Welfare, Punishment, and Social Marginality: Understanding the Connections

Brydolf-Horwitz, Marco; Beckett, Katherine

doi:10.1108/s0895-993520210000028005

Cited by 12 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Information about individuals’ work status, indebtedness, social assistance provision, healthcare arrangements, child protection agency experiences, and encounters with the criminal justice system, for instance, are ever more rapidly and efficiently accessed and cross-referenced between public and private data repositories to produce conveniently comprehensive personal history files on the basis of which further intersecting public sector interventions are produced (see, e.g. Brydolf-Horwitz and Beckett, 2021).…”

Section: Redrawing the Contours Of Discipline And Punishment?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Punishment, political economy and crisis: Disciplining labour through state-corporate surveillance in the ‘neoliberal heartlands’

Xenakis

2022

European Journal of Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this article is to advance the politico-economic analysis of punishment in contexts of crisis. To this end, the article examines punitive state interventions in the ‘neoliberal heartlands’ of the UK and the US, as set against a backdrop of multidimensional crises that have reconfigured political landscapes, the relationship between labour and capital, and the mode and scope of state punishment. Through a focus on the treatment of socio-economically embedded undocumented migrants, the article highlights the increasingly diffuse punitive repercussions stemming from the growing multi-sectoral, corporate-facilitated surveillance of the labour force.

show abstract

Section: Redrawing the Contours Of Discipline And Punishment?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Punishment, political economy and crisis: Disciplining labour through state-corporate surveillance in the ‘neoliberal heartlands’

Xenakis

2022

European Journal of Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These included drug treatment courts (Nolan 2003;Tiger 2012;Kaye 2019;Horowitz and Gowan 2022), prison-based drug treatment (Haney 2010;McCorkel 2013;Sue 2019), in-patient rehabilitation centers (Gowan and Whetstone 2012;McKim 2017;Whetstone and Gowan 2017), out-patient support groups like Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous (Sered and Norton-Hawk 2011), and sober living or halfway houses (Martin 2021;Miller 2021). This expansion has meant that many of the services and treatment programs the most marginalized Americans receive are now imbricated with criminal legal system contact (Miller and Stuart 2017;Brydolf-Horwitz and Beckett 2021).…”

Section: Conceptual Background Probation and State Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Strong-arm Sobriety: Addressing Precarity through Probation

Piehowski¹,

Phelps²

2022

Law Soc. Inq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past half-century, the US welfare and penal systems have become increasingly fused modes of poverty governance. At the center of the welfare-penal continuum sits probation, a form of community supervision that operates as a central hub, directing people to both services and incarceration. Drawing on interviews with 166 adults on probation in Hennepin County, Minnesota, in 2019, we argue that the coercive care of probation is structured by the broader project of controlling alcohol and drug use among the poor. Developing the concept of strong-arm sobriety, we show how the “criminal addict” trope undergirds the central processes of probation: treatment, testing, and revocation. We argue that strong-arm sobriety misreads structural precarity as the result, rather than the cause, of individuals’ choices. In doing so, strong-arm sobriety fails to address the circumstances that engender substance use and produces future subjects for coercive care.

show abstract

“…Begun in the Progressive Era as a rehabilitative alternative to incarceration, probation exists at the center of the “penal-welfare continuum” that governs the lives of the poor in the U.S. (Brydolf-Horwitz & Beckett, 2021 ). At its peak in 2007, 1 in every 53 adults was on probation compared to 1 in 198 in prison) (Phelps, 2017 ), with rates highest among young Black men without a high school diploma (Phelps, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This facilitated and/or coerced provision of services may include access to state identification, benefits like public health insurance, and healthcare services, including substance use treatment. Indeed, as Brydolf-Horwitz and Beckett ( 2021 ) note, many of the substance use treatment beds available to low-income adults are funded through correctional agencies and reserved for justice-involved adults (see also Miller & Stuart, 2017 ). Increased access to substance use treatment programs can reduce the morbidity and mortality risks faced by justice-involved adults (He & Barkowski, 2020 ; Maclean & Saloner, 2019 ; Western & Simes, 2019 ), as well as reduce arrests, crime, and recidivism (Edwards et al, 2022 ; Galvin et al, 2021 ; Moore et al, 2020 ; Simes & Jahn, 2022 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond “pains” and “gains”: untangling the health consequences of probation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Research on the health consequences of criminal legal system contact has increasingly looked beyond imprisonment to understand how more routine forms of surveillance and punishment shape wellbeing. One of these sites is probation, the largest form of supervision in the U.S. Drawing on an interview study with 162 adults on probation in Hennepin County, MN, in 2019, we map how adults on probation understand the consequences of supervision for their health and how these self-reported health changes correlate with individual, social, and structural circumstances. Results Roughly half of participants described their health as having improved since starting probation, while the remainder were split between no change and worsened health. Examining both closed-ended survey questions and open-ended interview prompts, we find that the “gains” of supervision were correlated with substance use treatment (often mandated), reduced drug and alcohol use, increased housing and food security, and perceptions of support from their probation officer. However, these potentially health-promoting mechanisms were attenuated for many participants by the significant “pains” of supervision, including the threat of revocation, which sometimes impacted mental health. In addition, participants in the most precarious circumstances were often unable to meet the demands of supervision, resulting in further punishment. Conclusions Moving beyond the “pains” and “gains” framework, we argue that this analysis provides empirical evidence for the importance of moving social services outside of punishing criminal legal system interventions. People with criminal legal contact often come from deeply marginalized socio-economic contexts and are then expected to meet the rigorous demands of supervision with little state aid for redressing structural barriers. Access to essential services, including healthcare, food, and housing, without the threat of further criminal legal sanctions, can better prevent and respond to many of the behaviors that are currently criminalized in the U.S. legal system, including substance use.

show abstract

Welfare, Punishment, and Social Marginality: Understanding the Connections

Cited by 12 publications

References 30 publications

Punishment, political economy and crisis: Disciplining labour through state-corporate surveillance in the ‘neoliberal heartlands’

Punishment, political economy and crisis: Disciplining labour through state-corporate surveillance in the ‘neoliberal heartlands’

Strong-arm Sobriety: Addressing Precarity through Probation

Beyond “pains” and “gains”: untangling the health consequences of probation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About