012;Hutton, 2017;Khan, 2022;Lammy, 2017;Meyers et al, 2020;Ministry of Justice, 2008). Yet, while research has been conducted on people's lived experience of prison incentive schemes, the authors are not aware of any quantitative studies that have examined the factors related to people's future status on such schemes, whereby status refers to their trajectory within the different regime levels in these schemes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the factors influencing prison incentive scheme status among adult males: A prospective longitudinal study

Butler,

McNamee,

Kelly

2024

Despite its impact on imprisonment, no quantitative study has examined the factors related to people's status on prison incentive schemes. This study addresses this gap by using administrative data to explore the factors related to the status of 405 men on a prison incentive scheme. Results revealed that those who had a prior history of passing prison drug tests at time 1, and spent more time imprisoned during the follow-up period, were more likely to be on the highest level of the scheme one year later at time 2. In contrast, those who had a history of past involvement in misconduct, referrals for serious self-harm/attempted suicide in prison, not taken a prison drug test, property offences, and greater periods of custody at time 1 were more likely to be on the lower levels of the scheme at time 2. The potential implications for theory, policy, and practice are discussed.