Rebecca Snyder and Professor Randal Day, School of Family Life
Introduction
Despite the recent slowing of population rates within the United States prison system, the prison population is at a record high. The vast majority of these 1.4 million incarcerated individuals will be released back into the community, and a significant number of these ex-inmates will relapse back into a habit of crime, eventually be reconvicted, and ultimately re-sentenced. The prospect of thousands of ex-prisoners returning to their homes and communities, and their probable recidivism, is a concern to many. But other than atheoretical studies on recidivism itself, prisoner re-entry as a whole has been neglected by the research community. The purpose of our study is to better understand re-entry by looking at prison-to-home adjustment with a broad perspective and a theoretical base. Through the paradigm of Symbolic Interaction, we will study prisoners’ fatherhood identity and its effect on their personal happiness/unhappiness and eventual prison-to-home adjustment.
Background and Significance
There are currently 1.4 million men and women incarcerated in the American prison system. 95% of these individuals will eventually be released (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2002). In five months alone, during the year 2001, the number of inmates under State jurisdiction in the United States grew over 15,000 (BOJS, 2002).
The prison population has not declined since 1972 (BOJS, 2002). In 1999, 1. 5 million American children had a parent in prison. This statistic is a 50% increase since the year 1990 (Mumola, 1999).
However foreboding these statistics are, the current trend of recidivism is devastatingly bleaker. Of the 272,111 persons released in 15 States in the year 1994, 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within only 3 years. Of this same 272,111, 25.4% were re-sentenced to prison for a new crime (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2002).
These statistics present a grim situation to sociologists, law enforcement, educators, and policymakers alike. Even though there has been a recent slowing, the United States prison population is still increasing, is expected to grow as the years continue, and many individuals who do leave the system, habitually relapse into crime.
This situation has caused a considerable need for studies involving recidivism and its contributing variables. Data (such as the above) have been collected and analyzed, and all is effective and worthy in its nature. However, rather than focus on its final stages, there is a significant need to research the whole process of re-entry and adjustment. In order to understand recidivism in depth, it is necessary to delve into prisoners’ relationships, and in our particular study, their fatherhood roles.
In studying prisoner’s roles as fathers, and it’s relationship to prison-to-home adjustment, we have incorporated a theoretical base in order to “allow us to better understand families and thus allow for more appropriate, empirically based recommendations for therapists, educators, and policy makers” (Lavee and Dollahite, 1991). We have chosen Symbolic Interaction’s Identity Theory, and it is through this paradigm that we have analyzed the present problem of ex-prisoner adjustment with a “whole process” perspective.
According to Stryker, the identity is an “internalized sets of role expectations, with the persons having as many identities as roles played in distinct sets of social relationships” (1987). McCall and Simmons hold a similar view of identity, but focus more on “role-specific identities” (1978). Both Stryker and McCall and Simmons rank identities on a hierarchal scale, suggesting the higher ranked an identity the “more motivated the individual will be to not only perform [in that identity] but try to excel in role-related behaviors” (La Rossa, 1993). Key to this theory is the correlation between the prominence of a certain identity, and the behavior of an individual, or the “strong direct relationship between the location of various identities in an individual’s identity hierarchy and the individual’s behavioral performances” (Rane and McBride, 2000). From this premise, it is understood that individuals will behave and perform in harmony with the unspoken and spoken expectations associated with the roles that are highly ranked in their identity hierarchies (Stryker & Serpe, 1994).
As seen above, there are a few different theoretical views on identity hierarchies, but the view we implement as our model is the McCall & Simmons Identity Theory. They suggest there are two hierarchies: a prominence hierarchy and a salience hierarchy. It is the prominence hierarchy we specifically deal with. The prominence hierarchy is the “most basic” (Rane and McBride, 2000) and is considered one’s “ideal self” (MacKinnon, 1994). The way the prominence of an identity is measured is by three determinants. They include “[1] amount of support provided by self and others to sustain a particular role-identity, [2] a person’s commitment and investment in it, [3] and the intrinsic and extrinsic gratifications derived from related performances” (McCall & Simmons, 1978).
It is with these three determinants that we begin to progress with our study. By determining the hierarchy of the “father” identity in our prisoners, according to the identity/behavior relationship, we can then predict how saturated their actions will be with father-like behaviors during incarceration and after their release. If a prisoner’s identity as a father is high on the hierarchal scale, and is inevitably strengthened by this relationship, it is possible his positive family life could enhance his ability to transition out of prison and into the home. (Harrison 2001; Nelson, Deess, & Allen 1999). It is then conceived that the higher a prisoners “father” prominence, the lower their rate of mal-adjustment.
Long-term adjustment, however, cannot be measured during a short-term study. It is then necessary for us to ascertain variables other than the percentage of prisoners who effectively adjust and avoid returning to crime and ultimately prison. With an understanding that feelings of happiness and depression play a large role in an ex-prisoner’s adjustment, we are interested in finding the happiness/depressive feelings and actions of our participants.
Methods
We are currently conducting a 60-minute interview with incarcerated fathers during their last month in prison. We are also conducting a 45-minute telephone interview with their spouse/partner (mother of target child) at this time. Three months after their release, we will conduct another 30-minute telephone interview with both the released father and his spouse/partner. All interviews of inmates and family members will include both structured items and open-ended questions. These interviews are recorded so the open-ended items can be transcribed. During these interviews, we have gathered data about the background characteristics of the mother and father, the interactions of the mother, father, and focal child during the period of incarceration, and the family relations and fathering behaviors after the release.
Sample
After Utah State Prison approval, 30 volunteer fathers from Utah State Prison were recruited for our study. Certain participant requirements are as follows: fatherhood, knowledge of mother’s location, and a scheduled release within one month of interview.
Following an identical procedure, we recruited 30 fathers from Oregon State Prison. Therefore, the sample size is 60 fathers and 60 spouses/partners for a total of 120 participants.
Measurement of Variables
McCall and Simmon’s three determinants of Identity Prominence serve as our independent variables, and because our inmates’ long term adjustment is immeasurable at this present time, our dependent variable will be the prisoners’ happiness/depressive feelings and symptoms. We have identified questions within the questionnaire in order to measure our variables. For a complete listing of questions, please see Appendix 1.
For determinant #1, the amount of support provided by self and others to sustain a particular role-identity, we are using nine questions regarding the frequency of communication with mother, the depth of relationship with mother, and the amount of support they provide one another.
For determinant #2, a person’s commitment and investment in it [the identity], we are using five questions having to do with the amount and type of contact the child, and the depth and closeness of the relationship.
For determinant #3, the intrinsic and extrinsic gratifications derived from related performances, we are using eight questions regarding the father’s general feelings about contact with child, his feelings about being a father, and details about how the child makes him feel. We have also identified three questions to serve as our attributes for our dependent variable, the prisoners’ depressive feelings and symptoms. These questions have to do with the prisoners’ feelings, sleep regularity, and ability to stay focused or pay attention.
References
- Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2002. Annual Parole Survey, 2000. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
- Harrison, C.F. (2001). Prisoners and families: Parenting issues during incarceration. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Urban Institute.
- Lavee, Y., & Dollahite, D.C. (1991). The Linkage Between Theory and Research in Family Science. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53, 361-373.
- MacKinnon, N. (1994). Symbolic Interaction as Affect Control. New York: State University of New York Press.
- McCall, G., J. Simmons. (1978). Identities and Interaction. 2d ed. New York: Free Press.
- Mumola, C. (2000). Incarcerated Parents and Their Children. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
- Nelson, M, P. Deess, & C. Allen. (1999). The First Month Out: Post-Incarceration Experience in New York City. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.
- Rane, T, McBride, B. (2000). Identity Theory as a Guide to Understanding Father’s Involvement with Their Children. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 347-366.
- Stryker, S. (1987) “The Interplay of Affect and Identity: Exploring the Relationship of Social Structure, Social Interaction, Self and Emotion.” Paper presented at the American Sociological Association Meetings, Chicago, IL.
- Stryker, S., & Serpe, R.T. (1994). Identity Salience and Psychological Centrailty: Equivalent, Overlapping, or Complimentary Concepts. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57,16-35.