Teaching & Learning Guide for

This guide accompanies the following article: Doreen Anderson‐Facile and Shyanne Ledford, ‘Basic Challenges to Prisoner Reentry’, Sociology Compass 3/2 (2009): 183–195, 10.1111/j.1751‐9020.2009.00198.x Author’s Introduction Crime, incarceration and prisoner reintegration are pressing issues facing the United States today. As the prison population grows at record rates so, in turn, does the reentry of prisoners into society. The transition from prison to the outside world is often difficult for post‐release prisoners, their families, their communities and the larger society. Many formally incarcerated individuals do not have the skills or support to succeed outside prison walls. Unfortunately, when post‐release prisoners are not successfully reintegrated, they are often returned to prison and begin the cycle of incarceration. The following is a course designed around the basic challenges prisoners face upon reentry. The literature suggests that success depends in part on support and overcoming several barriers, such as homelessness and under/unemployment. This course begins with an examination of reentry barriers facing post‐release prisoners followed by an exploration of the relationship between prisoner reentry, race, gender, family, and employment and concludes with an assessment of ongoing research and public policy. Author Recommends Anderson‐Facile, Doreen. (2009). ‘Basic Challenges to Prisoner Reentry’. Sociology Compass , 3 (2): 183–95. Anderson‐Facile’s review of current research on prisoner reentry yields interesting results. Her article examines prisoner reentry as it relates to the barriers preventing successful reintegration. Anderson‐Facile begins with a look at incarceration and recidivism statistics leading readers through the barriers preventing reentry success. Barriers such as housing, family and community support, employment, and the stigma of a prison record make successful reentry difficult. Anderson‐Facile concludes with a look at current reentry programs. Anderson‐Facile highlights literature suggesting post‐release success begins with rehabilitation and ends with community support. The author notes that many successful programs are faith or character‐based. These programs focus on the individual and assist in substance abuse issues, vocational training, and transitional living arrangements. Finally, Anderson‐Facile notes that programs that work in one community may not show success in other communities, therefore concluding that matching programs with communities is a critical component for assuring post‐release success. Dhami, Mandeep K., David R. Mandel, George Loewesnstein, and Peter Ayton. (2006). ‘Prisoners’ Positive Illusions of Their Post‐Release Success’. Law and Human Behavior 30 : 631–47. Dhami et al. examine prisoners’ forecasts of reentry success as this may have implications for how prisoners respond to imprisonment, release, and parole decisions. The authors examine sentenced US and UK prisoners’ predictions for personal recidivism. The authors also asked UK prisoners how successful they will be compared to the average prisoner. Overall, both samples yielded overly optimistic, unrealistic beliefs about personal reentry success when compared to official data. The UK participants demonstrated a self‐enhancement bias by expressing that they would fair far better than the average prisoner. The authors conclude their article by discussing the implications of their findings and suggest future research possibilities. Holzer, Harry J., Steven Raphael, and Michael A. Stoll. (2002). ‘Can Employers Play a More Positive Role in Prisoner Reentry? Urban Institute’s Reentry Roundtable’. The authors report that in the early 21st century over 600 000 prisoners were released each year from prison and three million or more ex‐prisoners were in the general population. Holzer et al. indicate that one of the greatest hurdles for a newly released prisoner is finding employment because, as applicants, they are faced with an aversion on the employers part to hiring ex‐offenders. Holzer et al. explore the extent and nature of this aversion. Holzer et al. maintain that interventions by other agencies can help mediate employer aversions to hiring post‐release prisoners. La Vigne, Nancy G., Diana Brazzell, and Kevonne M. Small. (2007). ‘Evaluation of Florida’s Faith‐ and Character‐Based Institutions’. The Urban Institute. La Vigne et al. produced a summary of the findings from a ‘process and impact’ evaluation of two of Florida’s faith and character‐based programs, also known as FCBIs. The authors’ note that FCBIs are founded on principles of self‐betterment and faith development and are often ran by volunteers. The authors gathered data in the following ways: one on one interviews, semi structured interviews with staff members at all levels, focus groups with inmates, administrative data/official documents, and telephone and email communications with state corrections personnel. The authors noted that at six months, male FCBI housed participants were more successful than post‐released prisoners housed in Federal Department of Corrections (FDOC) facilities. La Vigne, Nancy G., Rebecca L. Naser, Lisa E. Brooks, and Jennifer L. Castro. (2005). ‘Examining the Effect of Incarceration and In‐Prison Family Contact on Prisoners’ Family Relationships’. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 21 (4): 314–35. In this article, La Vigne, Naser, Brooks and Castro look at the role of the family in recidivism rates. Specifically, they examine the role of in‐prison contact with family members on released prisoner success. This article first defines family and then looks at the quality of familial bonds at imprisonment and during incarceration. Next, they examine the inter‐personal bonds in relationships, i.e., parent–child vs. husband‐wife of these post‐released prisoners. The authors’ findings were inconsistent. For example, in some situations in‐prison contact was detrimental on family relationships and ties, wherein other cases the same contact served to strengthen the family and create a tighter network of family support for the newly released prisoner. These findings suggest further research is necessary. Pager, D. (2003). ‘The Mark of a Criminal Record’. The American Journal of Sociology 108 (5): 937–75. Pager examined the relationship between prior incarceration and race on employment on two teams of subjects. One team consisted of two 23‐year‐old, white men and the other team was two 23‐year‐old, African‐American men. The two teams were nearly identical in personality, appearance, skills and employment history. The variables were race and criminal record. The findings suggest that race and employment history are important factors on post‐released employment. Thirty‐four percent of white applicants without criminal backgrounds received a call back while only 14 percent of black applicants without criminal backgrounds got called back. Seventeen percent of white applicants with criminal records received call backs while only 5 percent of black applicants with criminal records received call backs. These findings indicate that race and not prison record is a greater determinant of employment. Parsons, Mickey L. and Carmen Warner‐Robbins. (2002). ‘Factors That Support Women’s Successful Transition to the Community Following Jail/ Prison’. Health Care for Women International 23 : 6–18. Parson and Warner‐Robbins simply state the purpose of their article is to describe the factors that support the successful reentry of post‐release women into the community. The authors look at a specific program called Welcome Home Ministries (WHM), a community‐based program. The authors examine the demographics of the population, the rising incarceration rates, issues that lead to incarceration, and support for post‐release mothers. Through qualitative interviews with women who were participating in WHM programs upon release many themes emerged. The authors argue that these themes lead to implications about what future programs need to support women who are transitioning from prisoner to general public

Criminology · Imprisonment · Mass incarceration · Population · Prison · Recidivism · Reentry · Sociology · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Demography · Psychology