REENTRY COURTS: PROVIDING A SECOND CHANCE FOR INCARCERATED MOTHERS AND THEIR CHILDREN

Each year many incarcerated mothers are released from prison and must endure the difficult process of prisoner reentry. The rate of recidivism remains significantly high among this transitioning population, which negatively affects many children. The traditional parole system has not adequately addressed the complexities of a mother‐prisoner's reentry and reunification with her child. This Note proposes that states should expand or adopt the use of problem solving parole courts, or “Reentry Courts” to support a mother and her child through the transition from prison to home. Reentry Courts provide a multi‐agency coordinated solution, which utilizes judicial authority for women seeking to transform their lives and reunify with their children upon their release from prison.     

Breaking The Cycle Of Intergenerational Child Maltreatment: A Case For Active Efforts For Dependent Minor Parents And Their Children In State Custody

Dependent minor parents placed in foster care with their children often face significant hurdles. These parents are responsible to make caregiving decisions for their children, while they themselves fall under the caregiving responsibility of the state child welfare system. As such, dependent minor parents live in a “twilight zone” – they hold full parental rights, but limited rights as teenagers. For a number of reasons, the children of minor parents in foster care often come into state custody. When two generations are in foster care at the same time, states must balance the safety and best interests of the children with the rights of minor parents to care for their own children. Currently, the state child welfare system is only required to provide “reasonable efforts” to reunify parents with children when they have been removed from their care for abuse, neglect, or dependency. However, dependent minor parents in state custody often require more supportive services in order to successfully reunify with their children than in a typical child welfare case. This article places the circumstance just described in the context of dependent minor parents’ constitutionally protected rights, and advocates for a higher standard which would require states to provide “active efforts” to protect and preserve these young families.     

SPECIAL ISSUE: MAKING A BETTER WORLD FOR CHILDREN OF INCARCERATED PARENTS

The punitive sentencing regime that has branded the United States as the Country incarcerating the largest number of its inhabitants has also imposed a terrible punishment on the children of incarcerated parents. These youth are at risk, not only for continuing an intergenerational cycle of crime, but also for entering the pipeline that extends from foster care, to school failure, homelessness, unemployability, poverty, and institutionalization. Even those who escape the more draconian collateral consequences of their parents' incarceration face stigma and shame that may affect their development. This special issue of the Family Court Review explores a myriad of issues that impact Children of Incarcerated Parents, and suggests a variety of approaches, practices and policies that will better the lives of children who should not suffer for the “sins” of their fathers and mothers. This Introduction highlights many issues that affect the children of incarcerated parents, summarizes the valuable contributions of the authors, and also identifies publications and research sources that delve more deeply into these topics.     

Punishing the Innocent: Children of Incarcerated and Detained Parents

Abstract

About 2 million minor children in the U.S. have at least one parent incarcerated for criminal offenses. There are about 33,000 undocumented persons detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in jails and federal detention centers around the country, and 79% of the minor children of these detainees are U.S. citizens. There are few government programs that measure and respond to the harm caused to these children by the incarceration and detention of their parents, and the negative effects on these children are largely ignored in public policy debates about incarceration and immigration detention. I argue that we have an obligation to these children based on (1) the special status of children, (2) the harm caused to children by the arrest, detention and incarceration of their parents, (3) current incarceration and detention policies even in the presence of alternatives that would, on balance, create less harm.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Diverting and Abdicating Judicial Discretion: Cultural, Political, and Procedural Dynamics in California Juvenile Justice

Although tensions between substantive and formal rationality in the adult criminal justice system have received a great deal of attention, the existence of these tensions in the juvenile justice system has received little scholarly consideration. I seek to remedy this gap by exploring how punitive policies associated with the war on crime impact the formal and informal process of justice, the court community and work group, and the exercise of discretion in the juvenile courts. Drawing on qualitative data collected in three juvenile courts in Southern California, I identify the mechanisms by which prosecutors divert judicial discretion from the traditional rehabilitation-oriented bench officers to bench officers who are more accepting of the criminalization of juveniles. In addition, I investigate how and why rehabilitation-oriented bench officers at times abdicate their decisionmaking authority and make rulings that contradict their own assessments. My findings suggest that as the war on crime is extended to youth, the juvenile courts increasingly share the criminal courts' emphasis on offense rather than offender, enhanced prosecutorial power, and adversarial relationships within the court.     

Children of the American Prison Generation: Student and School Spillover Effects of Incarcerating Mothers

Formal equality and judicial neutrality can lead to substantive inequality for women and children, with social costs that extend beyond individuals and families and spill over into the larger social settings in which they are located. We consider the uniquely damaging effects of an “equality with a vengeance” (Chesney‐Lind & Pollack 1995) that resulted from “tough on crime” policies and the 1980s federal and state sentencing guidelines that led to the incarceration of more women and mothers. We argue that legal equality norms of the kind embedded in the enforcement of sentencing guidelines can mask and punish differences in gendered role expectations. Paradoxically, although fathers are incarcerated in much greater numbers than are mothers, the effect threshold is lower and the scale of effect on educational outcomes tends to be greater for maternal incarceration. We demonstrate both student‐ and school‐level effects of maternal incarceration: the damaging effects not only affect the children of imprisoned mothers but also spill over to children of nonincarcerated mothers in schools with elevated levels of maternal incarceration. We find a 15 percent reduction in college graduation rates in schools where as few as 10 percent of other students' mothers are incarcerated. The effects for imprisoned fathers are also notable, especially at the school level. Schools with higher father incarceration rates (25 percent) have college graduation rates as much as 50 percent lower than those of other schools. The effects of imprisoned mothers are particularly notable at the student level (i.e., with few children of imprisoned mothers graduating from college), while maternal imprisonment effects are found at both student and school levels across the three measured outcomes. We demonstrate these effects in a large, nationally representative longitudinal study of American children from the 1990s prison generation who were tracked into early adulthood.     

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.     

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.     

System management and compensatory parenting: Educational involvement after maternal incarceration

Research has demonstrated that paternal incarceration is associated with lower levels of educational involvement among fathers and primary caregivers, but little is known regarding caregiver educational involvement when mothers have been incarcerated. In this study, we present the first analysis of variation in school- and home-based educational involvement by maternal incarceration history, pairing survey and interview data to connect macro-level group differences with micro-level narratives of mothers’ involvement in their children's education. Our survey data demonstrate that children of ever-incarcerated mothers experience increased school-based educational involvement by their primary caregivers, regardless of whether the caregiver is the mother herself. Our interview data point to compensatory parenting as a key motivating factor in educational involvement, wherein a caregiver endeavors to “make up for” the child's history of maternal incarceration. Findings add to the literature demonstrating maternal incarceration as a distinct experience from both paternal incarceration and material disadvantage alone, and they suggest the need to explore the role of schools as potential points of productive institutional involvement for mothers with an incarceration history.     

WHEN JAIL FAILS: AMENDING THE ASFA TO REDUCE ITS NEGATIVE IMPACT ON CHILDREN OF INCARCERATED PARENTS

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) requires states begin termination proceedings when a child resides in foster care for fifteen out of the last twenty‐two months. Many states interpret this to mean that an incarcerated parent is unfit when they leave their child in foster care just because they are separated from their children. Parents and children can still have meaningful relationships even when separated. Thus, parental unfitness should depend on many factors such as the relationship with the child, age of the child, and ability to provide support for the child—not just the time spent away from the child. This Note advocates for the amendment of ASFA to include factors courts should consider when terminating the parental rights of incarcerated parents and encouraged states to focus not on a time frame for termination, but rather consideration of circumstances relevant to each individual family. States should incorporate the factors into their state laws. Further, states should actively work with prisoners and their children to help maintain contact and if possible, reunify families after incarcerations. These services will help prevent the need for termination after a parent completes their sentence and will help to reduce recidivism.     

An Overview of the Courts Catalyzing Change Preliminary Protective Hearing Benchcard Study

This paper presents an overview of the Courts Catalyzing Change: Achieving Equity and Fairness in Foster Care Preliminary Protective Hearing Benchcard Study. In the fall of 2009, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) began a study to examine the effects associated with judges' use of the Preliminary Protective Hearing Benchcard. For this study, data were gathered from case file information (both court and agency files) and from courtroom observations of more than 500 children in Los Angeles, California; Omaha, Nebraska; and Portland, Oregon. Data from a baseline sample were collected at each of the three sites, and judicial officers at each site were randomly assigned to either a Benchcard group or a control group. Benchcard implementation appears to be associated with more discussion and higher quality discussion of key dependency topics during preliminary protective hearings. Benchcard implementation also corresponds to increased judicial inquiry and parental engagement. Benchcard use also was associated with more family placements—placement with a charged parent, a non‐charged parent, or a relative—at the initial hearing and even more family placement at adjudication when comparing the same judges before and after Benchcard implementation. Similarly, the percentage of children who were reunified with the charged parent at the initial hearing and the adjudication hearing increased after Benchcard implementation.     

A Need for Training: Preparing Juvenile and Family Court Judges on Military‐Related Issues

This brief report presents a study undertaken to better understand the training needs of judicial officers related to military issues. A snowball sample of judicial officers and court‐affiliated stakeholders were asked to identify the most critical training topics regarding military issues in juvenile and family court, as well as rate the importance of 13 potential training topics. The highest rated training topics for judicial officers (N = 129) were the (1) Welfare of spouses and children, (2) Protocols to consider when selecting kinship care for children of deployed parents, (3) Mental and physical health consequences of military service and deployment, (4) Reporting standards regarding Intimate Partner Violence or Family Violence, as well as implications for civil case investigation, and (5) Education support for children of deployed parents. Findings suggest a desire in the field for specific training on a multitude of issues related to serving/veteran men and women, spouses, and dependents. Recommendations for such trainings are discussed.     

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.     

“‘That’s a damn good officer any day of the week’: inmates’ perceptions of correctional officers”

Correctional scholars have suggested that research describing the world of imprisonment can help illuminate some of the consequences of incarceration, specifically how individuals experience incarceration and the ways in which these experiences effect their reentry and reintegration into society. The present study examines the perceptions, daily interactions, and relationships between prison inmates and correctional officers from the perspectives of those who have been incarcerated. Qualitative, in-depth interviews of men released from Texas prisons focus on former inmates’ personal experiences and perceptions toward correctional officers while serving time.     

“Even though we're married,I'm single”: The meaning of jail incarceration in romantic relationships

Jail incarceration substantially transforms romantic relationships, and incarceration may alter the commitment between partners, thereby undermining or strengthening relationships. In this article, we use in-depth interviews with 85 women connected to incarcerated men (as current or former romantic partners) to explore how women articulate relationship changes that stem from their partner's jail incarceration, a common but understudied form of contact with the criminal legal system. We identify three interrelated and mutually reinforcing processes, which are shaped by and shape a partner's commitment to the relationship. First, incarceration produces liminality in the status of the relationship. Second, incarceration fosters women's sense of independence from their incarcerated partners. Third, incarceration creates space for partners to reevaluate how they prioritize the relationship in their lives. Jail incarceration intervenes in romantic relationships at different points during each relationship, and accordingly, women experience heterogeneity in processes of liminality, independence, and reprioritization. These processes contribute to differential relationship experiences, with some relationships deteriorating during incarceration, others strengthening, and others neither deteriorating nor strengthening. By systematically uncovering these processes linking jail incarceration to romantic relationships, we advance an understanding of how the criminal legal system can shape relationship commitment processes and inequalities among families.     

ASSOCIATIONS OF FATHERS' HISTORY OF INCARCERATION WITH SONS' DELINQUENCY AND ARREST AMONG BLACK,WHITE, AND HISPANIC MALES IN THE UNITED STATES*

Nearly 13 percent of young adult men report that their biological father has served time in jail or prison; yet surprisingly little research has examined how a father's incarceration is associated with delinquency and arrest in the contemporary United States. Using a national panel of Black, White, and Hispanic males, this study examines whether experiencing paternal incarceration is associated with increased delinquency in adolescence and young adulthood. We find a positive association with paternal incarceration that is robust to controls for several structural, familial, and adolescent characteristics. Relative to males not experiencing a father's incarceration, our results show that those experiencing a father's incarceration have an increased propensity for delinquency that persists into young adulthood. Using a national probability sample, we also find that a father's incarceration is highly and significantly associated with an increased risk of incurring an adult arrest before 25 years of age. These observed associations are similar across groups of Black, White, and Hispanic males. Taken as a whole, our findings suggest benefits from public policies that focus on male youth “at risk” as a result of having an incarcerated father.     

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.