WHEN THE COST IS TOO GREAT: THE EMOTIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT ON CHILDREN OF INCARCERATING THEIR PARENTS FOR DRUG OFFENCES1

The advent of the modern “war on drugs” and its accompanying “lock 'em up and throw away the key” crime policies largely explain the evolution of mass incarceration in the U.S. and account for much of the emotional and psychological pain caused to children who have lost their parents to long prison sentences. It is by reducing reliance on incarceration to tackle the “drug problem” in the United States that there will be a positive impact on reducing the number of parents being separated from their children for inordinate amounts of time, thereby potentially reducing the negative emotional and psychological impact on children. Aiding parents combat their addiction outside of prison walls is perhaps to most sensible criminal justice policy in addressing the needs of children who are caught in the cross‐fire of the war on drugs. In the meantime, as policy makers review, assess, and, eventually, reform draconian drug laws and sentencing policies, it is imperative that front‐line service providers who work with children and family and juvenile court judges be mindful of the emotional and psychological impact that parental incarceration has on youth. A more in‐depth understanding of the complexities of these young people's life experiences will hopefully enable the development of appropriate support services.     

Low-Level,but High Speed?: Assessing Pretrial Detention Effects on the Timing and Content of Misdemeanor versus Felony Guilty Pleas

Abstract

While numerous studies have examined pretrial detention and felony case outcomes, little empirical attention has been devoted to misdemeanor pretrial detention. We theorize that misdemeanants detained for a longer proportion of time will plead guilty quicker because the costs of fighting their charges in jail often outweigh the sanctions they face. Utilizing data on 165,630 felony and misdemeanor cases from Miami-Dade County, Florida, during a 4-year period (2012–2015) we assess whether the effects of pretrial detention length on the timing and content of guilty pleas differ across lower-level and upper-level courts. Survival analyses and multinomial logistic regressions indicate that misdemeanor cases overall and those involving lengthier pretrial detention are resolved faster, with most resulting in non-carceral sanctions such as credit for time served (CTS). Given that misdemeanors make-up the bulk of U.S. criminal cases, these findings reveal important insights about how pretrial detention impacts case-processing dynamics in lower courts.     

INCARCERATION AND POPULATION HEALTH IN WEALTHY DEMOCRACIES*

Everywhere you look, incarceration seems to be doing harm. Research has implicated incarceration not only in worse outcomes for individuals, their families, and their communities but also in growing inequality. Yet incarceration may not always harm society—even if it does harm those who experience it. To consider this possibility, I build an argument demonstrating how the macro‐level consequences of incarceration may be distinctively harmful in the United States, focusing on the incarceration–health relationship as one indicator of a broader phenomenon. I then test my hypothesis by using an unbalanced panel data set including 21 developed democracies (N = 414) and a series of ordinary least‐squares models predicting three measures of population health as a function of incarceration. Models including only a main effect of incarceration demonstrate an inverse association between changes in incarceration and changes in population health. Models including an incarceration by U.S. interaction, however, indicate that the population health consequences of changes in incarceration are far worse in the United States than elsewhere. Taken together, the results indicate that the United States is exceptional for both its rate of incarceration and its effects of incarceration, although it is unclear what drives this exceptionalism in effects.     

Jailed Parents

Abstract

It is axiomatic in the literature that parenthood exacerbates the pains of imprisonment for women. A corollary is that it has a lesser impact on incarcerated men. We have attempted here to establish an empirical foundation for concluding that incarceration affects fathers and mothers differently. Using a national survey of jailed parents to compare mothers and fathers on a number of variables, we found clear differences which persisted through two survey years. Jailed mothers were more likely than jailed fathers to have minor children and to have been living with their minor children at arrest. Their children were more likely to have experienced a change in caretaking because of their arrest than were the children of jailed fathers. Incarceration does, in fact, pose greater problems for mothers than for fathers.     

Jailing of American Indian adolescents

Based on a random sample of 300 youth detained prior to trial in a Southwestern Indian Community, this paper analyzes the pre-trial incarceration of American Indian adolescents. It discusses two major similarities between the detention of adolescents in this Indian community and the detention of adolescents nationwide, including the minimalization of the potentially deleterious effects of incarcerating adolescents and the detention of minor offenders. It also emphasizes divergences between the detention of adolescents in the Indian community and the detention of adolescents nationwide: a much higher rate of detention and recidivism on the reservation; the multiplicity of legal jurisdictions to which Indian adolescents are subject; administration of the reservation detention facilities by Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) personnel with minimal training in adolescent services; the unique power of BIA police to determine unilaterally who will be detained initialy; and the extreme lack of alternative resources for adolescents and families within the Indian community.     

Forgotten Children of Immigration and Family Law: How The Absence of Legal Aid Affects Children in the United States

The absence of government‐appointed legal counsel in immigration proceedings adversely affects large numbers of children in the United States. Children born in the United States to parents without citizenship status (U.S.‐born children of noncitizen parents or UCNP) are harmed by a parent's detention and removal. Unaccompanied alien children (UAC) who have entered the country without legal status are adversely affected by their own detention and removal. The possibility of obtaining relief from removal is drastically diminished by the lack of legal representation. Currently UAC and immigrant parents are not entitled to court‐appointed attorneys. Any meaningful change in immigration law, such as a federal statutory amendment to provide UAC and immigrant parents with government‐appointed counsel is unlikely due to the present political dissension in Congress regarding this issue. Because UAC and immigrant parents are not entitled to government‐funded legal representation, a pro bono legal service system has developed, but is unable to meet the present need adequately. For immigrant parents, this Note proposes the adoption of a statute to allow the appointment of court liaisons in family court proceedings. The court liaison is a nonattorney who is familiar with the processes of the family court and ensures that immigrant parents are fully informed regarding all pertinent family court proceedings. For UAC, this Note proposes an amendment to the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act to mandate the appointment of a child advocate to all UAC. The child advocate is not a lawyer, but works with the UAC's attorney to provide the child with legal representation and advocacy.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• UCNP confront the loss of parents to detention and removal. Children are condemned to limbo, torn between absent biological parents and placement in foster care.
• The recent surge in the number of UAC who enter the United States by crossing the border from Mexico has been described as a humanitarian crisis. These children often remain alone without legal protection, vulnerable to detention and removal.
• Ideally, UAC and the immigrant parents would be provided with government‐funded legal representation in immigration proceedings. In the absence of the federal statutory reform necessary to make that a reality, state statutory reform to allow for the provision of court liaison programs for immigrant parents and federal statutory reform to allow the appointment of child advocates for UAC can begin to offer children and families needed legal support and advocacy.

     

BARRIERS TO REUNIFICATION FOR INCARCERATED PARENTS—A JUDICIAL PERSPECTIVE

Within the child welfare system, going to jail does not automatically mean losing your children. As the number of incarcerated parents rises, California dependency bench officers are looking at the effects incarceration has on parents seeking to reunify with their children. The California legislature passed legislation allowing a dependency judicial officer to consider the effect incarceration has on parents' performance and to grant additional reunification if a parent's progress is hindered by incarceration. In Los Angeles County, the Incarcerated Parents Working Group was specifically created in 2009 to look at the services available to incarcerated parents and what barriers these parents face in their efforts to reunify. Additionally, the working group has created judicial training on this subject for their bench officers and for other judicial officers throughout the state.     

The effect of maternal incarceration on adult offspring involvement in the criminal justice system

Researchers have estimated that 63 percent of incarcerated women have one or more minor children and most reported living with their children prior to incarceration (Mumola, 2000). Unfortunately, children of incarcerated parents have been a relatively invisible population in the research on the collateral consequences of incarceration. The goal of the current study was to examine the long-term effect of maternal incarceration on adult offspring involvement in the criminal justice system using data from the mother child sample of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. Based on existing research, it was hypothesized that the adult offspring of incarcerated mothers would be more likely to have been convicted of a crime or to be sentenced to probation. The effect of maternal incarceration on correlates of criminal behavior in adolescence and early adulthood (e.g., negative peer influences, positive home environment) was also modeled to assess possible indirect effects. The results highlighted the direct effect of incarceration on adult offspring involvement in the criminal justice system, but parental incarceration had little association with correlates of criminal behavior.     

It's a Family Affair

Abstract

In the United States, incarceration rates are increasing at an alarming rate. In particular, the incarceration of women is increasing. Oklahoma has the highest rate of female incarceration in the nation, and drug offenders comprise a significant proportion of these female inmates. Placing large numbers of women in prison may have serious implications not only for the women but also for their families, particularly their children. We surveyed 144 incarcerated female drug offenders in Oklahoma, 96 of whom reported dependent children living with them prior to incarceration. The data included the women's perceptions of the effect of their incarceration on their families as well as an examination of the potential for serious problems due to placement of the children. The study indicates that many children are placed with families that have a history of abuse, which suggests that failure to consider the implications of incarcerating large numbers of women likely contributes to serious abuse risks for their children.     

MOVING BEYOND GENERALIZATIONS AND STEREOTYPES TO DEVELOP INDIVIDUALIZED APPROACHES FOR WORKING WITH FAMILIES AFFECTED BY PARENTAL INCARCERATION

Competing narratives about incarcerated parents and their children are provided by the Adoption and Safe Families Act (“ASFA”) and the Children of Incarcerated Parents Bill of Rights (“Bill of Rights”). Both the “child‐at‐risk” narrative of ASFA and the “good mother” narrative of the Bill of Rights are stereotyped and oversimplified and contribute, in opposite ways, to misperceptions about incarcerated parents and their children by suggesting a uniformity of situations and appropriate responses that does not actually exist. The time‐driven approach of ASFA—and many state termination of parental rights statutes—is overly rigid, while the Bill of Rights overlooks important differences among families, as well as tensions and trade‐offs among policy choices. In actuality, the situations of the parents and children involved vary widely and defy easy analysis and solutions. We should therefore be taking an individualized, qualitative approach that is nuanced and based on actual information about incarcerated parents and their children, rather than a quantitative, categorical approach based on generalized and simplistic assumptions. Only if we recognize and grapple with the complexities of parental incarceration can we develop sound legal and social policy to meet the needs of these families.     

Institutionalizing inequality in the courts: Decomposing racial and ethnic disparities in detention,conviction, and sentencing*

A significant body of literature has examined racial and ethnic inequalities in sentencing, focusing on how individual court actors make decisions, but fewer scholars have examined whether disparities are institutionalized through legal case factors. After finding racial and ethnic inequalities in pretrial detention, conviction, and incarceration based on 4 years of felony court data (N = 83,924) from Miami-Dade County, we estimate nonlinear decomposition models to examine how much of the inequalities are explained by differences in criminal history, charging, and for conviction and incarceration, pretrial detention. Results suggest that inequality is greatest between White non-Latinos and Black Latinos, followed by White non-Latinos and Black non-Latinos, ranging from 4 to more than 8 percentage points difference in the probability of pretrial detention, 7–13 points difference in conviction, 5–6 points in prison, and 4–10 points difference in jail. We find few differences between White non-Latinos and White Latinos. Between half and three-quarters of the inequality in pretrial detention, conviction, and prison sentences between White non-Latino and Black people is explained through legal case factors. Our findings indicate that inequality is, in part, institutionalized through legal case factors, suggesting these factors are not “race neutral” but instead racialized and contribute to inequalities in court outcomes.     

THE COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES OF INCARCERATION REVISITED: A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS ON CAREGIVERS OF CHILDREN OF INCARCERATED PARENTS*

While policy makers have long extolled the benefits of incarceration, criminologists have expended considerable effort demonstrating the harmful collateral consequences of incarceration. Sampson (2011) recently challenged researchers to move beyond this dichotomy and to assess the “social ledger” of incarceration, where both the potential benefits and harms associated with incarceration are examined. To shed light on the variation in the collateral consequences of incarceration, we focus on the experiences of a valuable group of individuals directly impacted by imprisonment: those caring for children of incarcerated parents. Drawing from in‐depth interviews with a diverse group of caregivers (N= 100), we examine the various consequences (both positive and negative) that occur in their lives as a result of incarceration, as well as the causal processes responsible for the outcomes we observe. Our findings reveal marked variation in the effects of incarceration on caregivers. Such effects are shaped by (1) the prisoner's prior parental involvement, (2) the interpersonal relationship between caregiver and prisoner, and (3) the caregiver's family support system. These findings have important implications for future work conducted on the collateral consequences of incarceration for caregivers, children, and families.     

Assessing the Influence of Familial Paternalism on Child Neglect Sentencing Decisions

Familial responsibilities have been found to significantly reduce the severity of sentencing outcomes of defendants in the criminal court. Additional research also has suggested that this leniency might be contingent on the type of offense, with defendants who commit crimes which imply that they are unfit parents (e.g., drug offenses) not receiving a significant reduction in their likelihood of incarceration. Utilizing familial paternalism as the theoretical basis, the current study examines whether having children influences the sentences of defendants charged with forms of criminal child neglect. The findings indicate that having children does result in significantly reduced odds of incarceration for defendants charged with child neglect. These findings support the arguments set forth by familial paternalism. However, they do not support the inference that defendants convicted of child neglect are presumed to be unfit parents. Implication of these results and directions for future research are discussed.     

Pat‐Downs But No Hugs: Why Prison Visitation Protocol Should be Changed to Help Keep Familial Structures Intact

In the United States there are almost three million children who have one or both parents incarcerated. Parental incarceration negatively impacts children in several ways. Visitation protocol varies across facilities nationwide with no modification in protocol for minors. Parental rights are disrupted by visitation protocol because of cost‐prohibitive access and extreme security measures. This Note proposes a model statute that would change visitation protocol to facilitate a clear‐cut set of visitation processes that are tailored to ensure prison safety while also fostering and maintaining a positive relationship between a minor child and his/her incarcerated parent.     

Ensuring Insurance for Foster Care: Requiring Foster Parents to Obtain Liability Insurance to Cover Harm Done to Foster Children in their Care

This Note proposes that all states should require that foster parents have liability insurance before children are placed in their care. This Note also proposes that the liability insurance needs to cover not just harm to third parties but also harm to the foster children through the negligent acts of the foster parents. This legislation will allow foster children to have standing to bring claims against their foster parents and insurance companies and give them a greater opportunity for recovery. Currently, the policies and statutes governing the policies in place do not cover all types of harm that can occur during the foster parent–child relationship. Certain policies leave children who are harmed by their foster parents’ negligence unable to recover any damages from the people who have harmed them. Because foster parents can be left to defend the actions themselves, they often become judgment proof due to their low income, leaving the children who are harmed with little chance of recovery.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• States need to require foster parents to obtain liability insurance, which covers harm done by the foster children to third parties, harm to the home, and any harm done to the child by the foster parents.

     

Book reviews

During the 1980s correctional officials focused considerable energy on the development of intermediate sanctions as alternatives to incarceration. One such alternative is electronically monitored home detention. Although the electronic monitoring equipment was not commercially available until late in 1984, programs were operating in all 50 states by 1990. This study presents a comparative analysis of three electronic monitoring programs: a program for adults charged with a criminal offense and unable to obtain pretrial release; a program designed as an alternative to incarceration for convicted adult offenders; and a program for adjudicated juvenile burglars. Each program operated in the same jurisdiction, used essentially the same equipment, and imposed similar rules and restrictions on behavior. The analysis focuses on comparisons of program delivery, clients' performance, and programmatic sources of variation. The implications of the findings for future program development and evaluation are discussed.     

If You Build It,They Will Fill It: The Consequences of Prison Overcrowding Litigation

This article examines the consequences of prison overcrowding litigation for U.S. prisons. We use insights derived from the endogeneity of law perspective to develop expectations about the likely impact of overcrowding litigation on five outcomes: prison admissions, prison releases, spending on prison capacity, prison crowding, and incarceration rates. Using newly available data on prison overcrowding litigation cases joined with panel data on U.S. states from 1971 to 1996, we offer a novel and comprehensive analysis of the impact that overcrowding litigation has had on U.S. prisons. We find that it had no impact on admissions or release rates and did not lead to any reduction in prison crowding. Litigation did, however, lead to an increase in spending on prison capacity and incarceration rates. We discuss the implications of these results for endogeneity of law theory, attempts to achieve reform through litigation, and the politics of prison construction.     

Imprisoned Mothers and Their Children

Abstract

Presently, there is concern regarding the imprisonment of female offenders who are mothers occasioned by both the numerical increase in women prisoners and by the fact that research and public policy have centered primarily on separation issues. It is estimated that 70%-80% are mothers, incarceration results in the separation of mothers and children. Following their incarceration, most mothers plan to be reunited with their children. This paper examines the reunion aspect and makes recommendations for its successfully implementation.     

Women Prisoners at the Dawn of the 21st Century

Abstract

The contemporary experiences of women in prison at the beginning of the 21st century must be understood within the context of the monumental increase in incarceration of specific U.S. populations in the last three decades of the 20th century, a truly unique period in history. How race and class impact on the increase of women in U.S. prisons attests to the importance of an intersectional and structural analysis (of race, class, and gender) in explaining the huge number of poor, heavily Black and Latina women incarcerated today. Women are criminalized for the same kinds of crimes today as in the past (nonviolent larceny-theft, forgery, and prostitution)-with the critical addition of drugs (and the “net widening” of previously noncriminal or nonviolent behaviors). And with drugs, the racialized impacts are even more profound. The socially structured conditions of class, race, and gender in the context of globalization, unemployment, and the prison industrial complex help to explain these findings.     

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF YOUTH THEFT,MARIJUANA USE,DEPRESSION, AND POOR ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE*

Explanations for the fact that crime tends to run in families have focused on the deprived social backgrounds of criminal parents, methods of child‐rearing, modeling processes, and genetic mechanisms. However, parental involvement in the criminal justice system itself also might contribute to the intergenerational transmission of crime and have other adverse effects on children's well‐being. We investigated the development of youth problem behavior in relation to parental arrest, conviction, and incarceration in the youngest and oldest samples of the Pittsburgh Youth Study, a longitudinal survey of 1,009 inner‐city boys. Parental arrest and conviction without incarceration did not predict the development of youth problem behavior. Parental incarceration was not associated with increases in marijuana use, depression, or poor academic performance. However, boys experiencing parental incarceration showed greater increases in theft compared with a control group matched on propensity scores. The association between parental incarceration and youth theft was stronger for White youth than for Black youth. Parenting and peer relations after parental incarceration explained about half of its effects on youth theft. Because the effects of parental incarceration were specific to youth theft, labeling and stigma processes might be particularly important for understanding the consequences of parental incarceration for children.