II/IIYI/WI‘I/Wif/E’s/W3Willi/WM A "BM“ Y

H
3 1293 H
EI'H E515 10577 4388 MlCh‘gan State

University

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

THE CRISIS OF IMPRISONMENT: COPING WITH STRESS
ADJUSTMENT TO FORCED SEPARATION

presented by

Cosandra Irene Douglas

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph . D I degree in PS 5: £2thng

 

Major professor

 

DMe October 18, 1983

 

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771

 

 

 

 

MSU

LIBRARIES
4—H“.

b

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE CRISIS OF IMPRISONMENT: COPING WITH STRESS
ADJUSTMENT TO FORCED SEPARATION

By

Cosandra Irene Douglas

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Psychology
1983

ABSTRACT
THE CRISIS OF IMPRISONMENT: COPING WITH STRESS
ADJUSTMENT TO FORCED SEPARATION

By

Cosandra Irene Douglas

The purpose of this research was to explore the
potential relationships between (a) marital stability
and good familial support and (b) the incarcerated
male offender's participation in prison programs and
prison misconduct. More specifically, the research
investigated the link between an inmate's marital sta-
bility and the amount of familial support received on
the one hand and his participation in recommended pri-
son programs and the number of tickets (major miscon-
ducts) he received on the other. Coping strategies
utilized by both the inmates and their families were
also discussed.

Questionnaires were developed by reviewing the
male offender literature and conducting extensive in-
terviewing of inmates, parolees, parole officers, and
other key prison administrators. These instruments
were administered to felony-convicted male offenders
ages 21 to 49 years at a state-directed minimumdmedi-
um-maximum security correctional facility. The de-
sign of the study was correlational, employing multi-
ple regression analyses, discriminant function, and
analyses of variance techniques. These procedures ex-
amined factors related to the changes experienced by

Cosandra Irene Douglas

inmates and their families following incarceration of
the male "head-of—household". The independent, predic-
tor variables--the background factors--were (1) the ages
of the inmate and his wife, (2) their educational levels,
(3) the size of the family income before and during the
period of imprisonment, (4) the presence or absence of
children, (5) whether the inmate is a repeat offender
or not, (6) the amount of contact (communication) main-
tained by mail or visits during the inmate's imprison-
ment, (7) the couple's race, (8) the number of earlier
_marriages, (9) the length of the couple's acquaintance
before marriage, (10) the wife's social participation
before and during the inmate's imprisonment, (ll) resi-
dential mobility, and (12) inmate's perception of wife's
attitude toward imprisonment as well as feelings about
the "justness" of his sentence.

The criterion variables were the personal and in-
stitutional adjustment of the husband to prison life,
as evidenced by misconduct reports, as well as a set
of more subjective indices, including the inmates' per-
ceptions of their wives adjustment regarding (1) their
children, (2) the inmates' relatives, (3) the wives'
relatives, (4) their friends, and (5) their sexual needs.

The results of the research revealed the follo-
wing: (l) Marginal support for the prediction that
"inmates whose marriages are perceived as intact and
who experience good familial support have greater pro-
gram participation than those whose marriages lack in
emotional support", and (2) support for the hypothesis
that "inmates whose marital relationships are described
as intact (good) receive fewer misconduct reports (tic-
kets) than those whose marriages are not-intact (not good).

Cosandra Irene Douglas

These results were discussed in terms of possible (1)
implications for providing optimal prison experiences,
given limited resources and (2) directions for future
research.

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to

MY FAMILY

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is with a great sense of accomplishment that
I have undertaken and successfully completed this pro-
ject after numerous hours of research and dedication.
I would never have succeeded had it not been for the
encouragement and enthusiasm expressed by my beloved
family. At this time, I would like to extend my sin-
cerest thanks to my Mom and Dad without whose finan-
cial resources and committment to my completion of this
degree, I am certain that I could not have made it.
A very special thanks to my siblings, Beth, Dianna,
Sylvester and Floyd for your continued support through-
out this project.

To my committee Chairman, Dr. Lawrence A. Messe,
I can't thank you enough for your continued and reassur—
ing beliefs in my talents. Larry, thanks also for a-
llowing me the freedom during my academic and profes-
sional career development to pursue a program of study
to which I was most committed. Deeply felt thanks are
also extended to my committee members, Dr. Jeanne Gull-
ahorn, Dr. Dozier Thornton and Dr. David Kalinich.

Special thanks are also expressed to Dr. John Prel-
esnik, Superintendent at the State Prison of Southern
Michigan and to the Michigan Department of Corrections
for granting approval to conduct this research. For
his statistical expertise and assistance, a sincere
thanks to Dr. John Condon.

And, to my adorable husband Mr. Robert Leon Gordon,
very special acknowledgement is hereby given to you. I

iii

can't thank you enough for your love, patience, and un-
selfish support throughout the various phases of this re-
search.

Above all, I lift up mine eyes unto the heavens and
give thanks to COD from whence cometh all help. . .

iv

TABLE OF

List of Tables . . . . .
List of Appendices . . . .

CHAPTER I . . . . . . .
INTRODUCTION . . . . .

Studies of Prisoners and

Bloodgood . . .
Sacks
Blackwell
Zalba
Merris
Anderson
Schneller
Swan

ooooooo
ooooooo

oooooooo
odoooooo

The Inmate Social System

Social Acceptance . .
Material Possessions

Heterosexual Relations

Personal Autonomy
Personal Security

CONTENTS

Factors Contributing to Stress

Deprivations . . . .
Management Concerns
Post Release Concerns

Strategies of Coping

Families

in Prison

Inmate Stress and Outside Contact . . .

Research Rationale .

Hypotheses . . . . .
Chapter II . . . . .

IETHOD o o o o o
Subjects . . . . .
Sampling . . . . .
Design . . . . .
Interview . . . . .
Instruments . . . . .
Chapter III . . . . .
RESULTS . . . . .

Descriptive Statistics
Geographic Profile

Page
vii

viii

mumbbb l-' H

11

13

15

19
21
22
24
26

31

33
35

35
38
48
50

51
51

51
51

52

55

57
57

57
58

General Characteristics

Marital Stability

Factors Pertaining to Separat

Level of Education

The Wives . . . .
The Children . . .
Family Income . . .

Effects of Imprisonment Upon Children

io on

Coping Strategies Utilized . . . . .

Tests of Predicted Hypotheses

Hypothesis One . .
Hypothesis Two . .

Chapter IV . . .'. .
DISCUSSION ' ' ‘ °

Characteristics of Inmates and

Their Families . .

Interpretation of Needs

Treatment . . . . .
Parole

Principles and Methods of Supervi

Implications for Future Research

APPENDICES ° ' ° °
REFERENCES - ' - °

vi

S

10

Page'
58
62

63

7O
73

76
78

82
83

86

86
87

9O
9O

9O

92
96
98

98
102

104
128

Table
l.

2.
3.
4

U1
o

11.
12.

13.
14.
15.
16.

17.
18.
19.

20.

21.

LIST OF TABLES

Previous Studies of Prisoners' Families
Age Distribution of Inmates . . . . .
Age Distribution of Inmates' Wives . .

Marital Status of Inmates at Time
of Interview . . . . . . . . . . . .

Duration of Marital Relationship . . .

Length of Acquaintance Prior to
Marriage 0 O I O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Number of Separations from Family
Prior to Incarceration . . . . . . . .

Record of Inmates' Previous
Incarceration . . . . . . . . . . . .

Types of Crimes Committed by Inmates .

Criminal Offenses and Statutory Sentence
Lengths I O O O I O O O O O O O O O O

Dominance -- Submission Patterns in
Inmates' Families . . . . . . . . . . .

Marital Adjustment Scores Prior to
Incarceration by Race . . . . . . . . .

Level of Education of Inmates . . . . .
Level of Education of Inmates' Wives .
Age Distribution of Children . . . . .

Duration of Separation from Fathers
(Due to Incarceration) . . . . . . . .

Primary Source of Present Family Income
Types of Jobs Held by Inmates' Wives

Employment of Married Inmates Prior to
Incarceration . . . . . . . . . . . .

Combined Monthly Income of Husbands
and Wives Before Incarceration . . . .

Mean Number of Tickets Received by Inmate

Groups 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

vii

Page

59
59

6O
61

61
62

64
65-66

67-68
69

71

72
73

77

77
78
79

80
81

87

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix

A. Explanation of Research .

B. Research Participation
Fom O O O O O O O O O

C. Demographic Information
and Data Sheet . . . . .

D. Family - Change Scale .

E. Locke-Wallace Short
Marital Adjustment Test .

F. Perceptual Prison Adjust-

ment Questionnaire . . .

viii

Page
106

108

110
114

118

122

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted to explore the impact of
marital stability and good familial support on the incar-
cerated male offender's prison program participation and
prison misconduct. Few would argue that confinement in
prison necessitates certain negative consequences which
are often presumed to lead to stress. Stress, in the
context of this research, referred to any situation that
frustrated or impeded the satisfaction of vital needs
and that required various strategies of coping to over-
come the impediments to need satisfaction. The study
was useful in distinguishing between factors that led to
relatively adaptive functioning with good prison adjust-
ment from those that led to maladaptive functioning and
poor prison adjustment.

The task of identifying those inmates who have man—
aged to adapt relatively well to a forced separation from
their spouses, families and loved ones is a complex assign-
ment. The chief aim of this research was to identify
changes inmates experienced following their incarceration
and to gain knowledge regarding their perceptions of their
ability to cope with the crisis of imprisonment. In as
much as the focus of this research was on the married in-
carcerated offender, the conceptualization of the family
was limited to the traditional nuclear family (which con-
sisted of the inmates' wives and children with whom he had
resided prior to his arrest and subsequent confinement).
Additionally, for those single inmates who were interviewed
as a part of this research, the conceptualization of these

1

families was too in terms of the traditional nuclear family
(having consisted of the inmates' parents and/or siblings).
A secondary goal of the research was to measure inmates'
perceptions of the effects of imprisonment on their families.
Also of interest to the researcher, was the identification
of specific coping strategies utilized by imprisoned male
offenders as they contend with numerous deprivations inher-
ent to life within the walls of a large maximum security
prison.

Imprisonment is a significant life experience whose
adverse effects on the individual and his family probably
depend largely on the extent to which these peeple have
been able to cope with other crises. It is likely that
these coping experiences are relevant to adjustment in pri-
son, irrespective of whether the imprisonment itself is a
unique or recurrent event. Also, I expected that adjust-
ment to prison would be smooth or rough, depending on the
quantity and/or quality of services and resources available
both within and outside of the prison community. A third
likely moderator of adjustment was the manner in which the
individuals perceive the crisis generated by imprisonment
relative to their status and objectives within a given com-
munity.

According to statistics for prisoners in the United
States, the marital status of adult persons appears to
have a substantial relationship with incarceration rates.
The rate of commitments to prisons and reformatories per
100,000 population of the same marital status is lowest
for the married, next to the lowest for widowed, next for
the single, and highest for the divorced. These ranks,
moreover, are not affected very much by age factors. Di-

vorced persons have the highest commitment rate at each
age, and this is true for each of the sexes. Divorced
males, aged twenty to twenty-four, have a rate of commit-
ment about six times as high as either single males of
the same age or married males of the same age, while di-
vorced females of that age have a rate about ten times as
high as either single females or married females of the
same age. Married males have a lower commitment rate
than single males in all age groups except fifteen to
nineteen; the rate is only slightly lower in the twenty
to twenty-four age group, but is significantly lower in
later ages (Sutherland and Cressey, 1974).

It has also been found that married persons succeed
on parole more frequently than persons of any other mar-
ital class, and that those who are compatibly married
succeed more often than do the incompatibly married. It
is not possible, however, to conclude from these statis-
tics that marital status is a direct causative "factor"
in imprisonment. Instead, it can be concluded that mar-
ital status is important to criminality because it deter-
mines the kind of behavior patterns with which persons
come into contact (Sutherland and Cressey, 1974).

Of major concern in any study attempting to ascer-
tain the influence of imprisonment on inmates and their
families is the question of change within the family
structure. To what extent has the inmate's imprison-
ment (forced separation) affected changes in (1) social
acceptance, (2) economic status, and (3) the amount of
sexual and emotional frustration.

While the number of studies conducted over the last
quarter of a century that deal with prisoners and their
families have steadily increased, purely investigative

4

studies of the impact of imprisonment on prisoners and
their families have been relatively limited. Further-
more, there is a high concentration of cross-referencing
among those available.

Review of Literature

 

Of the eight studies dealing with prisoners and their
families most cross-referenced in the literature, two are
outdated, having been conducted thirty-seven and twenty-
seven years ago. 0f the four most current, two were con-
ducted in the United States, one was conducted in Austra-
lia and one in Great Britain. Table 1 summarizes the sa-
lient features of this work.

The Bloodgood Study

 

The first empirical study of prisoners' families was
conducted in 1928 by Ruth Bloodgood for the United States
Department of Labor. Its chief concern was to determine
what effect the State of Kentucky's system of compensation
for prison labor had on the families of prisoners. Blood-
good found that most families were undergoing severe fi-
nancial difficulties and were barely "eking out an exis-

tence.‘ The State of Kentucky, as a result, increased the

rate of payment for prison labor (Bloodgood, 1928).
The Sacks Study

 

The second study, which was conducted in 1938 by Jerome
G. Sacks at the District of Columbia Reformatory for Men,
also revealed that a majority of prisoners' families could
not adequately take care of their financial needs and re-
sponsibilities. He consequently argued that while many of
the problems families encountered were problems subject to
treatment, none of the families had been assisted appropri-

.oHaEwa Bouncy uoauum o ponaawu: moaosum ozu mo osozn

.couvaano Hausa paw muocomwun oHoEow oofiosum magnum

 

 

commences
NmH mma m30a>uoucH paw oEonoH< Hmma swam
mango:
icofiumoSv new ownsdfiou mo
no no m3ma>uouoH uoapumwa omma uoHHocnom
mHHouumo<
om cm msoa>uoucH mausonfioz momfi acmuovc<
moans paw
one Nmo mzmw>uouCH ocmawcm nooa mfiuuoz
wwcuomaawo
mmwuasoo
mmamwc< mad
«NH mama m3ow>uouGH can moofio~< coma monN
acuwcwnmmz
moufimc zucsoo
we on -coaummao wcmxoam anon Haosxumam
mmaoaum
mmmu pom ownssfiou mo
mm mm m30w>uoucH uowuumwa wmma mxumm
moHvSum
mmmu one
cam oHN mama>umucH sxuaucox mama uoomuooam
voapzum omapaum
moaawsom mmumscH xpsum monum you» Honoumomom
mo nonszz mo uuoaflz mo oaha mo woman no oswz

 

 

oou~a6mh .uuucomgum mo moavaum unoa>oumui.a m4m<a

ately through parole services or through any prison-
connected agency. A basic misgiving appeared to be

that generally when any outside assistance was rendered
(which was seldom), it was given through public and pri-
vate agencies functioning in the community. Moreover,
Sacks pointed out that these families' economic and
social adjustment to the imprisonment was indeed bound
to be highly unsatisfactory (Sacks, 1938).

The Blackwell Study

 

James E. Blackwell's study "The Effects of Invol-
untary Separation on Selected Families of Men Committed

' involved ad-

to Prison from Spokane County, Washington,’
ministering questionnaires to 80 men imprisoned in the
State of Washington, as well as to 48 of their wives.
Blackwell's chief aims were to determine family
adjustment to imprisonment and to discern those factors
that could be used to predict adjustment level. The
Burgess-Cottrell Marital Adjustment Scale and an adapta-
tion of Hill's Adjustment Scale were used to measure
the variables of interest (Blackwell, 1959). Other var-
iables that were measured (the background factors) were
marital adjustment before imprisonment, the size of the
family income before and during the period of separation,
residential mobility, whether the woman was pregnant at
the time of marriage, the length of the husband's minimum
term in prison, whether this was a first offense or not,
the amount of contact maintained by mail during the
couples' separation, marital status at the time of impri-
sonment, the couple's race, the presence of siblings
in couples' parental families, the number of earlier
marriages, the institutional adjustment of the husband
to prison life, the wife's social activities before and

during imprisonment, the wives' attitudes toward impri-
sonment as a crisis (Blackwell, 1959).

Blackwell concluded from his study that marital
and family adjustment during and after imprisonment
could be predicted with a significant degree of accu-
racy.

He found the following variables positively rela-
ted to good adjustment to the separation: (1) High fam-
ily income before separation, (2) High level of educa—
tion by the couple, (3) Wife pregnant at time of marri-
age, (4) Couple divorced at the time of incarceration,
(5) Good marital adjustment before separation, (6) Short
minimum sentence, (7) Separation not seen by wife as a
crisis, (8) Present marriage of long duration, (9) Large
amount of mail correspondence during incarceration, (10)
Good institutional adjustment by inmate, and (11) The
wife's social participation during husband's absence.

The validity of some of these findings may be ques-
tioned in view of the fact that Blackwell used quantita-
tive analysis for both quantitative and qualitative var-
iables (Pearson's ; was used for all variables. This
is a statistical formula used to determine the rela-
tionship of two quantitative variables or factors).

The Zalba Study

 

Of the eight studies reviewed in this chapter, the
study by Serapio Zalba (1964) is the only one which had
prisoners' children as its primary focus. Zalba's study
concerned the problems faced by children who were sepa-
rated from.their mothers because of the woman's impri-
sonment. She also investigated what community services
were available to help these children of women prisoners.
Her results pointed out a definitive need for family-

oriented planning, both for the welfare of the children
and the rehabilitation of the mothers. She also recom-
mended increased cooperation among various social a-
gencies responsible for working with mothers and their
children.

The Morris Study

 

Pauline Morris of Great Britain completed perhaps
the most intensive study of prisoners and their families
to date (Morris, 1965). Morris interviewed some 932 in-
mates from 17 of the 45 prisons in England and Wales,
and also 676 of these inmates' wives. The study is a
major contribution to the knowledge of prisoners' fam-
ilies both because of the large number of wives included
in the study and because of the extensive nature of the
wives' interviews, which lasted from two to two-and-one-
half hours in each case.

Methodologically, the Morris study has much in com-
mon with a study conducted by Nancy Anderson in Austra-
lia, but Morris' was larger in scope and in some cases
utilized more intensive interviewing, thus permitting
greater generalization.

Though Morris studied 17 prisons, she did not util-
ize random sampling. Prisons were chosen for their a-
bility to fill certain quotas of different types of crim-
inals. These quotas, established by Morris, weighted
the group she studied with certain types of criminals.
This lack of random sampling rendered tests of signifi-
cance problematic, but some were useful nevertheless.
(Only approximately 16 percent of the men in her sample
were Black, whereas the number of Blacks in Jackson Pri-
son, the site of the present study, was significantly
higher. There are approximately 65 percent Black inmates

housed at Jackson.)

Morris studied the families of three types of in-
mates: recidivists, non-recidivists or "status" offen-
ders, and a separate category of inmates who were civil,
not criminal, offenders (e.g., a man who was arrested
for non-support).

Morris separately analyzed the data from the three
different subgroups. The largest of these groups con-
sisted of the recidivists and non-recidivists, 726 in-
mates and 534 of their wives. The second group consis-
ted of 171 civil prisoners and 107 of their wives. A
third group consisted of 35 inmates and their wives
from the London area who were studied quite intensively
over an eighteen-month period.

The study of recidivists and non-recidivists util-
ized short interviews with the inmate and long semi-
structured interviews with the wives. Seventy-five
percent of the inmates and sixty-two percent of the
wives were under the age of forty. Thirty percent
of the wives were employed at least part-time. A1-
most all wives had experienced pressure to go to work,
and those who did not work generally gave needing to
care for their children as the reason for staying at
home. Most of the wives that were employed held domes-
tic jobs. Seventy-eight percent of the families were
receiving aid from National Assistance and the average
number of children per family was 3.2.

Morris found that about 18 percent of the families
lived in conditions of "considerable dirt and squalor,"
but she felt that the percentage would be about the same

10

for equivalent families of non-prisoners.

The difficulties most often mentioned by the wives
were (in order of decreasing frequency): finances, man-
agement of their children in their husband's absence,
loneliness and sexual frustration, fears about their
husband's release, and housing concerns.

The women's adjustment to being prisoners' wives
was rated on a seven-point scale in thirteen different
areas: housing, finances, attitude toward welfare a-
gencies, employment, the children's behavior, the wife's
attitude toward her marriage and the future, the wife's
relationship with her husband's family, her relation-
ship with her own parents, the children's relationship
with their father in prison, the extent of the wife's
present social activities, and her relationship with
neighbors and friends (Morris, 1965).

Thirteen different background variables that might
contribute to adjustment were then correlated with the
average of the thirteen scale scores. The variables
were: the length of the prison sentence; the length
of time the couple had already been separated; the type
of offense; the husband's former occupation; the dura—
tion of the marriage; how long the couple had known each
other before marriage; the wife's age; the husband's
previous record of imprisonments, if any; the geographi-
cal mobility of the family; the couple's marital status
at the time of imprisonment; the husband's previous mar-
riages, if any; the wife's previous marriages, if any;
and the size of the family (Morris, 1965).

The intense study of 35 wives during an eighteen-
month period produced several findings with regard to
family relationships. With the passing of time, material

11

conditions, physical health, sexual frustrations and the
feelings of loneliness appeared to worsen. Those wives
who had been very dependent on their husbands were more
apt to show signs of constant deterioration than did
wives who had been less dependent on their husbands. The
initial stage of separation was the most crucial, espec-
ially for non-recidivists. The personality of the wives
appeared to be a more important factor than the quality
of the families' adjustment in sustaining the impact of
separation. Families appeared to be loosened by each
additional prison sentence, and the personalities of
both the inmates and their wives were found to be impor-
tant factors in achieving successful adjustment to re-
union.

Two of Morris' hypotheses were supported by the
findings of her study: (1) family relationships foll-
owing conviction and imprisonment followed a pattern
set by the family relationships existing before impri-
sonment; and (2) wives with wide kinship networks sought
additional support from them during the husband's im-
prisonment.

The Anderson Study

 

The study published by Nancy Anderson, When Father
Goes to Gaol, was conducted in Melbourne, Australia (An-

 

derson, 1965). Eighty-four prisoners, 59 prisoner wives,
and 12 employees from agencies dealing with prisoners
or prisoners' families were interviewed in an effort

to determine whether community services were meeting
the needs of prisoners' families. Only a few of the
wives interviewed were wives of the men studied. For
the most part they were selected from welfare rolls,

and their husbands were in various jails and prisons.

12

The prisoners and the wives in the study were pre-
dominantly young and poorly educated. Only nine of the
inmates and fifteen of the wives had gone beyond the
eighth grade, and only two wives and fifteen inmates
were over forty years old.

According to the answers given by the wives to un-
structured questions, the most difficult problems faced
by the families, in order of frequency mentioned were:
money, loneliness, illness, taking care of the children,
and disapproval of friends and relatives.

Fifty of the fifty-five wives judged their adjust-
ment to their husband's incarceration to be average or
above. Twenty-three wives considered their families in
a state of crisis as a result of their husbands' impri—
sonment. Some of the factors which wives found helpful
in making an adjustment to their husbands' incarceration
were: children, help from relatives, and being independ-
ent persons.

Anderson argues, "The extent which family and non-
family roles are disrupted is directly related to how

' Variations in the

much crisis the family experiences.‘
amount of crisis seem to rest in differences in social
class and the husband's previous criminal record. Some
wives adjusted well to the imprisonment and separation
because they did not expect to resume the relationship

after their husbands were released from prison.

The Schneller Study
Donald P. Schneller's study, The Prisoner's Family:

 

A Study of the Effects of Imprisonment on the Families of

 

Prisoners, examined the effects of imprisonment on the

 

families of ninety-three men who were in a medium-secur-
ity prison in Washington, D.C. From prison records,
Schneller collected the names of inmates who were living
with their wives at the time of arrest and had been in
prison for five years or less (Schneller, 1976).

13

He developed "a Likert-type scale" to measure any
change that occurred within these families. This scale
was composed of fifteen items and was divided into three
subscales. The items were discussed with the wives and
the families were then rated on these dimensions. The
families were also given scores on each of the three sub-
scales. These procedures were designed to measure three
components of change: (1) change in social acceptance,
change in economic status, and change in the amount of
sexual and emotional frustration felt by the wife.

Schneller found that the families experienced lit-
tle, if any, hardship in the realm of social acceptance--
poor Black families, especially, tended to view impri-
sonment as part of the overall system of discrimination
over which they have no control. Happily married couples,
however, suffered real hardship in the economic and sex—
ual-emotional areas.

Moreover, Schneller found that financial status and
sexual-emotional frustration were significantly altered
and presented real problems for a majority of wives, and
this was especially true for happily married respondents.

The Swan Study

 

L. Alex Swan's study, Families of Black Prisoners:

 

Survival and Progress, appears to be the most recent pro-

 

ject to study the effects of imprisonment on the families
of prisoners, specifically, the families of Black pri-
soners. The Swan study attempted to identify the crises
in each stage of imprisonment -- arrest, arraignment,
trial, and imprisonment -- and assessed the role played
by family members as they adjusted to each of these pha-
ses, particularly to the loss of the person (usually male)
on whom the rest of the family typically had depended for

l4

psychological and material support (Swan, 1981).
Swan found that the greatest impact of imprison-

ment on the prisoners' families was financial. Other
serious problems which affected a great many of the
wives was anxiety regarding ill-health, insufficient
financial resources, or the lack of a male parent to
help in the children's upbringing. Swan's recommenda-
tions included prompt intervention services at each
stage in the imprisonment crisis and workshops for
prisoners and their families to strengthen family sol-
idarity and to reduce the possibilities of recidivism.
Also increased communication and referral systems among
those agencies and individuals who deal with prisoners
and their families on a consistent basis was recommen-
ded.

The studies reviewed here had various emphases, but
all were concerned with the impact of imprisonment on
the families of the incarcerated. All have made some
contribution to the knowledge and understanding of the
subject and the whole process of family adjustment. How—
ever, because these studies varied in emphasis and meth-
odology, it is difficult, if not impossible, to compare
and contrast their results. They have similarities, but
their differences require that other research be con-
ducted using similar, but more methodologically sound
techniques and procedures.

It is felt that the present research conducted was
an attempt to do a better job of sorting out the myriad
of data on the incarcerated offender, while additionally
providing new information that can be of help to prison
officials as they strive to maintain internal order with-

15

in their institutions. Also a survey of the coping
strategies utilized by incarcerated male offenders, as
well as records of the kinds of behavior pa terns ex-
hibited within the mileau of a maximum-security prison
setting, was undertaken to provide those working in
the prison community with information that could en-
hance prison adjustment, while simultaneously lower-
ing the incidence of prison misconduct and maladaptive
behavior.

The Inmate Social System

Prisons have always proved to be exciting labora-
tories for social scientists, criminologists, and more
recently psychologists, and psychiatrists, yet not
everyone views this laboratory in quite the same way.
Presented below is a description of the prison as a
kind of social environment.

A prison is a physical structure in a geographi-
cal location where a number of people, living under
highly specialized conditions, utilize the resources
and adjust to the alternatives presented to them by
a unique kind of social environment. For some re-
searchers, the prison represents a microcosm of the
larger society. Donald Cressey makes the following
position explicit in his introduction to a collec-
tion of studies of the prison:

The prison is a microcosm of the larger so-
ciety which has created it and which maintain it,
for this larger society also remains as a unit
and continues to "work", despite numerous indi-
vidual disagreements, misunderstandings, antago-
nisms, and conflicts. The most general aim of
the book is to contribute to a better understan-
ding of the larger society through analyses of
its microcosm, the prison (Cressey, 1961).

16

Other researchers deny that the prison can be con-
sidered in any real sense a microcosm of the larger so-
ciety. They deny the use of the term prison community
to refer to what, from their viewpoint, can only be con-
sidered a unique type of formal organization. Hillery
asserts:

If communities are seen as generally compo-
sed of conformists, and if total institutions are
generally composed of deviants, then it is not sur—
prising that total institutions are really anti-
communities . . . The concept of total institution
. . . at least has the value of suggesting the most
extreme form of non-community (Hillary, 1968).

The majority of researchers, without explicitly re-
jecting the microcosm approach, examine the prison as a
particular form of social organization (Cloward, 1960).
Some of these researchers use the model of Erving Goff-
man, which emphasizes the particular characteristics of
the "total institution" as a social organization. The
prison, like other total institutions, is a "place of
residence and work where a large number of like-situated
individuals, cut off from the wider society for an appre-
ciable period of time, together lead an enclosed, formally
administered round of life (Carter, 1972).

The people enmeshed in, and creating this environ-
ment include administrative, custodial, and professional
employees, habitual petty thieves, one-time offenders,
gangsters, professional racketeers, psychotics, pre-psy-
chotics, neurotics, and psychopaths, all living under
extreme conditions of physical and psychological com-
pression. The more formal administrative structure of
the prison may be understood in a brief glance at its
table of organization. Such a table reveals a series

17

of bureaucratically arranged positions with the warden
at the top, and formal flow of power downward from his
position. An even more penetrating glance at the so-
cial structure of the prison reveals an ongoing complex
of processes that cannot be described by a static enum-
eration of formal powers and functions. For interacting
with this formal administrative structure, and in many
ways ind pendent of it, is another social structure,
the inmate social system, which has evolved a complex
of adaptational processes with which inmates attempt

to cope with the major problems of institutional liv-
ing.

Perhaps the first and most obvious characteristic
of the inmate social system is the absence of escape
routes from it. Not only is the offender incarcerated
in a physical structure without exit, he is enmeshed
in a human environment and a pattern of usages from
which often times the only escape is psychological with-
drawal. Another aspect of the inmate social system is
its rigidly hierarchical character, in which vertical
mobility, while possible, is highly difficult. The
causes of this immobilizing rigidity are varied.

The number of roles an individual may play are se-
verely limited and, once assigned, are maintained -- par-
ticularly at the lower status levels--through enormous
group pressure. From the very moment a new inmate arrives
at prison from the court or county jail, he is exposed
to a series of very defining experiences.

It is of interest that those inmates who partici-
pate in and administer these experiences are frequently
those who recognize that the inmate is somewhat near
their level, a perception which stimulates anxiety in
them. For instance, an obviously tough hoodlum will

l8

create no special problems to the majority of lower-
status inmates who, responding to minimal cues, will
either avoid him or immediately acknowledge his higher
status. However, the arrival of this type of inmate
pose a threat to the block's chief "bad man", who will
be expected to challenge the newcomer to a battle of
mutual definitions.

Moreover, there is an additional aspect of this
defining process which sheds light on another charac-
teristic of the social structure, namely, its extreme
authoritarianism. The role-defining conflicts carried
on by inmates on or near the same status level point a
up the fact that any situation of equality is a situ-
ation of threat which must be resolved into a relation-
ship of superordinance and subordinance. However vehe-
mently inmates in groups demand equal treatment and
condemn favoritism, inmates as individuals continuously
press for special personal advantages.

Generally, where demands for increased permissive-
ness have been granted by authorities, the results have
almost invariably been that the rigid authoritarian pat-
terns have not been destroyed, but simply transferred
to a new and less stable center of gravity. This type
of authoritarian character of inmate relstionships sug-
gests that members of the system afford no exception to
the general psychological observation that the victims
of power tend to regard its possession as the highest
personal value.

Gresham Sykes, in his study, The Society of Captives,
suggests that is is this systematic deprivation of goods
and services that provides much of the incentive for the

19

development of a subordinate system and an inmate atti-
tude that helps alleviate what he describes as "the pains
of imprisonment." According to Sykes, any inmate enter-
ing prison is faced with five major problems involving
"deprivation or frustration in the areas of social accept—
ance, material possessions, heterosexual relations, per-
sonal autonomy, and personal security (Sykes, 1958).

Social Acceptance

 

According to Sykes, the mere fact that the prison-
er's movements are restricted, is far less serious than
the fact that imprisonment means that the inmate is cut
off from family, relatives, and friends, not in the self-
isolation of the hermit, but in the involuntary seclusion
of the outlaw. While it is certain that visiting and
mailing priviliges do partially relieve the prisoner's iso-
lation--that is if he can find someone to visit him or
write to him and who will be approved as a visitor or
correspondent by the prison officials--it seems that for
many inmates, as the months and years pass by, their
links with persons in the free community often weaken.

Seeing this isolation as painfully depriving or frus-
trating in terms of lost emotional relationships, of
loneliness and boredom, is not that difficult. But what
makes this pain of imprisonment much harder is the fact
that the confinement of the criminal represents a delib-
erate, moral rejection of the criminal by the free com-
munity. Indeed, it seems that the moral condemnation
of the criminal, however it may be symbolized, is what
converts into punishment, i.e., the just consequence of
committing an offense, and it is this condemnation that

20

confronts the inmate by the fact of his seclusion.

Many have argued that many criminals are so aliena-
ted from conforming society and so identified with a
criminal subculture that the moral condemnation, rejec-
tion, or disapproval of legitimate society does not
phase them; they are, it is said, indifferent to the
penal sanctions of the free community, at least as far
as the moral stigma of being defined as a criminal goes.
This may indeed be true for a small number of offenders,
such as the professional thief described by Sutherland
(1937) or the psychopathic personality studied by William
and Joan McCord (1956). However, for the great majority
of inmates in prison, the evidence suggests that neither
alienation from the ranks of the law-abiding nor invol-
vement in a system of criminal values is sufficient to
eliminate the threat to the prisoner's ego posed by so-
cietyfs.rejection (Reckless, 1955).

Sykes further postulates that the signs pointing to
the prisoner's degradation are many--the anonymity of a
uniform and a number rather than a name, the shaven head,
the insistence on gestures of respect and subordination
when addressing officials, and so on. The prisoner in
essence is never allowed to forget that by committing
a crime, he has forgone his claim to a full-fledged,
trusted member of society. It is true that in the past
the imprisoned criminal literally suffered civil death, and
and, although the doctrines of attainder and corruption
of blood were largely abandoned in the 18th and 19th Cen-
turies, the inmate is still stripped of many of his civil
rights -- the right to vote, to hold office, to sue in
court, and so on (Tappan, 1954). But as important as the
loss of these civil rights may be, the loss of that more

21

diffuse status which defines the individual as someone
to be trusted or as morally acceptable is the loss which
hurts most.

80, it appears that the wall which seals off the
criminal, the contaminated man, is a constant threat to
the prisoner's self conception, and the threat is con-
tinually repeated in the many daily reminders that he
must be kept apart from "decent" men. Somehow this re-
jection or degradation by the free society must be warded
,fo,\turn d aside, rendered harmless. If the imprisoned
criminal is to endure psychologically, he must somehow

 

find a device for rejecting his rejectors (McCorkle and
Korn, 1962).

Material Possessions

 

Now it is true that the prisoner's basic material
needs are met in the sense that he does not go hungry,
cold, or wet. He generally receives adequate medical
care and he has the opportunity for exercise. .But a,
.standard of living constructed in terms of so many calo-
ries a day, so many hours of recreation, so many cubic
yards-of space perwindividual, and so on, misses the
central point when one is discussing individual feelings
gfwdeprivation, however useful it may be in setting min-
imum levels of consumption for the maintenance of health.
Admittedly, there are many problems in attempting to
compare the standard of living existing in the free so-
ciety and the standard of living which is supposed to
be the lot of the inmate in prison. This is to say,
for example, how does one interpret the fact that a
covering for the floor of a cell usually consists of
a scrap from a discarded blanket and that even this po-
ssession is forbidden by prison authorities? A standard
of living can be hopelessly inadequate, from the inmate's

22

viewpoint, because it bores him to no end or fails to
provide those subtle symbolic overtones which we invest

in the world of possessions. Thss remains a very real
prisoner problem in the area of goods and sarvices. He
wants, or needs if you will, not just the so-called neces-
sities of life but also the amenities: such things as
cigarettes and liquor as well as calories, interesting
foods as well as sheer bulk, individual clothing, indi-
vidual furnishings for his living quarters as well as
shelter, privacy as well as space.

While the "rightfulness" of the prisoner's feeling
of deprivation can be questioned, Sykes maintains that
such criticisms are irrelevant to the major issue, namely
that legitimately or illegitimately, rationally or irrat-
ionally, the inmate population defines its present material
impoverishment as a painful loss. Sykes further main-
tains that because in modern Western culture, material
possessions are so large a part of the individual's con-
ception of himself that to be stripped of them is to be
attacked at the deepest layers of personality.

It is true that our society, as materialistic as
it may be, does not rely exclusively on goods and services
as a criterion of an individual's value; and, ultimately
the inmate population does defend itself by stressing al-
ternative or supplementary measures of merit. But impov-
erishment remains as one of the most devastating attacks
on the individual's self-image that our society has to
offer and the inmate cannot ignore the implications of
his straitened circumstances (Komarovsky, 1940).

Heterosexual Relations

 

It can be argued that if the inmate, then, is re-
jected and impoverished by the facts of his imprisonment,
he is also figuratively castrated by his involuntary

 

23

celibacy. Unlike the prisoner in many Latin-American
countries, the inmate in most American prisons does not
enjoy the priviledge of the so-called conjugal visit.
And during those moments when the prisoner is allowed

to see his wife, mistress, or "female friend", the woman
must often sit on one side of a plate glass window and
the prisoner on the other, often communicating by means
of a phone under the scrutiny of a guard.

A number of writers have suggested that men in pri-
son undergo a reduction of the sexual drive and that the
sexual frustrations of prisoners are therefore less than
they might appear to be at first glance. It should be
noted, however, that largely these reports of reduced sex-
ual interest have been confined to accounts of men im-
prisoned in concentration camps or similar extreme sit-
uations where starvation, torture, and physical exhaus-
tion have reduced life to a simple struggle for survival.
Lindner has noted that in the American prison these fac-
tors are not at work to any significant extent; and he
further notes that the inmate's access to mass media,
pornography circulated among inmates, and similar stim-
uli serve to keep the inmate's sexual impulses alive
(Lindner, 1951). It is quite_clear that the lack of heter-

"Qsexual intercourse is a frustrating experience for the
.incarceréted_criminal, particularly the married incar-
Qerated criminal, andthat it is a frustration which
weighs heavily and painfully on his mind during his pro-
lpnged confinement. (For some, namely, the "habitual"
homosexuals in the prison--men who were homosexual before
their incarceration and who continue their particular
behavior within the all-male society of the custodial
institution--perhaps, the deprivation of heterosexual in
tercourse cannot be counted as one of the pains of impri-

24

sonment.)

In addition to the frustrations which in the sexual
sphere can be described in physiological terms, theer also
are a number of psychological problems created by the
lack of heterosexual relationships. It is not uncommon
that latent homosexual tendencies may be aroused in the
individual in a society composed exclusively of men. This
type of situation tends to generate anxieties in its mem-
bers concerning their masculinity, regardless of whether
or not they are coerced, bribed, or seduced into an overt
homosexual liason. There are few inmates who can escape
the fact than an essential component of a man's conception,
his status of male, is called into question. And if an
inmate has engaged in homosexual behavior within the walls
not as a continuation of a habitual pattern, but as a rare
act of sexual deviance under the perceived intolerable
pressure of mounting physical desire, the psychological
onslaughts on his ego image will be particularly acute.

Additionally, yet another problem the deprivation
of heterosexual relationships carries with it has to do
with the fact that the inmate is cut off from the world
of women which by its very polarity gives the male world
much of its meaning. Like most men, the inmate must
search for his identity not simply within himself but also
in the picture of himself which he finds reflected in
others; and since a significant half of his audience is
denied him, the inmate's self-image is in danger of be-
coming half complete.

Personal Autonomy

Sykes maintains that the inmate suffers from a loss
of autonomy in that he is subjected to a vast body of
rules and commands which are designed to control his be-

25

havior in minute detail. To the casual observer, however,
it may seem that such things as the rules about language
used in letters, the hours of sleeping and eating, or the
route to work, are controlling relatively trivial and un-
important areas of life. And, perhaps it might be argued
that like material deprivation, the inmate in prison is
not much worse off than the individual in the free society
who is regulated in a great many aspects of life by sheer
custom. Some writers even argue that for a number of im-
prisoned criminals the extensive control of the custodians
provides a welcome escape from freedom.and that the pri-
son officials thus serve as a kind of external Super-Ego
which serves to reduce the anxieties arising from an aware-
ness of deviant impulses.

Regulation by a bureaucratic staff is felt much dif-
ferently than is regulation by custom. From the viewpoint
of the inmate, it is precisely the triviality of much of
the officials' control which often proves to be most un-
welcome. Most prisoners, in fact, express an intense hos-
tility against their far-reaching dependence on the de-
cisions of their captors, and the restricted ability to
make choices must be included among the pains of impri-
sonment, along with restrictions of physical liberty, the
posession of goods and services, and heterosexual rela-
tionships.

The loss of autonomy experienced by the inmates of
the prison does not represent a grant of power freely
given by the ruled to the rulers for a limited and speci-
fic end. Rather, it is total and it is imposed, and
for these reasons it is often less endurable. The nom-
inal objectives of the custodians are not, in general,
the objectives of the prisoners. Because so many of

26

the regulations and orders do not "make sense" from the
inmate's point of view, they often arouse the inmate's

hostility. Indeed, though, the incomprehensible order

or rule is a basic feature of life in prison. '

Personal Security

 

While it is true that every inmate does not live in
the constant fear of being robbed or beaten, the constant
companionship of thieves, rapists, murderers, and aggres-
sive homosexuals is far from reassuring. However strange
it may appear that society has chosen to reduce the crim—
inality of the offender by forcing him to associate with
more than a thousand other criminals for extended periods
of time, there is one meaning of this kind of involun-
tary union which is obvious, namely, that the individual
inmate is thrown into prolonged intimacy with other men
who in many cases have long histories of violent, aggres-
sive behavior. This certainly creates a situation which
can prove to be quite anxiety-provoking even for the har-
dened recidivist.

An important aspect of this general lack of feelings
of security is the fact that the inmate is acutely aware
that sooner or later he will be "tested," that others will
"push" him to see how far they can go, and that he must
be prepared to fight for the safety of his person and his
possessions. If he fails, he will forever thereafter be
an object of contempt, constantly in danger of being attack-
ed by other inmates who view him as an "easy mark," as a
man who cannot or will not defend his rights. And, on the
other hand, if he succeeds, he may well become a target
for the prisoner who wishes to prove himself, who seeks to
enhance his own image by defeating the man with a reputa-
tion for toughness.

27

Very succinctly, the inmate's loss of security a-
rouses acute anxiety, not just because violent acts of
aggression and exploitation occur, but also because be-
havior constantly calls into question the individual's
ability to cope with it, in terms of his own inntr re-
sources, his courage, his "nerve", if you will. Regard-
less of the nature or extent of his own criminality,
the uncertainties of whether he can take it or not, and
will he prove to be tough enough, constitute an ego
threat for the individual forced to live in prolonged
intimacy with other criminals. He often is unable and
unwilling to rely on prison officials for protection,
uncertain of whether today's joke will be tomorrow's
bitter insult, and such feelings do indeed contribute
to the prisoner's inability to feel safe.

In summary, the formal system's rules, regulations,
and methods of control can never fully anticipate or co-
ordinate all possible forms of behavior. And, thus,
an informal system develops in an attempt to amelio-
rate and eliminate the deprivation of goods and ser-
vices, autonomy, and security (McCorkle and Korn, 1954;
Sykes 1958; Cloward 1960; Grosser 1960; Dunheim and
Weinburg 1960; Shoblad 1970; Kalinich 1980). The infor-
mal system becomes an avenue to cover some of the more
complex interactive patterns with which the formal sys-
tem cannot deal with (Berk, 1966).

It seems that in all studies of inmate subcultures,
the same basic sociocultural system, regardless of the
location and characteristics of the institution, is de-
scribed. This is to say that inmates usually must con-
form or give the impression of conforming to the convicts'

28

codes or be ostracized and/or face isolation from fel-
low inmates. Such codes generally summarize the be-
havioral expectations current in the system. Sykes and
Messinger (1960) finds five main groups of expecta-
tions:

Don't interfere with inmates interests.
Don't lose your head.

Don't exploit inmates.

Don't weaken.

Don't be a sucker.

UI-l-‘LAJNH

Based on these expectations, the perfect prisoner is
strongly pro-prisoner, anti-administration, tough, cool,
dependable, and one who never uses others prisoners un-
fairly. Obviously, few prisoners approximate this ideal
man, but most give verbal allegiance to the model.

It is well documented that within the inmate cul-
ture there does exist a social hierarchy. The highest
order inmates are considered politicians or merchants.
They have influence with the guards and professionals
and manipulate the power structure in an effort to mini-
mize the frustrations caused by incarceration by gain-
ing power for themselves and delivering favors in the
form of goods and services to fellow inmates. It may
be necessary for leaders in the power structure to vio-
late certain portions of the inmate code to facilitate
long-term goals. Below the leaders in the social and
power structure are the "thugs" whose primary behavior
is violence, descending in order to the "right guys"
who follow the inmate code but attempt to avoid inter-
acting in the subculture, to the "square-johns" who
try to conform to the inmate social structure and fol-
low institutional rules, to the "low class" made up of
sex offenders, stoolies, punks, and homosexuals (McCleary
1968; Clemmer 1958; Haynes 1948).

29

Again, the inmate social structure includes the
development and selection of leaders who facilitate and
support the inmate culture. Peer pressure toward con-
formity to the inmate code is strong. In prison jar-
gon, the leaders are appropriately referred to as "pol-
iticians," as they are capable of developing favorable
interpersonal relationships with inmates, guards, and
treatment personnel. They typically are older than
most inmates, have spent "long bits" in the institu-
tion, and have usually been involved in criminal be-
havior that gives them status with their peers. Some-
times, they have been important members of criminal
gangs or organizations on the outside. According to
McCleary (1968), by and large, inmate leaders hold key
administrative or clerical positions and have access
to avenues of communication and administrative decis-
ion making through relationships of trust and power
persuasion.

It appears that inmates conform to official rules
and procedures for the first and last six months of
their incarceration. However, such conformity may be
more symbolic than substantive as inmates attempt to
facilitate their release through the power system. A
number of studies suggest that the longer the prison
term, the younger the inmate at first conviction, the
lower the social class of the offender's origin, the
fewer number of contacts with persons outside prison,
and the lower the inmate's postprison expectations, the
more likely he is to conform to the prison culture and
inmate code (Wheeler 1961; Garabedian 1963; Tittle and
Tittle 1975; Wélford 1967; Irwin 1970).

The indigenous origin theory of prisoner subcul-
tures, as posited by Cloward, Sykes, and others holds

30

that the prisoner subculture was largely a response to
conditions within the prison. This perspective remained
essentially unchallenged until 1962, when Irwin and
Cressey first published their opposing theory, the im-
portational model (Irwin and Cressey, 1962). Irwin and
Cressey's position is that the convict code is part of
a more general criminal code that exists outside the
prison, one that is imported into the prison from the
streets by newly sentenced felons. They also suggest
there is a more general utilitarian and manipulative
"hard core," lower-class culture in free society, from
which most criminals are drawn. The indigenous theory,
they say, has more to do with the maintenance of the
prisoner subculture than with its origin.

According to Irwin and Cressey, in fact, there are
really three prisoner subcultures, not one. These are
the thief subculture, the convict subculture, and the
conventional subculture. The thief subculture is com-
posed of various professional criminals who share with
their friends, who are loyal to other thieves, and who
do not seek leadership within the prison. In contrast,
the members of the convict subculture manipulates others
for their own gain and seek maximum power and status
while incarcerated. And, conventional subculture in-
mates are "square johns" who bring the legitimate cul-
ture of the streets into the institution with them
(Irwin and Cressey, 1962).

This challenge to the indigenous origin model was
not long unanswered. Roebuck argued, for example, that
the prison experience is what teaches thieves how to "do
easy time" and that the "right guy" image of nonmanipu-
lative sharing is a prisoner-created myth. Roebuck
countered that Irwin and Cressey offered no real evi-
dence for their model, that their theory was contra-
dicted by much of the penological literature, and that
it was inconsistent with his own prison experience and

 

31

research (Roebuck, 1963). Lending some support for
Roebuck's position was a long series of reports de-
rived from a study conducted by Tittle and Tittle (1964)
which reported that belief in the convict code in-
creased directly with time incarcerated for first offen-
ders and that the more prisoners accepted the convict
code, the less likely they were to reach a satisfactory
therapeutic adjustment, and the less they subjectively
experienced the pains of imprisonment (Tittle and Tit-
tle, 1965). Not all the predicted relationships were
found at statistically significant levels, but the
general trend of the data was supportive of the in-
digenous origin theory.

No matter what the prison experience is for thou-
sands of inmates throughout the country, it seems like-
ly that there are general factors that contribute to
all these stressful situations.

Factors Contributing to Stress in Prison

Deprivations

 

As has been mentioned earlier, confinement in pri-
son necessitates certain negative consequences which are
often presumed to lead to stress. These negative dimen-
sions, inherent in the prison environment, have been fre-
quently described (Reimer, 1937; Clemmer, 1940; Sykes,
1958).

Toch (1977) identified seven "environmental con-

' comparable to the deprivations identified by
Sykes, to be integral features of living in prison. These
concerns, which produce different levels of stress on in-
mates, were privacy, safety, structure, support, emotional
feedback, activity and freedom. Interviews with inmates
revealed that freedom was their most salient concern

cerns,‘

(Toch, 1977). However, elements of imprisonment do not

32

always create acute stress in each inmate throughout
his incarceration. First, deprivations cannot be iso-
lated from other pressures which may increase or de-
crease the impact of deprivations/concerns on inmate.
stress. Certainly, the inmate's background or stage
of his prison term.may render him more or less suscept-
ible to prison pressure. Second, strategies of coping
may ameliorate prison stress. Finally, the institu-
tion, itself, also has some flexibility in its own
policies and regulations to reduce the severity of
deprivations. Through furloughs and work release pro-
grams, the prison can diminish to some extent the pain
of loss of freedom. In a similar fashion, an effec-
tive classification system reduces safety/security
concerns by identifying and isolating those inmates
likely to exhibit violent tendencies.

Without question, the institution as well as the
inmate has a vested interest in reducing tension. How-
ever, prison officials do not have control over most
of the means to ameliorate adverse conditions. The
number of inmates sentenced to confinement, the num-
ber of inmates released by the parole board, legisla-
tive provisions dictating policy, budgetary constraints,
and public attitudes toward crime and corrections can
seriously restrict the ability of any institution to im-
plement tension-reducing procedures.

In sum, elements of imprisonment contribute to
pressure in prison. Although these factors are inher-
ent in the environment, they are subject to modifica-
tions and can differentially affect inmates.

33

Management Concerns

 

Many researchers argue that the focus of the admin-
istrative and custodial staff is the maintenance of in-
ternal order. To promote internal order, institutions
must have at their discretion a number of alternatives.
This range of options, their availability, and their
application subsequently affects the overall climate
of the facility.

Principally, institutions rely on two types of in-
centives to elicit cooperative behavior (Forst, 1980).
First, there are the incentives that shape the "quality
of time" and address the level of comfort of the in-
mate. These rewards or punishments include segrega-
tion, cell lock-up, privileges (i.e., night recreation),
work assignments, cell assignments and program oppor-
tunities. Second, "quantity of time" incentives are
typically either credits for good behavior (good time)
that lowers the minimum or maximum time to be served,
or consideration of the inmate's prison behavior at
parole board hearings. Both qualitative and quanti-
tative incentives are intended to encourage compliant
behavior by the inmate.

Empirical evidence on the actual or relative ef-
fect of these various rewards and punishments on inmate
cooperation is scant. Forst (1980) argued that quality
of time incentives may become more important during per-
iods of overcrowding because of the pressure to re-
lease inmates regardless of their prison behavior. Re-
strictions on incentives affecting the quality of life
were recently cited as being a contributor to inmate
frustrations prior to the 1980 New Mexico prison riot.
The New Mexico Attorney General (1980) in part attributed

34

the riot to a narrowing of privileges, such as transfers
to more desirable satellite facilities.

There also is some evidence that discriminatory
or perceived discriminatory application of rewards
and punishments may add stress to the inmate's adjust-
ment to prison (Toch, 1977; Attorney General of New
Mexico, 1980). McCarthy (1979) noted that inconsist-
ent decisions regarding eligibility and selection of
inmates for furloughs can contribute to inmate anxiety.

Another source of stress is the lack of certainty
regarding what behavior will be considered an indica-
tor of rehabilitation by the parole board, an especially
critical concern in jurisdictions with boards which
do not have guidelines concerning offense and offender
characteristics (New York State Special Commission on
Attica, 1972).

In the last decade, legislative, judicial and pa-
role board actions have resulted in significantly more
admissions to prison, longer average sentences, and
fewer releases. Overcrowding, produced by these and
other factors, can lead to stress in numerous ways.

It certainly limits opportunities for privacy, which

we know to be a basic concern of inmates. Additionally,
overcrowding restricts rehabilitative and work assign-
ments, adding to idleness and boredom, and of course
tension. Moreover, overcrowding frequently can reduce
the institution's ability to classify prisoners and
separate violent inmates from others. It becomes a
simple matter of bed space.

35

Post Release Concerns

Concerns about the future may also create stress
for inmates. Waller's (1974) Canadian study of ex-pri-
soners found that both parolees and dischargees were
concerned most about finding employment and about re-
turning to their families (Goldstein, 1980). Managing
financially also was reported to be a major issue for
those discharged. Only a small portion of Waller's
sample had been worried about returning to prison be-
fore they were released (Waller, 1974). According to
Glaser (1969) and Irwin (1970), the inmates they inter-
viewed had a very pessimistic view of the probability
of their successful readjustment. Whether this pessi-
mism translates into pressure in prison has not actually
been investigated. For certain types of inmates, how-
ever, there appear to be more acute levels of "anxieties
about the uncertainties of a future lifestyle" (Irwin,
1970).

In sum, to some degree external factors do affect
the inmate's level of tension inside prison. Employ-
ment and family concerns are the most often reported
sources of this tension.

Strategies of Coping

 

There is no question that each inmate has to a-
dapt in some fashion to the institutional life of pri-
son. Over the course of his sentence, an inmate may
choose one or a combination of different adaptations.
Isolating distinct strategies is not very practical
because prisoner interactions are so complex. Just
the same, though, distinguishing various strategies
aids in their understanding. For example, certain
strategies are more suited to extreme levels of frus-
tration perhaps because they have serious negative or
highly unpredictable consequences. Presented below is

36

a brief discussion of styles of cOping.

Litigation. Beginning in the 1960's, courts, es-

 

pecially federal courts, became increasingly receptive
to inmate suits. This receptivity, thus, encouraged in-
mates to file more and more petitions.

Litigation can have benefits at two levels. First,
inmate writ writers may see litigation as a method of
coping in the institution. The time consuming nature
of suits may actually be positive in the sense of keep-
ing inmates occupied. The status of writ writers can
also help to relieve tension generated by the degrada-
tion of being an inmate. Also, litigation might just
win the sought-after relief. Secondly, successful liti-
gation may improve prison conditions for the entire
prison population.

Grievance Procedures. Similarly, another way of

 

reducing tension for some inmates is to resort to formal
grievance procedures. Support for such procedures is
derived in part from the perspective that these "devices
are safety valves that can relieve the patterned dissat-
isfaction, deprivations and problems that occur in penal
settings, and that, if unheeded, might go to litigation
or to riots" (Robin, 1980; McArthur, 1974; Keating, et.
a1., 1975; Deneberg, 1975).

While both litigation and grievance procedures re-
quire planning and a willingness to await a response,
prison stresses may dictate that inmates develop more
immediate responses. Inmates may derive one or a num-
ber of individual non-violent roles as strategies of
coping. Occasionally, inmates may also resort to non-
violent collective action when extremely frustrated.

37

Withdrawal. For safety and/or privacy needs, which

 

are among the most important inmate concerns (Toch, 1977),
inmates may choose some form of withdrawal, depending in
part on the individual's level of stress.

Activity. The opposite of withdrawal is activity,
meant here as a nonviolent strategy of daily coping. Ac-
tivity may take different styles. One inmate may prefer
a particular work assignment, another a hobby, another
physical exercise, and etc. Such activities are intended
to relieve stress by keeping the inmate so occupied and
exhausted that there are neither time nor resources to
devote to prison frustrations (Toch, 1977). Although
there are no reliable trend data on the proportion of
inmates adopting one or another strategy, it seems a
reasonable inference from recent research that the vio-
lent prison has fostered withdrawal as the primary style
of most inmates today.

Collective Nonviolent Action. Collective nonvio-

 

lent action by inmates refers to strikes, slow-downs,

and similar disruptive behavior by a group of inmates.
Such a strategy would be considered short-term and typi-
cally would require a relatively high level of frustra-
tion. Very frustrating conditions would definitely be

a prerequisite in order to obtain consensus. Both strikes
and their violent equivalent, riots, sporadically mani-
fest and ventilate collective frustrations.

In summary, as mentioned earlier, both internal and
external factors contribute to prison stress and tension
and can be manipulated in either a positive or negative
way. Perhaps the single most significant pressure threat-
ening to cancel out the benefits of any ameliorative ef-
forts is overcrowding. (Already in Michigan this year,
the Emergency Powers Act to ease overcrowding in Michi-
gan's prisons has been invoked six times. The Emergency

38

Powers Act is utilized anytime the prisons exceed in-
tended capacity for more than thirty (30) consecutive
days. It reduces the minimum sentence of prisoners by
ninety (90) days, resulting in their early release from
the institution.) Overcrowding restricts or destroys
institutional and inmate efforts to reduce tension, and,
because there are no signs that this conditinn will
change in the immediate future, we certainly need to
explore means by which internal order and greater in-
mate compliance can be obtained. The present research
sought to accomplish this goal.

Inmate Stress and Outside Contact

 

It should not be surprising that imprisonment gen-
erates some degree of pressure in each and every inmate.
We know that most of life's changes or transitions pro-
duce some disequilibrium and require adjustment. Most
of us have made, with varying degrees of success, tran-
sitions from grammar school to high school, old neigh-
borhood to new neighborhood, friend to foe, and lover
to exlover. Some of these changes are painful and re-
quire the use of considerable coping resources to endure.
It is likely however, that the transition from the street
to prison is among the most unsettling. Prison pressures
may lead inmates to choose one or more strategies of
coping with their environment. The array of interactions
in prison is a mixture of both pressures and reactions
to pressure. The available evidence on one measure of
psychological breakdown, self-injury, indicates that (l)
self-destructive breakdowns are relatively more common
at the beginning stage of incarceration than in other
stages of confinement (Esparza, 1973; Heilig, 1973; Martin,
1971), and (2) those who do injure themselves in prison

 

39

tend to do it relatively early inttheir period of con-
finement (Biegel and Russell, 1973; Danto, 1973; Esparza,
1973; Heilig, 1973; Martin, 1971). These findings sug-
gest that the initial period of incarceration may be
especially stressful.

Many argue that persons who exhibit certain life
styles or engage in illicit occupations should realisti-
cally anticipate arrest and confinement; however, crim-
inologists report that they seldom do (e.g., Gibbs, 1978).
Still following the actual incarceration, many cope with
the experience by rationalizing it as a cost of doing
business or a consequence of their lifestyle.

Prior to arrest and incarceration, however, the
possibility of eventual confinement is in some ways sim-
ilar to perceptions of death. This is to say that al-
though death happens to all of us, very few are prepared
for its arrival. The early period of conefinement in
prison, like death, may be reacted to with disbelief and
shock when it does arrive.

Certainly one group of prisoners who are especi-
ally susceptible to this type of disbelief and shock
are those whose pre-prison lifestyles involved a heavy
chemical component (Gibbs, 1978). In addition to their
inability to satisfy their physical cravings for drugs,
once incarcerated, these men must face the consequences
of confinement without the assistance of the substance(s)
that they used to cope with the stresses of life on the
streets.

Some of the interviewed prisoners claimed that the
constant activity involved in obtaining drigs and the
effects of the drugs blinded them to the consequences of
their actions. For many, drugs alleviated the pain associ-

40

ated with previous periods of incarceration and dis-
torted future time perspective.

Another group of persons who are susceptible to
crisis upon confinement are those who suffer from.psy-
chological problems. Gross psychological disturbances
are not uncommon responses to abrupt shifts in life
conditions. Where psychotic symptomatology or tenden-
cies already exist, the setting in which even psycho-
logically stable individuals have difficulty separa-
ting what is real from what is not can immobilize and
aggravate schizophrenic delusions. Granted, addicts
and psychotics are expecially vulnerable to the stresses
of the transition from street to prison, but the sud-
den change is stressful for most other people as well.

Stress and Outside Contact

Stress, in the context used here, refers to any
situation that frustrates or impedes the satisfaction
of vital needs and that require extraordinary efforts
to allow the system to continue to function. Stress
requires the marshalling of emergency resources in or-
der for a system to maintain equilibrium.and to over-
come the impediments to need satisfaction (Oken, 1962).
If the system is so imbalanced by stress that it can-
not provide for essential needs, the system breaks
down. People, in this sense, may be considered systems
and they may suffer physical and psychological break-
downs as the result of stress. If the flow of blood
to a vital organ, for instance, is restricted and the
system cannot overcome or remove the impediment, the
organ may cease to function. A person who is constantly

41

frustrated in his attempts to fulfill certain basic
emotional needs, due to the myriad of rules and con-
straints placed upon him in prison, may also cease to
function. He may become withdrawn and lose touch
with reality and, thus, experience a psychological
breakdown.

Changes in environment or circumstances can af-
fect the ability to satisfy certain needs and to dis-
tinguish the relative importance of various needs. In
certain settings, certain needs predominate or become
survival requisites. Within the confines of the maxi-
mum security prison, without question maintaining a
sense of security in a threatening environment requires
more vigilance than is necessary in less dangerous set-
tings. However, increased vigilance can have unintended
consequences. Scanning the environment for threats
can result in increased sensitivity to danger cues,
and thus produce even greater insecurity.

Whenever a person must contend with either chronic
or acute stress, there is a possibility that the indi-
vidual will fail to cope. The chances that a person will
break down are related to (l) the severity of the stress;
(2) the characteristics of the person experiencing the
stress; and (3) the nature of the stress.

As has been mentioned, certain needs can become
more salient than usual in certain environments. The
transition from street to prison poses an adjustment
problem for the newly confined that goes beyond the im-
mediate prison environment. Incarceration may change
a number of the individual's established relationships.
Upon incarceration, a man accustomed to possessing real

42

or imagined power or resources on the streets may be-
come dependent on individuals in the prison community
for many important functions. This sudden role reversal
may have implications for his sense of adequacy.

During periods of transition, people often exper-
ience feelings of lack of control. "Stability zones"
or'bertain enduring relationships that are carefully
maintained despite all kinds of other changes" can be-
come important coping resources during times of transi-
tion (Toffler, 1970). It has also been observed that
people in threatening or stressful situations center
their attention and energy almost exclusively on the
resources necessary to overcome the stress and reestablish
psychological equilibrium. This narrowing of focus
is known as the "shrinking phenomenon" in which the
elements which are most important to the satisfaction
of vital needs become all-consuming (Bahnson, 1964).

If the assistance and support of those in the com-
munity become predomina t needs upon incarceration,
they may attain crucial significance, and an inmate
may experience a psychological "shrinking phenomenon."
The street-to-prison transition may result in the re-
allocation of the importance and meaning attached to
family and friends.

The importance of family can sometimes reach meta-
physical proportions in the eyes of the confined. Dis-
tortions of reality may take place, and the person may
regress to the point where symbolic mother's milk create
a secure and predictable niche in the threatening world
of prison.

The importance of family support is documented in
the findings of a study of self-destructive breakdowns

43

in penal settings conducted by Toch (1975). The most
prevalent of the sixteen problems that were identified
in the content of interviews with the self-destructive
prisoners was Self-Linking:

A person's protest against intolerable sepa-
ration from significant others, against perceived
abandonment by them, or against his inability to
function as a constructive member of a group. The
person rejects the possibility of an independent
life, feels that his well-being is inconceivable
without the continuation of certain vital relation-

ships, and that no satisfactor existence is possi-
ble without them. (Toch, 1975

Outside links or contacts are of central importance
for dealing with the disruption of making the street-to-
prison transition. The satisfaction of the need for sup-
port is a stabilizing element during a time of psychologi-
cal instability. Two additional environmental qualities,
predictability and activity, have been found to be associ-
ated with psychological stability. Granted these are
rare commodities in prison, but a description is presented
below.

Stability

 

Some measure of environmental predictability is nece-
ssary for psychological survival. Toch has noted:

If we wish to live sane lives, we must have en-
vironments that respond sensibly and predictably to
what we do. we must know what to look for, what to
expect, and when and where to expect it. Hadley Can-
tril has observed that "it is necessary for us to
maintain some degree of stability and continuity in
our assumptive world if any of our value judgements
are to make sense; if any of our actions are to be
effective" (Toch, 1977).

Prisons certainly contain many features that consti—

 

tute impediments to satisfying the need for stability and
predictability. It is a world filled with numerous doubts
and much disorganization. Often during the seemingly eter-

44

nal nights in prison, a person's need for information
and certainty concerning a variety of issues may ampli-
fy. The morning may bring only more noise, uncertainty,
and confusion as the "tiers erupt into a world of dis-
cordant sound richocheting between steel and concrete"
(Gibbs, 1975). In such a situation, a man may find
that his ability to think clearly and make decisions

is impaired.

Activity

The inability to satisfy essential needs often re-
sult in tension and anxiety. Reduction of the tension
resulting from frustration can become a primary need in
itself. The inability to diminish tension constitutes
a frustration that produces more anxiety and tension.

No matter what the source of anxiety, and there can
be numerous sources in prison, its level can be reduced
by engaging in physical activity. A variety of forms
of activity will do; it does not matter whether the ac-
tivity is related to the original source of tension (Stot-
land, 1969). In prison, however, chances for anxiety-
reducing activity are limited. Lack of activity for in-
mates ranked third in average seriousness of the 24 prob-
lems assessed by a group of prison personnel, and bore-
dom.was considered the most common problem faced by in-
mates (Gibbs, 1981).

Unoccupied time and lack of diversion establish pro-
pitious conditions for dwelling on one's problems. Such
preoccupations can spawn counterproductive reactions.
Toch has described the pattern as "Sanctuary Search":

An effort by the inmate to escape from redun-
dant preoccupations particularly with re ard to
problems in the outside world or in his own situ-
ation to which he finds no solution or closure. The
effort is to break the unproductive cycle and se-
cure peace of mind (Toch, 1975).

45

Toch described "Sanctuary Search" as representing
a classic example of unconstructive rumination or worry
"a problem eating away at a man." A person may find
himself in a position in which the tension produced by
attempts to deal with a problem become a problem in it-
self. The difficulty is no longer simply one of solving,
resolving, or in some way coping with a difficulty with
the courts or family, for example, but develops into an
issue of escaping from an unrelenting bombardment of
painful thoughts and feelings. In this situation, one
begins to feel trapped. Relief from tension becomes all
important. Thought patterns of this kind can be the re-
sult of dwelling on any of the number of problems associ-
ated with prison incarceration. Barred for the most
part from the kinds of activity that could assist one
in coping, the inmate must make do.

It should be noted that nearly two thirds (63-65 per-
cent) of the inmates entering American prisons each year
have been in prison before (Fox, 1962). An even higher
proportion, approximately four out of five (80 percent)
of the prisoners who are sent to solitary confinement,
the jail within the prison, it has been estimated by
prison administrators, have been in solitary confine-
ment or punishment status before (Fox, 1962). Such a
high proportion of failure indicated that the problem
of inducing conforming behavior from.persons exposed to
our punishment programs remains unsolved.

The disciplinary problems in a prison constitute the
manifest culmination of all the problems faced by the in-
mates and the administration of the institution. Disci-
plinary problems constitute a threat to an administration
because they disrupt the order, tranquility, and security

46

of the institution. In many prison facilities, the re-
action to this threat is immediate and drastic. Very
often in a majority of adult penal institutions in the
United States, psychological and social treatment ceases
when rules are violated, and the offenders are placed
in solitary confinement or in some other punishment sta-
tus. Thus, upon violation of rules, many prisons are
confronted with a policy dilemma, in that they withdraw
treatment from those who, by their maladaptive behavior,
have demonstrated that they need treatment most.

Many prison personnel and parole boards have dis-
played a tendency to evaluate the prospects of success-
ful adjustment outside the prison on the basis of an in-
mate's lack of misconduct reports in the prison. Many
wardens regard the institution as a small community which
gives practice to prisoners in getting along wtth others,
the effect of which can be transferred to the larger com-
munity.

The term, "discipline," has frequently been con-
fused with some of the techniques by which it is achieved.
"Discipline" is group order. Traditionally, the prison
is characterized by exaggerated discipline (Fox, 1962).
Practices and techniques by which order may be achieved
vary widely from institution to institution, from philoso-
phy to philosophy, and from administrator to administrator.
More often than not, the most desirable motivation for
group order within the prison lies in good morale, good
food, a cahllenging and interesting program, and excel-
lent spontaneous communication and relations between all
individuals and sub-groups of which the total group is
comprised -- this of course, including wives and families
of inmates. When there is a breakdown in any of these

47

areas, usually some type of force is administered by
the administration to maintain group cohesion. The
most frequent types of force used in prisons are: (l)
Solitary confinement, frequently with dietary restric-
tions; (2) Locking-in own cell with loss of yard privi-
leges; (3) Loss of visiting, correspondence, canteen,
and/or other privileges; (4) Transfer to another in-
stitution; (5) Assignment to a "discipline squad" for
menial labor; (6) Down-grading in a grading system and/
or forfeiture of earned good time; and (7) Corporal
punishment, formal in some southern prisons, informal
in several others (Fox, 1962).

Controlled movement of inmates and segregation pro-
cedures are the two broad classifications of techniques
used by custody to maintain order in an institution. Mov-
ing lines of prisoners, gate control, and the pass system
constitute the controlled movement of prisoners. Segre-
gation includes the prisoners in solitary confinement;
in the mental ward, hospital, and other special facili-
ties; and those prisoners held away from the general
population because of chronic incorrigibility or safe-
keeping. The persons in solitary confinement are those
who have been found guilty of violation of prison rules.
It is this group and this relationship to which many per-
sons refer as "disciplinary procedures."

The rules of conduct in most prisons are fairly
standard and are set to define inappropriate behavior
for which an officer should arrest and report an in-
mate. The offenses most frequently reported in custo-
dial summary courts are: fighting, gambling, homosexual
practices, stealing (from cells, kitchen, library, work
assignments, and "high-jacking"), smuggling in contraband

48

or possession of contraband, skating (being in an un-
authorized area without a pass), disobedience, refusal

to work, making alcoholic beverages (spud-juice, cane-
buck, raisin-jack, etc.), bartering with other inmates
without permission, escapes, planned escapes, or attempted
escapes, etc.

These offenses appear fairly frequently in all in-
stitutions. The types of offenses committed by each in-
dividual may be psychiatrically diagnosed according to
the area in which the individual finds conformity most
difficult. Fox (1952) found evidence to support his con-
tention that the specific nature of the offenses com-
mitted by each individual is partially dependent upon
the personality of the offender. There appears to be
a tendency for each offender, outside prisons and with-
in prisons, to repeat the same types of offenses, some
to a greater extent than others.

Approximately three percent of the inmate popula-
tion is involved in misconduct reports in any given year.
This means that there is a high incidence of repeating,
an indication which is confirmed by the observation of
experienced prison personnel and an examination of the
records of inmates who have accumulated misconduct re-
ports. The three most common major disciplinary problems
in prison are gambling, sex, and fighting. The fighting
frequently results from the gambling and sex problems.

Research Rationale

 

The focus of this research was to explore the im-
pact of marital stability and good familial support on
the incarcerated male offender's prison misconduct and

49

participation in various prison programs. This study
also served to delineate specific coping strategies util-
ized by imprisoned male offenders as they contend with
numerous deprivations inherent to life behind walls.
Concomitantly, inmates' perceptions of the effects of
imprisonment on their families were also explored.

A chief limitation of previous research in this
area has been the use of post-incarceration file data
to generate possible indicators of ways people are not
"successful" in the prison community. Also, generally,
this type of data has served as the primary basis for
recidivism literature; and these files, for the most
part, tend to be unreliable in terms of giving suffici-
ent and accurate information (Brecochea and Spencer,
1972). It is hoped that by directly interviewing in-
mates, an accurate account of their perceptions regard-
ing the impact of imprisonment on not only themselves
but their families as well, may be obtained.

While a point of departure for this research was
provided by the theoretical background of a number of
studies, actually the number of purely investigative
studies of the impact of imprisonment on prisoners and
their families has been relatively limited. Also, a-
nother shortcoming of previous literature in this area
is that the focus has been almost exclusively upon the
families, rather than being primarily interested in
the inmates' perceptions of their experiences of loss
and their understanding of various familial changes
undergone due to their being'locked-up."

Therefore, in view of these and other methodologi-
cal limitations of previous research, the focus of the
study was directed on the hypotheses presented herein.

50

HYPOTHESES

Inmates whose marriages are perceived as "intact"
and who experience good familial support have greater

program participation than those whose marriages
lack in emotional support.

Inmates whose marital relationships are described
as "intact" (good) receive fewer misconduct reports

(tickets) than those whose marriages are "not-intact"
(not good).

CHAPTER II
METHOD

In this study, questionnaires were administered to
incarcerated male offenders of the world's largest, max-
imumrsecurity walled prison, the State Prison at Southern
Michigan. This prison is under the jurisdiction of the
Michigan Department of Corrections and is located in Jack-
son, Michigan. (The official name of the prison is the
State Prison at Southern Michigan, but its more popular
name, Jackson Prison, is the title which will be used
in this dissertation when reference is made to the pri-
son.) An interview format was utilized to study the im-
pact of imprisonment on the lives of the inmates and their
perceptions of the "crisis" of imprisonment on the lives
of their wives and loved ones.

Subjects

The participants for this study were felony-convic-
ted male offenders. The men were chosen from an inmate
population of a state-directed minimum—medium-maximum
security men's correctional facility. The institution
houses men who are at least 21 years of age and have a
sentence longer than one year for a felony offense. A-
pproximately 5,000 inmates were incarcerated in the cor-
rectional facility (Jackson Prison) at the time this study
was conducted.

Sampling - Determination of a Universe

 

Since there was no ready-made means by which to
identify the population of married men in the prison,
it was necessary initially to randomly choose inmates

51

52

with a starting point, determined by having chosen
every fifth inmate from a list of approximately 500
inmates housed in the prison's Reception and Guidance
Center. The inmate's prison file was then examined

to ascertain his marital status. Only legally married
inmates were interviewed for participation in this
research. Common-law relationships were excluded pri-
marily due to the researcher's feelings that perhaps
the level of commitment to the marriage and the influ-
ence of familial support was somewhat less, in as much
as the two parties in such a relationship, for what-
ever reason, were unwilling to give legal sanction to
the relationship via a simple civil ceremony. A screen-
ing interview was then conducted with the inmate to
limit the sample to approximately 70 married inmates
who: (1) were living with their wives at the time of
arrest; and (2) were incarcerated in the prison at the
time the study was being conducted.

Also 40 single inmates were interviewed in an ef-
fort to obtain additional information related to the
hypothesis regarding their incidence of prison miscon-
duct.

2.68.232

The primary design in this study was correlational,
specifically involving multiple regression, discriminant
function, and analysis of variance techniques. The goal
of these procedures was to examine factors related to
the changes experienced by prisoners and their families
following the incarceration of the male "head of house-
hold." The independent, predictor variables -- the back-

53

ground factors -- of interest to the researcher were
(1) the ages of the inmate and his wife, (2) their ed—
ucational levels, (3) the size of the family income
before and during the period of imprisonment, (4) the
presence or absence of children, (5) whether the in-
mate is a repeat offender or not, (6) the amount of
contact (communication) maintained by mail or visits
during the inmate's imprisonment, (7) the couple's
race, (8) the number of earlier marriages, (9) the len-
gth of the couple's acquaintance before marriage, (10)
the wife's social participation before and during the
inmate's imprisonment, (11) residential mobility, and
(12) inmate's perception of wife's attitude toward imr
prisonment as well as the "justness" of his sentence.
The criterion variables were the personal and in-
stitutional adjustment of the husband to prison life,
as evidenced by misconduct reports, as well as a set of
more subjective indices, including the inmates' percept-
ions of their wives' adjustment regarding (1) their
children, (2) the inmates' relatives, (3) the wives'
relatives, (4) their friends, and (5) their sexual needs.

Data Collection

 

Interview

 

Each man was randomly selected from a prison list
of inmates compiled weekly by the institution. Because
of the large number of inmates incarcerated and housed
in the Reception Center at Jackson Prison (approximately
500), the starting point was determined by having chosen
every fifth inmate from the weekly prison list. The in-
mate's file was then located to ascertain his marital

 

54

status. After the subject was selected, the inmate
was placed "on call" for a screening interview which
was held in a private office. Upon arrival, the pur-
pose of the research and participation requirements
were explained to the Subject. (See Research Expla-
nation, Appendix A.) At this point if the man did not
wish to participate, he was granted permission to re—
turn to his housing unit. If he stated his interest
in participating, a "Participation Agreement" (see _
Appendix B) outlining his rights and the researcher's
responsibilities were read. If at this point he de-
clined participation, he was then instructed and allow-
ed to return to his unit. Those who did agree to par-
ticipate in the study signed the "Participation Agree-
ment" form.

For each inmate who agreed to participate in the
study, the following explanation of the study's format
was given (see Appendix A).

Hello:

You are being asked to participate in a research
study designed to look at the means by which you cope
with being locked up at Jackson Prison. I will also ask
you questions about how you feel your wife and family
are getting along without you while you are imprisoned.

The purpose of the study is to identify some of the
things you do to help you "do your time" and also to
learn about some of the changes you have experienced
since being here at Jackson. Hopefully, this study will
help develop programs within the prison which may help
out in this regard.

All of your responses to this interview are confi-
dential and it is hoped that you will be as frank and
open as possible.

The interview format consisted first of acquiring
various demographic data on each subject and secondly,
aEEries of questions designed to ascertain the impact of

 

55

imprisonment on the lives of inmates, as well as the
inmates' perceptions of the impact of imprisonment on
the lives of their wives and loved ones were examined.

Instrument Construction

 

In order to ascertain the impact of the "crisis"
of imprisonment on male offenders, the researcher con-
ducted an extensive review of the male offender litera-
ture and designed a demographic and informational sheet
useful for recording the background data of interest
in this study. Questions for the interview were developed
by interviewing incarcerated and paroled males, inter-
viewing parole officers, prison superintendents and other
key administrators within the Department of Corrections
regarding their perceptions of some of the problems
and concerns of inmates and how imprisonment impacted
upon the lives of inmates and their families.

The "Family-Change Scale" used in this research is
an adaption of a scale developed by Donald P. Schneller,
1976 (see Appendix D). This scale has three sections,
each consisting of five questions. The first section
is the social-change section, the second is the economic-
change section, and the last section is the emotional-
sexual-change section. The total family-change scale
yields scores which can range from 15 to 75. Each sec-
tion of five questions yields scores with a range of 5
to 25. Using this scale, it is possible to obtain an
overall family-change score, and at the same time speci-
fic subscale scores on the three types of change, social,
economic, and emotional-sexual.

A second scale used in this research was the Short
Marital Adjustment Test developed by Harvey J. Locke and
Karl M. Wallace, 1959. The scale measures marital ad-

 

56

justment. It has been tested for validity and relia-
bility and rates high on both (see Appendix E). The
scale consists of 15 items and has a possible score
range of 2 to 158.

A third instrument, the "Perceptual Prison Adjust-
ment Questionnaire", developed by the researcher is the
result of extensive reviewing of male offender litera-
ture which addresses the areas of interest in the pre-
sent research (see Appendix F).

Each of these scales were administered verbally
during interviews. The inmate was allowed to discuss
any question on the various scales he cared to talk
about. The answers were recorded on mimeographed forms
by the researcher.

 

CHAPTER III
RESULTS

In this section, the data are organized and pre-
sented in two parts. Part One presents descriptions of
the demographic characteristics of the respondents (i.e.,
the incarcerated male offenders) and their families. Any
unusual features of the subjects are also noted. Part
Two presents the results of the systematic data analyses
and tests of the hypotheses.

Part One: Descriptive Statistics

In an effort to effectively analyze the perceptions
of the impact of imprisonment on incarcerated male offen-
ders and their families, it is necessary to gain some in-
sight into the general family structure and lifestyle
prior to the incarceration. Thus, presented below is
background inofrmation about the social and emotional
characteristics of the men and their families in this
sample, their financial and economic standing, basic com-
position and reaction of the members of these families,
as well as their ability to cope with the crisis of impri-
sonment.

It should be noted that a series of cross tabula-
tions were performed utilizing this information with in-
mate family groups (intact, not-intact, single). However,
no significant differences were found. Thus, the demo-
graphic material presented below was primarily seen as
providing a descriptive backdrop for the tests of the hy-

57

"I

58

potheses that are presented in a later section. Addit-
ionally, data analyses yeilded no significant correla-
tions (systematic differences) between the independent,
predictor variables --the background factors-- and the
criterion variables.

Geographic Profile

 

Although more than 200 men initially were inter-
viewed for this research, approximately 90 offenders
were eliminated from further study because they failed
to meet the criteria of inclusion in the sample. Thus,
final analyses yielded data from 110 incarcerated male
offenders. Of the 110 respondents, approximately half
(53.6 percent) were from the Wayne-Oakland county area.
The remainder principally had resided in Kent (4.5 per-
cent), Genessee (2.7 percent), and Ingham (2.7 percent)
counties.

General Characteristics

 

An important factor in determining the relevant
characteristics of the respondents' families is the need
to isolate certain relevant facts about the men and
their families who participated in the study. The first
factor considered was age. The ages of the men inter-
viewed ranged from 21 to 49 years. Their wives' ages
ranged from 19 to 52 years. Tables 2 and 3 present a
more detailed categorization of the ages of the respon-
dents and their wives, respectively.

The data in Table 2 clearly show the relative youth-
fulness of the inmates who participated in this study. The
majority (55.5 percent, or 61) of them were no more than
thirty years old, and approximately 89 percent were below
the age of forty. This finding is similar to those re-

 

59

ported by Pauline Morris and Nancy Anderson in their
studies conducted in England and Australia respectively.
The average age of respondents in Anderson's study was
thirty, and more than half of the women in the Morris
study were thirty years old and under.

TABLE 2.--Age Distribution of Respondent Inmates

 

 

 

 

éfiéfi Frequency Percentage
21-25 26 23.7
26-30 35 31.9
31-35 25 22.6
36-40 12 10.8
41-45 8 7.2

46 yrs or

older 4 3.6
TOTAL 110 100

 

The wives of the inmates were also quite youthful as
can be viewed from the data in Table 3.

TABLE 3.--Age Distribution of Inmates' Wives

 

 

 

 

Ages Frequency Percentagg
19-23 11 15.7
24-28 25 35.7
29-33 19 27.1
34-38 8 11.4
39-43 5 7.1

44 yrs or

older 2 2.9
TOTAL 70 100

 

60

Since this study was principally interested in
the impact of imprisonment on married incarcerated of-
fenders, it is relevant that at the time of the in-
terviews, some 63.6 percent of inmates reported being
legally married, with apporximately 10 percent of those
indicating they had been separated from their spouses
prior to their current incarceration. Table 4 depicts
the marital status categories of the sample studied.

TABLE 4.--Marital Status of Inmates at Time of

 

 

 

 

Interviews

Frequency Percentage
Married 59 53.6
Single 33 30
Divorced 6 5.4
Widowed 0 0
Separated ll 10
No Answer 1 1
TOTAL 110 100

 

The 11 inmates who were separated at the time of
this research reported that the relationships were on
relatively shaky grounds, primarily because of infideli-
ty on the part of the inmate or wife, hardship due to
financial troubles, disagreements about "running part-
ners" and disputes among in-laws.

Tables 5 and 6 present information about the dura-
tion of the relationship and the length of acquaintance
prior to the marriage. While 60 percent (42) had lived
together for five years or more, the data in Table 5 also
show that couples were rather unevenly distributed with
respect to the number of years they had spent together

 

61

prior to incarceration.

TABLE 5.--Duration of Marital Relationship

 

 

 

 

Frequengy Percentagg
Less than 2 yrs 7 10
2-4 yrs 20 28.6
5-7 yrs 16 22.9
8-10 yrs 9 12.9
More than 10 yrs 17 24.3
No Answer 1 1
TOTAL 70 100

 

With regard to the amount of time inmates generally
"courted"-their wives prior to marriage, this analyses re-
vealed that in general the length of acquaintance with
their prospective spouses was from about two to four years.
This statistic suggests that many inmates did in fact
know their spouses fairly well prior to committing them-
selves to a long-term relationship with them.

TABLE 6.--Length of Acquaintance Prior to Marriage

 

 

 

 

Frequency Percentage
Less than 2 yrs 22 31.4
2-4 yrs 20 28.6
5-7 yrs 8 11.4
8-10 yrs 3 4.3
More than 10 yrs 10 14.3
No Answer 7 10

TOTAL 70 100

 

62

Marital Stability

 

Another set of data that is related to the general
marital characteristics of these couples concerns the
level of marital stability and perceived familial sup-
port. Table 7 presents this information. It is felt
that these particular characteristics have a direct in-
fluence upon the families' basic composition.

These data suggest that a majority of the men were
concerned about maintaining intact marital relationships
and reported having never left their wives for any rea-
son, other than a previous incarceration, but having cho-

 

sen instead to "stick it out" and work through any mar-
ital difficulty.

TABLE 7.--Number of Separations from Family Prior
to Incarceration

 

 

 

Number Percentage
0 35 50
l 23 32.8
2 6 8.6
3 3 4.3
4 or more 3 4.3
TOTAL 70 100

 

Although most of the wives were in their twenties,
the combined time that the majority of these couples had
been together was from two to seven years, that is, when
the time the families spent together prior to incarcera-
tion was combined with the time the inmates had been in-
carcerated, the entire period was comparatively short.
This finding is similar to that reported by Alex Swan in
his study of Black prisoner families in Alabama and Tenne-

63

ssee. It would appear that if these couples had a rela-
tively good relationsiip prior to the incarceration, per-
haps the unplanned crisis of imprisonment could not help
but to bring about a major disruption in the familial re-
lationship, one requiring an immediate reorganization in
order to survive and maintain the family scheme of life.
During the interview, inmates were asked if their
wives and/or families provided emotional support. A vast
majority of inmates, about 79 percent (87) reported in
the affirmative; in contrast, the remaining 20 percent
reported virtually little, if any, support at all.

Factors Pertaining to Separation

As was cited previously, of the 32 percent of married '
inmates who reported having been separated at least once
from their wives (for reasons other than a previous incar-
ceration), the men reported a variety of circumstances
that led them to separate for a period of time. The ma-
jor reasons cited were for infidelity, disagreements re-
garding "run ing partners", financial woes and in-law dif-
ficulties.

Again, while this study was primarily interested in
the effects of incarceration on inmates and their families,
data were recorded about the number of prior incarcera-
tions which resulted in the inmates being separated from
their families on prior occasions. This information is
summarized in Table 8. Not surprisingly, virtually 52.7
percent (58) of the inmates had been incarcerated at least
once. Some 18.2 percent (20) had been incarcerated at
least twice and an incredible 29.1 percent (32) had been
previously incacerated some three times or more! Table 9

presents the types of crimes committed by the inmates who

64

TABLE 8.--Record of Inmates' Previous Incarcerations

 

 

 

Number Percentage

None (lst

Offense) 43 39.1
Once 15 13.6
Twice 20 18.2
Three X's 10 9.1
Four X's 7 6.4
Five X's 6 5.5
Six X's or

More 9 8.2

TOTAL 110 100

 

65

TABLE 9.--Types of Crimes Committed by Inmates

(by Groups)

 

 

INTACTS
Types of Crimes

Armed Robbery

Unarmed Robbery

Felonious Assault

Criminal Sexual Conduct
Manslaughter

Murder

Narcotics Violation
Possession Stolen Property
Larceny

Breaking and Entering
Unlawful Driving Away Automobile
Forgery

Uttering and Publishing
Violation of Credit Card Act

TOTAL

# of Inmates

 

H
HHHNowwWHN-L‘Nl-‘O‘

i

 

NOT-INTACTS

 

Types of Crimes

 

Armed Robbery

Felonious Assault

Criminal Sexual Conduct
Attempt Murder

Murder

Narcotics Violation
Larceny

Burglary

Breaking and Entering
Carrying a Concealed Weapon
Uttering and Publishing
Violation of Credit Card Act

TOTAL

# of Inmates

 

10

HHNmHHHNHbH

 

DJ
0

 

SINGLES
Types of Crimes

 

Armed Robbery
Felonious Assault
Criminal Sexual Conduct

# of Inmates

 

66

TABLE 9.--(Cont'd.).

 

 

SINGLES (Cont'd)

Types of Crimes

 

Assault Less Murder

Murder

Narcotics Violation

Receiving & Concealing Stolen Property
Larceny

Breaking and Entering

Carrying a Concealed Weapon

Arson

# of Inmates

 

HUDOC‘UDNU'IN

 

67

TABLE 10.--Crimina1 Offenses and Statutory Sentence Lengths

 

 

Code Offense :::?;;m ::::;:;°" [splanation of Offenses
1 Murder. 1st degree Life Premeditated. intentional killing
2 Hurder. 2nd degree Life or any Murder not premeditated. e.g..
term of years bar-room brawls.
1ess than life
3 Attempted murder Assault with intent to do great
bodily noun.
4 Assault with intent to comit «order
5 Robbery amd Life or any
6 Assault to rob. anned term of years
7 Rape '
I Kidnapping '
9 Conspiracy '
10 bank safe or vault robbery
11 Narcotics. un1awfu1 sale. distrib..
manufacturing 13.3 yrs. 20 years
11 Burning a dwelling hause 13.3 yrs. 20 years Threatening a person with injury
in order to obtain property.
11 Extortion 13.3 yrs. 20 years
11 Accept earnings of a prostitute
pandering 13.3 yrs. 20 years Ptmping
12 Robbery. unarmed 10 yrs. 15 years
12 Assault to rob 10 yrs. 15 years
12 Manslaughter 10 yrs. 15 years Ki11ing but offender was prevoked.
Retaliation.
12 Breaking and entering an
accupied dwelling 10 yrs. 15 years
12 Sodomy 10 yrs. 15 years Sexual assau1t (not violent}.
12 Perjury 10 yrs. 15 yrs. Lying in a situation when yOu're
under oath to te11 the truth.
12 P1ace explosive by property
with intent to discharge 10 yrs. 15 years
12 firearm. cause death w/o malice 10 yrs. 15 years e.g.. gun goes off by mistake and
someone is killed.
13 Uttering and Publishing 9.3 yrs. 14 years Passing a bad check.
13 forgery of records 9.3 yrs. 14 years
14 Breaking and entering 6.66 yrs. 10 years
14 Possession of burglary tools 6.6 yrs. 10 years
14 Larceny from a person 6.6 yrs. 10 years Stealing from a person. e 9..
purse snatching. Bargained down
robbery.
14 Assault less than murder 6.6 yrs. 10 years
14 Assau1t comitting rape. sodwy.
or gross indecency 6.6 yrs. 10 years
14 Assau1t to cannot a felony 6.6 yrs. 10 years Assault with a dangerous weapon.
without intent to comit murder. and
without intent to inflict great 0061')
harm. i.e., less than murder.
14 false pretense to defraud 6.6 yrs. 10 years fa1se1y obtaining money. goods. or

services from an individual. In
theft because given artic1es
vo1untar11y

TABLE 10. (Cont'd)

68

 

 

Code Offense :::?:2_ :::::::°" txp1anation of Offenses

14 Indecent 11berties with chi1d 6 6 yrs. 10 years

14 Iurning other real property 5 5 yrs 10 years

14 Orunt driving-third offense 5 5 yrs 10 years

14 Possession of a stolen auto 6 6 yrs 10 years

14 Incent 5 5 yrs 10 years

15 Ion-narcotic drug. illegal sa1e.

distribution 4.66 yrs 7 years
15 ha11uctnogens. sales. distri..
and manufacturing 4.66 yrs 7 years

16 Escape from prison 3.33 yrs 5 years

16 Carrying a concealed weapon 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 leceiving sto1en property 3.3 yrs. 5 years Conmonly ca11ed attempted btt.
Usually bargained down from BIL.

16 Un1awfu1 drling away auto 3.3 yrs. 5 yrs.

16 Larceny over 5100 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 Larcenv from motor vehicle 3.3 yrs. 5 vrs.

16 Larceny by conversion over 5100 5 years Receiving money. goods. or other
property and wrongfully app1ying it
to a purpose other than that for
which it was delivered to him. e.g.
defendant given funds to buy stock
for someone but uses money to buy
himse1f a par.

16 Attempted gross tndency between

aa1e and fema1e 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 Carrying weapon w/unlawful intent 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 Possession of forged notes 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 Transport drugs into prison 3.3 yrs 5 years

16 mfg. or pass. i11ega1 weapon 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 Possession of bomb 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 Column law offense 3.3 yrs. 5 years

16 Cross indecency between females 3.3 yrs. 5 years

17 Larceny from a building 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 fe1onious assau1t 2.6 yrs. 4 years Hitting a person

17 Iargotic dru s. possession of 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Intent to se 1 or use credit cards 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Marijuana. 111eg. sa1e. distr.. mfg. 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Ha1. dest. property over 5100 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 burning of persona1 property 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Prepare to burn property over 550 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Sale or use of credit cards 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Crue1ty to ch11dren 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Hal. dest. hause. barn, other b1dg. 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 fa1se statement to obtain relief

over 5500 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Larceny of livestock 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 lheft of credtt cards 2.6 yrs. 4 years

17 Obscounding or forfeiting bond 2.6 yrs. 4 years

16 u.O.A.A. w/o intent to steal 1.3 yrs. 2 years Joy-riding.

1. Checks wlo account or suff. funds 1.3 yrs. 2 years Checks that bounce.

16 Ion-narcotic drug possession 1.3 yrs. 2 years

16 Resisting or obstructing officer 1.3 yrs. 2 years .

16 Negligent homicide 1.3 yrs. 2 years Death due to reckless drIVing

1| Careless use of fireanms 1.3 yrs. 2 years

14 Larceny of'rented motor vehic1e

under 5100 1.3 yrs. 2 years
16 felonious driving 1.3 yrs. 2 years
19 Itsdeaeanor .66 yrs. 1 year

 

SOURCC: INchigan Department of Corrections.

69

participated in this research and Table 10 presents the
various sentences for these crimes.

Returning to our focus on the married inmates who
participated in this study, the majority of inmates per-
ceived their marriages as being rather egalitarian in
nature. When asked to report which one of them was usual-
ly the one to give in when a disagreement arose, most
of them answered that they generally reached an agree-
ment by "mutual give and take" (See Table 11, which
summarize responses to this question). This finding
appears to be in line with observations made by Ernest
Burgess and Harvey Locke that the trend in the Black
family (63 percent of the married subjects were Black)
is toward the egalitarian type family, the type of fam-
ily in which decisions are made jointly by husband and
wife.

TABLE ll.--Dominance-Submission Patterns in Inmates'

 

 

 

 

 

Families
INTACT NOT-INTACT
Patterns of Behavior Number of Responses Number of Re-
in Solving Disagree- By Inmates sponses by In-
ments mates
Husband Gives In 6 6
Wife Gives In 5 9
Mutual Give and Take 29 15

TOTAL 40 30

 

 

70

The mean marital adjustment score for the research-
er's study was 109 in contrast to a mean marital adj t-
ment score of 116 for the couples who participated in the
original Locke-wallace study. Unlike the Locke-wallace
study, the husband's and wives scores for the present
research could not be averaged together. Also in test-
ing the validity of their scale, they found a happily
married group to have a mean score of 135.9. Realizing
of course that the inmates in the present study answered
the marital—adjustment scale questions according to their
perceptions, it would appear that the couples studied in
the present research were only slightly below average
in marital adjustment. An interesting finding of the
present study was that for those inmates who revealed
significant problems in their marriages and who reported
them as not-intact, the average score was 97.5, much
higher than the 71.5 score recorded by Locke-wallace for
the unhappily married group in their study. For the
inmates who reported their marriages without major prob-
lems and intact in the researcher's study, their average
score of 119.2 was somewhat below the average score for
Locke-wallace's happily married group (135.9). Table
12 show the distribution of mean marital adjustment
scores for the period prior to incarceration classified
by race. The lowest possible score on the scale is two
and the highest possible score is 158 (Locke and Wallace,
1959).

Level of Education

Table 13 depicts the level of educational attainment
of the inmate respondents. Of those inmates interviewed
a large majority 63.6 percent (70) reported having either

71

TABLE 12.--Marital Adjustment Scores Prior to Incar-
ceration by Race

 

 

Black Inmates

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Range of Scores Frequency
40 - 59 2
6O - 89 6
90 - 109 13
110 - 129 10
130 - 149 12
150 - 158 2
TOTAL 45

White Inmates

Range of Scores Frequency
40 - 59 2
6O - 89 3
90 - 109 8
110 - 129 6
130 - 149 4

150 - 158

TOTAL ‘23__—'

 

72

completed high school or earned the general equivalency
diploma (GED). These results are certainly above and be-
yond most reported statisitics in this area, which indi-
cate that the average prison inmate has approximately

an eighth grade education. Perhaps even more surprising
was the finding that 36.4 percent (40) of the inmates
reported having achieved at least one year of college
course work.

TABLE 13.--Leve1 of Education of Inmates

 

 

 

Number Percentage
Up to 7th grade
or less 3 2.7
8 - 9 grade 12 10.9
10 - 11 grade 24 21.8
12th grade 30 27.3
1 - 3 years
college 33 29.9
College degree 7 6.4
No Answer 1 1
TOTAL 110 100

 

73

TABLE l4.--Level of Education of Inmates' Wives

 

 

 

Number Percentage
Up to 7th grade
or less 2 2.9
8 - 9 grade 2 2.9
10 - 11 grade 13 18.6
12th grade 32 45.7
1 - 3 years
college 1 1
College degree . 4 5.7
No Answer 16 22.8
TOTAL 70 100

 

When asked to report on their wives educational sta-
tus, 16 of the men indicated that they were uncertain and
thus no information was recorded. Of those who were able
to supply the interviewer with this information, 32 (45.7
percent) reported that their wives had completed high
school and only 17 (24.3 percent) had a 7th grade-11th
grade education. Also it was reported that .5 of the wives
had completed 1 year or more of college course work. Table
14 presents a more complete summary of this information.

The Wives

 

For the most part, the prisoners gave the researcher
the impression that their wives were emotionally stable
and law-abiding citizens. A majority 70 percent (49) re-
ported that their wives had not sought any kind of treat-
ment for major medical or psychiatric treatment since

74

their incarceration, rather their was an effort on the
part of the wives to generally seek emotional, and when
needed, financial support from other family members. Of
those inmates 30 percent (21) who had indicated that their
wives had sought psychiatric treatment, a majority attribu-
ted that such treatment was directly related to diffi-
culties experienced due to the husband's incarceration.

Another rather interesting finding of the study was
that 54 percent (38) of inmates reported being aware of
their wives seeking greater support (either/both finan-
cial and/or psychological from family members during
the husband's incarceration.)

The most frequently reported matters of concern for
the wives as reported by their incarcerated husbands were
in order of frequency, financial matters, whether or not
inmates would become reinvolved in crime upon his release,
how she would meet her social and sexual needs, and wor-
ries regarding whether the husband intended to leave his
wife upon his release to "sow his wild oats."

When inmates were asked to describe the amount of
overall support (both psychological and financial) given
to them by their wives, the majority reported that it
had been in keeping with their expectations of at least
hearing from them on a weekly basis, and often times more
than they would have expected.

Generally after good rapport was established between
the researcher and the inmate, some rather sensitive
topics were explored. When asked to respond to the ques-
tion of how often they discussed their wives dating other
men during their absence, some 35.5 percent of inmates
reported that this rather sensitive topic was never even
broached with their wives.

 

75

Another sensitive topic which was asked of married
inmates concerned how willing they were to discuss the
sexual needs of their wives during their incarceration
which ranged in time from a minimum of 1 month to a max-
imum time served of 142 months. When specifically asked
to respond to the question of "how do you think your
wife is coping with her sexual needs since your incar-
ceration at Jackson prison?" the majority of inmates
41.4 percent (29) responded by saying that they felt
their wives were abstaining from sex in their absence;
in contrast 25.7 percent (18) admitted that they felt
their wives were getting their sexual needs met and
30 percent (21) stated that for whatever reasons, they
never discussed the issue with their spouses. Perhaps
for some of those 30 percent of inmates who reported
being unable to discuss the issue of their wives sexual
needs during their incarceration, there was an underly-
ing fear that indeed since they were not able to satis-
fy their spouse's sexual needs, maybe their wives would
turn to other men "on the streets" for satisfaction.
Again, some inmates openly admitted such to the researcher
and added that if this were true, many simply would not
want to know. Several inmates, depending on the length
of their sentences, revealed that "if the shoe were on
the other foot" and their wives were the one incarcerated,
they certainly felt as if they would not abstain from
seeking sexual fulfillment. This last finding is inter-
esting in that it contrasts with another question asked
of inmates regarding how much they missed having sex with
their wives since being "locked-up" in prison. The over-
whelming response (48.2 percent) was that, indeed, inmates
reported missing sex with their wives much more often since

76

they were separated and some 49.1 percent reported
that they frequently longed to be able to show love
and affection towards their mates during their period
of incarceration.

It would appear that the wives had similar long-
ings since 74 percent of inmates reported receiving
either mail or visits from their families at least
once a week or oftener. Some 78 percent reported hear-
ing from their wives at least twice monthly either
via mail or through prison visits. It is unquestion-
ably true that for married offenders, their relation-
ships with their wives is a source of social-emotional
support and it would appear that the wives' potential
for assisting in the adjustment of their husbands to
incarceration has not been fully realized.

The Children

 

The 70 couples (married-intact and married not-in-
tact groups) in this study had 60 children, an average
of less than one child per family. The majority were
less than twelve years of age, with only 17 being in their
teens. Table 15 shows the distribution of ages for the
children. All but one child was reportedly living with
their mothers and that child lived with relatives. While
none of the children was reported as being in the cus-
tody of the courts, several fathers noted that their
wives were experiencing some difficulty in managing their
young children, with sons posing more difficult prob-
lems. (Perhaps this may be the result of sons, more
so than daughters, identifying with their fathers and
feeling a greater need to "be tough" like their fathers,

77

"to get into trouble", etc.)

Furthermore, it is likely that most of the children
were at an age when the presence or absence of their fa-
thers would have an important influence on their lives
(see Table 15). The majority of the inmates, due to
their incarceration, as is shown in Table 16, had been
away from their families for less than two years. But
again, any period, whatever the duration, could be of
great consequence to the children, a large number of
whom.were quite young.

TABLE 15.--Age Distribution of Children

 

 

 

Age Number of
Children
1 - 3 yrs 8
4 - 6 yrs 10
7 - 9 yrs 14
10 - 12 yrs 5
l3 - 15 yrs ll
16 - 18 yrs 6
19 - 21 yrs 4
22 and over
TOTAL 60

 

TABLE 16.--Duration of Separation from Fathers (Due
to Incarceration)

 

 

Time Served Number Percentage
Less than 2 years 51 72.8
2 - 5 years 17 24.2
6 - 8 years 2 2.8

More than 8 years
TOTAL 70 100

 

78

Familial Conditions

Family Income

The majority of inmates (some 57 percent) in this
study reported that prior to their incarceration they
were employed in either skilled or semi-skilled posi-
tions and had contributed to the support of their fam-
ilies. Subsequent to their absences, reportedly the
greatest source of primary income for their families
was welfare payments in the form of Aid to Families
with Dependent Children (ADC). Table 17 shows the var-
ious sources of income and the number of families de-
pendent upon each.

Table 18 shows the distribution of jobs held a-
mong the employed wives following their husbands' in-
carceration.

TABLE l7.--Primary Source of Present Family Income

 

 

 

 

Source Number of Percentage
Families

1. Welfare (Aid to Families 30 42.9

with Dependent

Children)
2. Wife WOrking 27 38.6
3. Combination l and 2 0
4. Other 9 12.9
5. No Response 4 5.7

TOTAL 70 100

 

 

79

TABLE l8.--Types of Jobs Held by Inmates' Wives

 

 

Types of Jobs Number of Wives

 

 

 

L0
N

NONE-- ON AID

FACTORY WORKER
STUDENT

HAIRDRESSER

NURSES AID

CLERK

HOUSEWIFE

BARTENDER

LABORATORY TECHNICIAN
SECRETARY

BABYSITTER

JANITOR

HOUSEKEEPING

NURSE

MAIL DELIVERER

COOK

TEACHER

TICKET RESERVATIONIST
SEAMSTRESS

STOCK PERSON
RECEIVING SOCIAL SECURITY
RECEIVING DISABILITY
NO RESPONSE

aird hirald held raid #414 hard F414 raid hblv 59-h on

\I
0

TOTAL

 

 

80

Table 19 shows the data supplied by the inmates
on their past employment. Over half the men (57.1 per-
cent) had been employed in skilled positions, working
primarily in factory positions, as carpentry workers,
and as general laborers. The three professionals had
worked as teachers.

TABLE 19.--Employment of Married Inmates Prior to

 

 

 

 

Incarceration
Number Percentage
Unemployed 16 22.9
Unskilled 7 10
Semi-skilled 19 27.1
Skilled 21 30
Professional 3 4.3
On Aid 1 1
No Answer 3 4.3

TOTAL 70 100

 

Few would argue that a key element in any family
stability is the steady flow of financial resources to
adequately meet household expenses and maintain an ade-
quate life-style. As is shown in Table 20, which pre-
sents the combined monthly income of husbands and wives
prior to incarceration, a large number of inmates re-
ported that they had helped financially support their
families and the loss of their contribution to the com-
bined household income was noticeably felt in their absence.
Many men reported during the interview that the loss of

81

their contribution to familial expenses was indeed a
contributor to their crimes and such losses (primarily
due to lay-offs, plant closings, firings, etc.) played
havoc with the inmates' sense of self-worth. Perhaps
not too surprisingly, a majority of the inmates' wives
had to resort to welfare (ADC) in an effort to make
ends meet for their families during their husbands' in-
carceration.

TABLE 20.--Combined Monthly Income of Husbands and
Wives Prior to Incaceration

 

 

 

 

Number Percentage

Under $500 11 15.7
500 - 600 8 11.4
601 - 700 4 5.7
701 - 800 5 7.1
801 - 900 l 1.4
901 - 1000 3 4.2
1001 - 1500 14 20
1501 - 2000 9 12.9
2001 - 2500 5 7.1
2501 - and

greater 6 8.6
Unreported 4 5.7
TOTAL 70 100

 

82

Effects of Imprisonment Upon Children

The families of the incarcerated offender is often
faced with considerable difficulties, be they financial
or emotional or social. Moreover, these problems tend
to be compounded when children are involved. As pre-
vious studies making clinical observations of children
of imprisoned parents have revealed (e.g.. Seedler and
Thomas, 1976; Sack, 1977), a high percentage of these
children showed short-term behavioral symptoms soon af-
ter a parent was confined. The majority of these symp-
toms were mild disruptions, expressions of sadness, with-
drawal, and/or a drop in school performance.

Previous research in this area also indicates that
it is not uncommon for children of incarcerated parents
to be stigmatized or be made the target of cruel teas-
ing. Granted that the degree to which any one child may
suffer debilitating injuries, either socially or emo-
tionally, will depend in part on the child's age, perso-
nality, prior relationship with the father, the length
of time the child is separated from the father, the
type of care the child receives while the father is in-
carcerated, in addition to the opportunities the child
has for continuing contact with the father or other sig-
nificant persons in his or her life. As a society we
can ill afford not to study and address the issue of the
impact of imprisonment upon children (particularly in
terms of father absence). To neglect it and be faced
in the future with a generation of youngsters who suf-
fered a lifetime of rejection and neglect may be a se—
vere consequence not many of us are willing to risk.
That this is an area which merits future systematic
research cannot be emphasized enough.

 

83

Coping Strategies Utilized

In an effort to explore the numerous ways by which
both the inmate and his family adjusted to his forced
separation, a number of specific questions proved in-
sightful. They are presented below.

It seems the most significant adjustment for the
inmate and his family was in the financial realm. Many
inmates reported having been major contributors to fi-
nancial household responsibilities and when asked to
respond to the question of "how much has your family's
income changed since you have been incarcerated," the
majority (intacts, 60 percent; not-intacts, 53 percent)
reported that their families were being forced to sur-
vive on much less money than when they were not incar-
cerated.

In answering a related question, "what do you think
is your wife's most serious and pressing concern since

your incarceration,"

the present study was congruous
with other prison studies in which a majority of inmates
(both intacts and not-intacts) reported financial matters
as being perhaps the most difficult with which their
families had to contend in their absence.

Not surprisingly in view of the above, when inmates
were asked "what is your most serious and pressing con-
cern following general "survival" and getting out of Jack-

son prison,"

the majority reported concerns about find-
ing employment, especially with the attached label of
being an "ex-con."

In as much as on a daily basis the inmate is con-
fronted with a number of serious concerns (often just

thinking of ways to make the hours seem less long), the

 

84

researcher attempted to get a picture of the coping
strategies utilized on a daily basis to combat the
repitition and boredom, so commonplace in prison in-
stitutions. Inmates stated that in an effort to cope
mentally with being away from their loved ones, most
of them simply tried to think of happier times spent
with them, often enjoyed looking at family pictures
and writing to their loved ones, reading quietly,

and when given the opportunity to engage in physi-
cal exercise (i.e., basketball, weightlifting, jog-
ging, etc.) found these types of things to be help-
ful. Additionally, a major complaint rendered by in-
mates to the researcher was the lack of and/or avail-
ability of current reading materials and too little
opportunity for physical exercise.

W.

85

Part Two: Analyses of Data

 

As has beennentioned earlier, the data analyzed
here were collected during interviews with 110 incar-
cerated male offenders. The material on these 110 in-
mates and their families consists of the responses of
the husbands to structured as well as open-ended ques-
tions asked during private interviews. The information
collected from the inmates included background informa-
tion about themselves and their families, their finan-
cial and economic standing, basic composition and reac-
tions of the members of these families to the inmate's
imprisonment, as well as the interpersonal adjustments
required, and so forth.

In analyzing the material, the first task was to
code all Of the qualitative data. Once a code had been
established for all of the data, the amassed informa-
tion was transferred to IBM cards and run through a
computer.

Since a large proportion of the data presented in
part one were either nominal or ordinal in nature, the
largest part of the analyses involved cross tabUIations,
frequency counts, and the use of non-parametric tests
for answering specific questions. An attempt was made
by the researcher to develop a scale (the Perceptual
Prison Adjustment Scale) by which to measure each fam-
ily's reaction to the husband's imprisonment, the changes
experienced by both the inmate and his family due to
his incarceration, etc.

Throughout the analyses the coded data were used
and additionally, this information was further substanti-

86

ated by the personal comments and statements recorded
during the interviews.

TESTS OF PREDICTED HYPOTHESES

 

Central to this research was the generation of two
specific hypotheses which were both marginally supported.
They are presented below:

Hypothesis 1. Inmates whose marriages are per-

 

ceived as "intact" and who experience good familial
support have greatergprogram participation than those
whose marriages lack in emotional support.

This hypothesis was supported in part. It was
tested using a multiple regression analyses which util-
ized four variables it was felt might have a signifi-
cant bearing on the inmate's individual participation
in prison programs. The actual recommendations (i.e.,
participation in Alcoholics Anonymous, Drug Counseling,
Group Psychotherapy, Academic and/or Vocational Edu-
cation, etc.) for each inmate is made by either a psy—
chologist, social worker or counselor upon his initial
entrance into the prison. The four variables utilized
in the regression equation were GROUP (intact vs not-
intact) F=2.08, p<L.O7, the amount of OUTSIDE CONTACT
maintained via mail or visits with the inmate during

 

his incarceration F=2.53, p¢1.05, his responses to the
amount of FAMILIAL SUPPORT (both emotional and finan-
cial) received during his incarceration F=.l4 NS, and
his responses to the Locke-wallace FAMILY-CHANGE ques-
tionnaire F=.90 NS. There was marginal significance

 

with 4, 64 degrees of freedom suggesting that the im-
portance of whether or not an inmate was involved in
an intact marital relationship, the degree to which he
regularly received mail or visits while incarcerated,

87

and his perceptions of whether his family provided emo-
tional and/or financial support cannot be understated
because it does appear to impact upon his active par-
ticipation in prison programs recommended to better as-
sist him in his adjustment.

Hypothesis 2. Inmates whose marital relation-
ships are described as "intact" (good) receive fewer
misconduct reports (tickets) than those whose marri-
ages are "not-intact" (not good).

This hypothesis was supported in that there was
a tendency for those inmates who perceived their mar-
riages as being intact to receive fewer tickets or
misconduct reports than those whose marriages are
not-intact and for single inmates. A t-test was per-
formed and yielded the following values t(80) = 1.95,
p<1.06. Table 21 show the mean number of tickets re-
ceived by group.

TABLE 21.--Mean Number of Tickets Received by In-
mate Groups

 

 

 

 

Groups # Tickets Received
Intact 1.31
Not-Intact 3.72
Single 2.95

 

The data presented in the above table certainly
lends itself to the idea that for prison personnel in-
terested in maintaining "the smooth flow of prison

88

operations" to ignore the influence of an inmate's wife
and family on his mental attitude toward his incarcera-
tion may prove costly beyond our belief.

Additionally, a discriminant analysis (SPSS, 1975)
was used to furtheranalyze the relationship between the
demographic characteristics and the criterion variables.
Discriminant analysis allows a researcher to statisti-
cally distinguish between two or more groups of cases.

To distinguish between the groups, the researcher selects
a collection of "discriminating variables" that measure
those characteristics on which the groups are expected

to differ. In the present research, seven variables were
chosen on which it was felt the two groups (intacts, not-
intacts would differ. The seven variables were as fol-
lows: PROGRAM PARTICIPATION (actual number of prison
programs partcipated in); TICKETS (number of tickets re-

 

ceived); LOCKE-WALLACE(responses to family-change scale);
OUTSIDE CONTACT (amount of mail and/or visits received);
FAMILIAL SUPPORT (responses to question #20 on PPAQ de-
veloped by the researcher); EFFFAM (responses to ques-

 

 

 

tions #1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, on family change scale); and
LFSEX ( responses to questoons #7, 10, 14, 15 on family
change scale). The scores for these variables were used
to discriminate between variables. These scores were com-
puted and scored during the principal component proce-
dure. The criterion by which independent variables, dis-
criminating variables, were selected for inclusion in

the discriminant analysis was WILKS LAMBDA. When the
method for inclusion.is WILKS LAMBDA, the criteria is

the "overall multivariate" F ratio for the test of dif-
ferences among the group controls. The variables which

89

maximize the F ratio also minimizes WILKES LAMBDA, or
measure of group discrimination. WILKS LAMBDA also
takes into consideration the differences between all
the centroids and homogeneity within the groups (SPSS,
1975). In order to determine which variables (discrim-
inating variables) did in fact discriminate between
groups, the significance of change in the Raos V was
used. If the significance level was less than or e-
qual to .05 that variable would be seen as discrimi-
nating between the two groups.

There were four primary components that discrim-
inated between those who had intact marital relation-
ships and those who did not. The four discriminating
variables were PROGRAM PARTICIPATION F=.022, OUTSIDE
CONTACT F=.529, FAMILIAL SUPPORT F=.524, and EFFECTS
OF INCARCERATION ON FAMILY F=.483. (WILKS LAMBDA =
.5523, CHI SQUARE =33.532, df=7, pz:.0001. Thus, the
profile of the group who had intact marriages tended
to participate in those prison programs receommended
for them, maintained regular contact their wives and
families, received emotional and financial support
from their families, and had families whose life-
styles were adversely affected financially and so-
cially due to their incarceration. They also experi-
enced sexual longings for their spouses. The above
stated prediction function correctly classified over-
all 80 percent of inmates. It was better at correctly
classifying 91.4 percent of the intact group and 66.7
percent of the not-intact group.

CHAPTER IV
DISCUSSION

 

The present study attempted to explore the impact
of marital stability and good familial support on the
incarcerated male offender's participation in prison
programs and prison misconduct. More specifically,
this study investigated the differential effects of
an inmate's marital stability and the amount of fam-
ilial support received on participation in recommended
prison programs and the number of tickets (major mis-
conducts) the inmate received during his incarcera-
tion. Coping strategies utilized by both the inmates
and their families were also explored. In an effort
to discuss the importance and implications of these
findings, highlights of the demographic characteris-
tics and the researcher's interpretation of perceived
needs are presented. Thus, this discussion section
will be divided into three parts: (1) the demographic
characteristics of the incarcerated male offenders
and their families; (2) the researcher's interpreta-
tion of needs in view of tests of the hypotheses; and
(3) the implications of this study for future research.

CHARACTERISTICS OF INMATES AND THEIR FAMILIES

A primary objective of this research was to col-
lect a survey of data regarding married inmates' ex-
periences as a result of their forced separation, in
addition to information on the inmates' wives and fam-

90

91

ilies as they struggled to cope with his absence.

For this sampled group, it was found that the
married inmates were young adult Blacks and Whites
with low socio-economic status, who had approximately
a twelth grade education, and had less than one child
per couple. They presently were serving a sentence
for a "property-type" offense, and had served at least
one prior prison term. While in large part this
group was representative of the adult inmate popu-
lation nationwide, there were some surprises.

One surprising finding of this research was the
revelation that a majority of the inmates sampled had
either completed high school or earned the general
equivalency diploma (GED). The national average for
an inmate's educational attainment is approximately
the eighth grade. Another surprising finding was
the low number of children conceived by incarcera-
ted fathers -- contrary to the widespread miscon-
ception that these men with criminal tendencies are
promiscuous, impregnating and subsequently abandoning
to the "welfare culture" every woman with whom they
become intimate. Perhaps the sensitivity with which
the sampled fathers spoke of their children was in
part due to the lower father-child ratio; and in as
much as the majority of couples had less than one
child per family, there may have been increased op-
portunity for the inmate father to become closer to
his offspring. While several studies have been con-
ducted on the children of incarcerated parents (Black-
well, 1959; MOrris, 1965; Zalba, 1964; Burkhart, 1973;
Adler, 1975; Click, 1977; Stanton, 1980) all of these

92

have focused on women inmates with the exception of
Blackwell (1959) and Morris (1965).

A less surprising finding was there was a high
percentage of black males in the sample (63 percent),
even though the percentage of Blacks residing in the
State is less than 10 percent. Also consistent with
expectations was that the sample who were from the
lower socio—economic strata contained a large per-
centage of respondents who were serving sentences for
property-type offenses such as burglary, larceny, and
breaking and entering. This pattern is in keeping
with results obtained by other researchers (Click,
1977; Simon, 1975) and national statistics (Uniform
Crime Reports, 1980) which show a greater incidence
of property type offenses by both male and female
offenders.

Based on previous literature compiled on the in-
carcerated male offender, the remainiqgfindings also
were expected --i.e., statistics regarding the ages
of the sampled population, the prior incarcerations
and commitments, living situation prior to incarcera-
tion, and employment history (or lack thereof), etc.

INTERPRETATION OF NEEDS

In view of the exploratory nature of this research,
a survey technique was used to provide answers to two
hypotheses. The first of these hypotheses outlined an
expected relationship between the influence of good
familial support and an inmate's increased desire to
participate in those prison programs recommended for
him prior to his release. The second hypothesis was

93

an expectation that good familial relations would im-
pact positively upon an inmate and, thus, increase his
desire to return swiftly to his family without the pos-
sibility of getting more time added on to his prison
sentence because of major prison misconduct (tickets).
Both hypotheses were at least supported.

Separation from family and children has been re-
ported to be one of the most difficult aspects of in-
carceration (Ward and Kassenbaum, 1965; Burkhart, 1973).
Once incarcerated, visitation is the one means by
which inmates can try to maintain some semblance of
a relationship with their wives and families. The
presence and maintenance of strong family ties is seen
by many to be a very critical factor in an inmate's
successful adjustment after release. Certainly one
of the serious effects of confining persons convicted
of crimes is the resulting destruction of family re-
lationships (Morris, 1965). It has long been docu-
mented empirically that the existence of a supportive
relationship is one of the few factors that can
have an affirmative influence on recidivism (Glasser,
1964; Holt and Miller, 1972; N. Morris, 1974). While
the results of the present research are consistent
with this general notion, they extended it by showing
a positive impact between good family ties and partici-
pation in prison activities while still incarcerated
and prior to release from the institution.

The American Correctional Association in one of
its most recent Manuals (6.2 pg 542) has stated that
"the members of the inmate's family should be permitted

94

and encouraged to maintain close contact with the in-
mate, not only to help his morale while serving a sen-
tence but to sustain family life, ensure close ties af-
ter release, and assist in the inmate's institutional
adjustment, giving him encouragement and helping him
keep in touch with the outside world in a practical
way."
This researcher maintains, as does numerous others
in the field, that conviction and criminal punishment
should not destroy familial relationships. Also, in
as much as prisons will continue to exist for the fore-
seeable future, in part because of what Morris and
Zimring (1969, p. 138) refer to as "the four horsemen
of political inaction: inertia, irresponsibility, ig-

norance and cost, the results of the present study
suggests that it would be foolish to ignore the impact
of familial support and its ameliorative effects on
prison misconduct.

Noted criminologists John Irwin and Donald Cressey
(1962) posited a similar thesis in their emphasis on
the fact that the patterns of inmate behavior and cul-
ture are determined primarily less by prison condit-
ions (rigid organizational structure, banality, etc.)
than factors associated with the prisoner's background
in the community. In the years since their article
appeared, a number of other observers have published
studies which support the view that preinstitutional
behavior patterns are the crucial determinants of be-
havior inside prison (Cline, 1968; Schwartz, 1971;
Jacobs, 1974). The present study, in which pre-incar-
ceration familial relationships were explored also

adds to this body of literature.

95

Furthermore, in recognizing that no matter what
other goals prisons have attempted to achieve from time
to time -- be it, for example, to reform prisoners or
to earn money with convict labor -- two tasks have al-
ways been their primary responsibility: preventing es-
capes and maintaining internal order. It is the lat-
ter of these two on which this study focused.

There are few who would claim that in the complete
absence of supervision and control, the inmate popu-
lation would live harmoniously within the walls of the
prison. However, much criticism has been directed a-
gainst the apparent triviality of many regulations
which seem to have no other purpose than the domina-
tion of the prisoners for the sake of domination a-
lone. Prison custodians, on the other hand, adamantly
disagree and maintain that in large part these regu-
lations are needed for control, given the ratio of
inmates to staff is so very large. (At Jackson Pri-
son, the ratio of inmates to guards is approximately
six to one.)

This is to say that even a moment's escape from
surveillance, from the perspective of the custodial
staff, provides the inmate with an Opportunity to per-
form a variety of serious, illegal acts. For indeed
what may be innocent enough now may prove dangerous
later--as a route of exchange for cigarettes becomes
a route of exchange for weapons; or gambling may lead
to unpaid debts, unpaid debts may lead to a knifing,
and so forth. It seems prison custodians are ever
aware that they are dealing with men with proclivi-
ties toward violence and other forms of anti-social
behavior, and internal order can be maintained only

96

if the situation that promote such behavior can be
eliminated from prison life.

The present research examined the number of pri-
son violations for married inmates and in so doing
found support for her hypothesis that custodial staff
would have less difficulty maintaining this internal
order for a smoother flow of prison operations from
those inmates whose marital relationships were posi-
tive and whose families provided much needed emotional
support.

Due to the correlational nature of this research,
one needs to be cautious about making causative infer-
ences regarding relationships between family support
and prison behavior. While this obtained relation-
ship is consistent with the idea that family support
fosters good prison adjustment, other possible ex-
planations cannot, as yet, be dismissed. For example,
it could be that family situation and prison behavior
are associated because they both reflect level of ego
functioning. These, as well as other alternative ex-
planations, are quite feasible. Thus, while the pre-
sent study establishes the "fact" of the relation-
ship, between family support and prison conduct, it
remains for future research to examine more directly
the various explanations that this relationship really
reflects.

TREATMENT

 

From.the standpoint of correctional treatment,
the present research also supported the hypothesis
that participation in recommended prison programs
(i.e., drug and/or alcohol counselling, academic and/

97

or vocational programs, etc.) would be enhanced for
those inmates who reported good family ties and in-
tact, stable marriages. Unless an inmate has been
convicted and sentenced for a heinous crime to a life-
time of imprisonment with no chance of parole, it is
reasonably certain that he will eventually be released
from prison. The concept of imprisonment as "putting
someone away"--with its implication of finality--
which some people seem to have, is actually just an
expression of their own wishes. Certainly the very
communities which send men to prison have a stake,
as do we all as a society, in the adequacy of prison
treatment, since more often than not these men re-
turn to the same counties which sent them to prison.
In considering the findings of the present re-
search, it may prove advantageous for prison officials
to stress upon the wives and families of those who
are imprisoned that they need to be more encouraging;
and, if these families could help to instill in the
inmates a sense that self-advancement and good citi-
zenship were important--and could be achieved by tak-
ing advantage of opportunities for training and treat-
ment during imprisonment--the likelihood of recidi-
vism would be greatly lowered. Also, in as much as
many prisoners' motivation for treatment, is influ-
enced by a desire to overcome a deeply felt hurt over
the separation from their loved ones, if these inmates
develop strong desires to make amends and to reduce
the anxieties of their loved ones, all the better for
everyone.

98

PAROLE

Because most of the men communities send to pri-
son will be released once again into those very same
communities, a discussion of parole is relevant. Pa?
role is defined as:

. . ."the act of releasing or the status of being
released from a penal institution in which a criminal
has served a part of his maximum sentence, on condit-
tion of maintaining good behavior and remaining in
the custody and under the guidance of the institution
or some other agency approved by the State until a
final discharge is granted." (Sutherland and Cressey,
1974)

Parole is "conditional liberation," that is, lib-
eration on condition that the prisoner live in accor-
dance with specified rules. These conditions are
fixed sometimes by law, sometimes by the parole board,
and sometimes by other agencies. These conditions
may included abstaining from intoxicating liquors and
drugs, keeping away from bad associates, curfews, not
changing residence or employment without permission,
not being in the presence of a minor child without a-
pproved adult supervision, not marrying without per-
mission, and/or making reparation or restitution for
the crime.

PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF SUPERVISION OF PAROLEES

There are at least three different views of super-
vision, differentially emphasizing punishment and treat-
ment that are found among lay and professional parole
workers. One conception, which is rapidly on the de-

99

cline, is based on the assumption that parole is a
system of leniency which permits the early release

of many dangerous criminals who should continue to
suffer punishment. Consequently parole work based

on this view emphasizes supervision rather than assis-
tance, and "supervision" is taken to mean zealous
"police work," "parole officer" to mean "police offi-
cer". A primary assumption here is that most parolees
have not reformed and will commit new crimes if given
the opportunity. The parole officer then becomes
charged with the duty of keeping parolees under close
surveillance and coercing the offender into conformity
by means of punsihment and threats of punishment
(namely the return to prison).

A second conception is based on the assumption
that reformation is a matter of individual self-de-
termination to "make good" in free society. The
primary notion here being that reformation is almost
complete at the time of release, and the function of
the parole officer is to watch the parolee to deter—
mine whether he is maintaining the conditions fixed
for his parole. This supervisory system may be viewed
as "watchful waiting." Coupled with the idea that
society must be protected by a careful watch over the
parolee is a belief that the parolee must be protected
from society. Parole officers with this approach are
likely to give direct help and assistance in locating
jobs or solving other problems, to lecture, and to
use both praise and blame. They often believe that
frequent contacts will destroy the parolee's initia-
tive or confidence in himself.

100

A third conception is based on the belief that
essential work of promoting adjustment has to be done
after release from prison, and that this requires assis-
tance, not to prevent the parolee from exercising his
own initiative, but to assist him in exercising it
correctly, so that crimes will not be repeated. This
is to say that it is not assumed that all parolees are
dangerous criminals, but it is recognized that "reform-
ation" in the form of "making good" is not always suffi-
cient to prevent recidivism. Parole thus is viewed as
a system for improving the welfare of the parolee by
helping him in his individual capacity. Assistance,
rather than surveillance, is emphasized, on the ground
that we already have police to act as surveillants and
detectives. In parole work based on this conception,
parole officers perform more as social workers.

Few would argue that in practice, of course, it
is difficult to separate supervision and assistance
of treatment and even in parole systems emphasizing
assistance, the parole officer must do some policing
(Cressey, 1959). Also, it should be remembered that
from the parolee's point of view almost any contacts,
whether one chooses to call it "assistance" or "super-
vision" are regarded as snooping. If the parole offi-
cer is to be of real assistance to the person on pa-
role, he should have an intimate acquaintance with
the personality and background of the offender. And
it would be advantageous if this information was se-
cured before a proper method of dealing with the offen-
der could be determined.

101

In view of the present research findings it appears
that if these data are utilized, the returns could prove
quite propitious. We know that the information now se-
cured through the original investigation for the insti-
tutional classification committee (the "diagnosis"),
and the data on the institutional adjustment of the
offender are accessible to the parole officer; however,
additionally it is suggested that an effective parole
officer should also have an intimate knowledge of the
family and other salient groups with which the parolee
will interact. These steps to familiarize the parole
officer with the potential parolee's family situation
ideally should be undertaken so as to prepare such
groups for the parolee's return before he is actually
released from the institution.

Also, in as much as the period of parole super-
vision will eventually end, it is important that the
parole officer assist the parolee in securing friends
and contacts of his own. A study conducted by Horlick
(1961) of fifty inmates in the District of Columbia
revealed that the men had four primary areas of con-
cern about their release from prison on parole -- these
were community acceptance, employment, family relation-
ships, and relationships with police and parole offi-
cers. The primary goal is to assist the parolee in
adjusting to society. Of course, this is much easier
said than done, since the criminal justice system up
to this point in the prisoner's life has done much to
convince him that he is an outcast; but, in face of the
author's and other's research regarding the importance
of familial support and its ameliorative effects on

102

the inmate's outlook, it is imperative that parole
agents across the country consider such variables as
they aim to assist released prisoners in their read-
justment.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

 

The most important finding in the author's re-
search was that family ties and emotional support does
relate positively to the inmate's participation in
prison programs and negatively to his prison miscon-
duct. Another salient feature of the research was
that prior to their incarceration, a majority of in-
mates had been contributing financially to their re-
spective households, and the effects of monetary losses
did create hardship on the family's ability to main-
tain an adequate standard of living.

In as much as no research is without its limita-
tions, this research was also limited by at least three
factors. The first of these was the sample size. A
larger sample size might have made the analyses, par-
ticularly the discriminant function, more meaningful
and perhaps more generalizable. However, given the
time involved and lack of funding available for inceas-
ing the size of the sample, this was not feasible.

A second limitation of the research was that initi-
ally the researcher envisioned being allowed to inter-
view inmates from each of the various cell blocks cho-
sen randomly from a list of all inmates confined to
Jackson Prison, however, due to a lack of security per-
sonnel, this was not a viable procedure and the men
were all interviewed while housed in the prison's Re-
ception and Guidance Center.

Another limitation was the partial use of self-re-
port and archival data. Archival data were used to col-
lect only the offense history of the inmate, his marital

103

status, and the amount of time he had served on his
sentence. However, not much focus was given to the
offense history of the inmate, nor to the amount of
time served. Much criticism has been directed against
using both self-report data as well as archival data,
particularly in the area of corrections. Having recog-
nized the tendency of some inmates to "put their best
foot forward" while participating in this, and perhaps
other research, it should be noted that the quality

of data derived from interview respondents was quite
good. Even taking into account the number of "false
positives" (those inmates who reported intact marriages
but whose relationships were not-intact), any biases

in this direction would not have resulted in achieve-
ment of the expected relationships. Despite criticism
levied against the use of self-report data, it should
be pointed out that many policy level decisions are
made utilizing this very type of information. There-
fore, the usefulness of this method of data resource
should be taken seriously.

Certainly in terms of the author's findings, which
found some support for her hypothesis that family ties
and emotional support does relate positively to inmate
participation in prison programs and negatively to his
prison misconduct, the implications are that this in-
formation could prove quite useful in the development
of specific programs with the prison, as well as for
those interested community agents. Also further research
may be generated to identify specific ways in which
families contribute to the aim of greater participa-
tion in recommended prison programs and reductions in
prison misconduct.

104

APPENDICES

105

APPENDIX A
EXPLANATION OF RESEARCH

106

APPENIDX A
EXPLANATION OF RESEARCH

Hello:

You are being asked to participate in a research
study designed to look at the means by which you cope
with being locked up at Jackson Prison. 1 will also
ask you questions about how you feel your wife and fam-
ily are getting along without you while you are impri-
soned.

The purpose of the study is to identify some of
the things you do to help you "do your time' and also
to learn about some of the changes you have experienced
since being here at Jackson. Hopefully, this study
will help develop programs within the prison which may
help out in this regard.

All of your responses to this interview are con-
fidential and it is hoped that you will be as frank and
open as possible.

107

APPENDIX B
RESEARCH PARTICIPATION FORM

108

APPENDIX B
RESEARCH PARTICIPATION FORM

Consent Form

 

I have freely consented to take part in the study
being conducted by: Cosandra 1. Douglas

under the supervision of: Lawrence A. Messe, Ph.D.
Academic Title: Professor of Psychology, M.S.U.

The study has been explained to me and I understand
the explanation that has been given to me and what
my participation will involve.

I understand that I am free to discontinue my par-
ticipation in the study at any time without penalty.

I understand that the results of the study will be
treated in strict confidence and that I will remain
anonymous. Within these restrictions, results of
the study will be made available to me at my re-
quest.

I understand that my participation in the study does
not guarantee any beneficial results to me.

I understand that, at my request, I can receive ad-
ditional explanation of the study after my partici-
pation is completed.

 

109

APPENDIX C
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION AND DATA SHEET

110

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION AND DATA SHEET

AGE

RACE

Marital Status

Education (in years)

1. Inmate
2. Wife
3. Children

Married
Single
Divorced
Widowed
Separated

MbUNH
e e e

. Inmate
Wife

NH
0

'#Times Changed Address(Wife)

Area Inmate Arrested(Cty)

#Years lived in Area of

Arrest

Length of Present Marriage

Wayne/Oakld
Genesse
Kent

Ingham
Other

MDUNH
ea e no

Inmate
. Wife

RNA
0

Month Year

 

 

Length of Acquaintance before

Marriage

#Previous Marriages

 

l. Inmate
2. Wife

#Separations During Current

Marriage

#Times Arrested Since Present

Marriage

Length of Current Sentence

Month Year

-_-._—-_.

 

Record 1
ID#

 

111

Time Served on Present Sentence

#Prison Terms Served

Offense of Current Sentence

Present Source of Family
Income

Present Custody of Children

Does Family Rent Apartment?

Does Family Own Home?
Value of Equity

Did Family Own Home at Time of
Arrest?

Did Family Rent Home at Time of
Arrest?

Monthly Household Income Before

Incarceration (Combined)

Monthly Household Income After
Incarceration (Combined) .

Occupation Before Incarceration
(Inmate) __

w—v fl

 

Occupation Before Incarceration
(Wife)

 

vi

Wife's Occupation Following Inmate's

Incarceration

 

Wfi "'

#031014 O‘U‘IPWNH U'iwaH

A
H
V

Record 1
ID#

_——_——.——_-—~—_

Person Offense
Property Offense
Drug Offense

Sex Offense
Other

Welfare (ADC)
Wife Working
Combination 1/2
Social Security
Disability
Other

Wife
Court
Relatives
Other

(2)

Yes No

 

 

 

(From Above)

4 $
$
$

1. Unemployed
2. Unskilled

3. Semivskilled
4 Skilled

5 Professional

(From Above)

112

Attitude Toward Current Prison
Sentence (Inmate)

Attitude Toward Current Prison
Sentence (Wife)

Estimate of Amt of Contact
w/Wife by mail or-visits

 

Record 1

 

ID#
(1) (2)
just unjust
. None
. Once or twice
yearly

Once a month

. Twice mthly

. Once a week or
oftener

than» hue

Number of Misconduct Reports Received

by Inmate

Number of Programs Rec'md for Inmate

 

V v fie
~

Actual Number of Programs Inmate Has Par-

ticipated In

 

113

APPENDIX D
FAMILY - CHANGE SCALE

 

Record 2

114 ID?" ——

FAMILY-CHANGE SCALE

To what extent did your wife and family lose or
gain friends since you came to Jackson?

A. Wife

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
gained many gained some have the lost some lost
friends friends same number friends many

of friends friends
B. Children

How have your relatives reacted to your being sent
to Jackson?

1 2 3 4

They are They are a They are They are less
much more little more about the helpful or
helpful or helpful or same as be- friendly now.
friendly friendly now. fore.

now. 5

They are much
less helpful
or friendly
now.

Compared to before your incarceration, to what ex-
tent is your family being insulted because of you
since your arrival at Jackson?

A. Wife

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Not at A little About the A little Much
all. less now. same as more now. more
B. Children before. now.

Compared to before your incarceration, how often do
you feel your family avoids people or places now that
you are at Jackson?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Not at A little About the A little Much

all. less now. same as more now. more
before. now.

Compared to before your incarceration, how often do
you feel your family is embarrassed because of your
being here at Jackson?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Not at A little About the A little Much
all. less now. same as more now. more

before. now.

10.

11.

12.

Record 2

 

ID#
115
Compared to before your incarceration, how often
do you feel embarrassed about your life 8 plight?
1. 20 . 3. 4. 5.
Not at A little About the A little Much
all. less now. same as more now. more
.- ‘ before. . now.
Since you came to Jackson how has your family's
income changed?
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. -
It is It is a It is about It is a It much
much more little the same as little less now.
now. more now. before. less now.
How has the condition of the family home changed
since you came to Jackson? 4
1. 0 0 0 50 .
It'is It is. It is about It.is not It 13
much better a little the same as (1111136 as Eggrly as
now. ' better now.- before. 80"" now. good.
Has the family experienced a change of cars since
you came to Jackson?
1. 2, 3. 4. 5.
Now have Have 8 Have the Car have No 10083:
a car nicer c-ar same, simi- now 18. have a
before we now. 181', 01’ Still not QUICB car-
didn't. no car. gOOd.
Has your family's life-style (food, clothing, etc.)
canged much since you came to Jackson?
1. 2. . -3. A, ' 5.
It is much It 18 a It is It is not It is not
better little about quite as nearly as
now. better the same good as gOOd as
now.- as before. now. now.
How often do you experience wishing that you could
show love and affection toward your wife now that
you're at Jackson? '
1. 2. 3. l}. . 5.
Much less Less About the A llttle' EUCh "20:5;
frequently frequently same as more frc- frequcn )7
now. now. before. quently “0"-
now.
How much do you miss having sexual relations with

your wife now that you are here at Jackson?

1. ' 5.

2. 3. 4.
Not at Very About as A little ““5“
811’ ' little. much as more now. more.

before.

13.

14.

15.

Record 2
ID#

116

From.your observations now that you are at Jackson,
how much do you think other inmates find themselves
attracted to other men now that they are locked

up in prison?

 

1 2. '3. 4. . 5,
' Less About as A.little 'Much more
“ever often. often as more often. often.
before.

If conjugal visits (explain) were allowed in the
prison and baby sitters and transportation for
your wife to the prison were furnished, how often
do you7think your wife would like to have these
vis ts

 

l. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Never. Once or Once a Twice a Once a
twice a month. month. ' ‘week or
year. oftener.

If conjugal visits (explain) were allowed in the
prison and babysitters and transportation for your
wife to the prison were furnished, how often do
you think.you;would like to have these visits?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Never. Once or Once a Twice a Once a
twice a month. month. 'week or
year. oftener.

117

APPENDIX E
LOCKE-WALLACE SHORT MARITAL ADJUSTMENT TEST

Record 3
ID#

118

LOCKE4WALLACE SHORT MARITAL ADJUSTMENT TEST

1. Circle the dot on the line scale below which best
describes the degree of happiness, everything con-
sidered, of your marriage before the present sepa-
ration caused by incarceration. The middle point,
"happy" represents the degree of happiness which
most people get from marriage, and the scale grad-
ually ranges on one side to those few who are very
unhappy in marriage, and on the other, to those
few who experience exteme joy in marriage.

__

0 2 7 15 20 25 35.

State the approximate extent of agreement or disagree-
ment experienced between you and your wife on the fol-
lowing items.

AA = Always A reed
.AAA = Almost Always.Agreed
OD = Occasionally Disagreed
FD = Frequently Disagreed
.AAD = Almost Always Disagreed
AD = Always Disagreed

2. Handling Family Finances

(5) (4) (3) (2) (1) (0)
AA AAA on FD AAD AD

3. Matters of Recreation

—_

AA AAA OD FD AAD AD

-——.——

4. Demonstration of Affection

AA AAA OD FD AAD AD
8 6 4 2 l O

5, Friends
AA AAA OD FD AAD AD é____

 

6. Conventionality (right and pro—
per conduct)

AA AAA on FD AAD AD

 

10.

11.

12.

13.

-2. To stay at home '

Record 3
ID#

119
Sex Relations
AA AAA OD FD AAD AD
15 12 9 4 1 0
Philosophy of Life ,
AA AAA on FD AAD AD
Ways of Dealing With In-Laws
AA AAA 0D FD AAD AD

When disagreements arose, did they usually
result in:

l. Husband giving in
(0 '

2. Wife giving in (2)

3. Agreement by mutual
give and take (10)

Did you and your wife engage in outside
interests together? --—-

1. All of them (10)
2. Some of them (8)
3. Very few of them (3)
4. None of them (0)

In leisuretime (freetime) did you generally
prefer to be:

1. "On the go"
2. To stay at home

In leisuretime (freetime) did your wife

prefer to be:
1. "On the go"

 

(Stay at home for both, 10 pts; "onthe g0" for
both, 3 pts; disagree, 2 pts)

Prior to the separation caused by the present
situation (incarceration) did you ever Wish
you.had not married your present Wife?

1. Frequently (O)

. Occasionally (3)

. Rarely (8) —————
. Never (15)

#0019

Record 3
ID#
120

14. If you had your life to live over prior to
the present situation (separation caused by
incarceration), do you think you would have:

1. Married the same person (15)
2. Married a different person (0)
3. Not married at all (1)

15. How often did you confide in your wife:

1. Almost Never (0)
2. Rarely (2)

3. In most things (10)
4 In everything (10)

121

APPENDIX F
PERCEPTUAL PRISON ADJUSTMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Record 4
ID#
122

PERCEPTUAL PRISON ADJUSTMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

How much has your family's income changed since
you have been incarcerated at Jackson?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

It is It is a It is about It is a {E gs much
much more little the same as little 8 now.
now. more now. before. less now.

To what extent are you bothered by the change in
status of your family's income now that you are in-
carcerated at Jackson?

1. 2. 3. 4.

It bothers It bothers It rarely It doesn't
me a great me somewhat. bothers me. bother me
deal. at all.

If your wife is working, do you know who cares for
the children during her working hours?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Inappli- Day- Relatives Friends Other
cable Care

Do your children know that you are in prison?
1. 2.
Yes No

If not, where do they think you are?
l 2 3 4.

out-of- Out-of- In jail Parents' Other
town work- town at rel- Separated
ing. atives.

Do you enjoy having your children visit you
in prison?

1. 2.

Yes No
Are you aware of any behavioral problems your
wife is currently experiencing with your children?

1. 2.
Yes No

If yes, please explain.

Record 4
ID#

123

8. Has it been necessary for your wife or children

to seek medical/psychiatric treatment since your

incarceration?
l. 2.
Yes No
9. Are you aware of your wife seeking reater support
(both psychological and/or financiaI) from family
members?
1. 2. 3. 4.
Inmate's Wife's Both Neither

Relatives. Relatives.

10. Since your incarceration at Jackson, how do you

ll.

12.

13.

14.

cope mentally being away from loved ones?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Makes mind Tries to Tries not I often Combin.
up to do think of -to think get de-

time. happier about often pressed.

times.
Since your incarceration at Jackson, what kinds ‘
of physical activities have you found helps you
to cope with being locked up?

1. 2. 3. 4. S. . 6.
Engage in Reads Bi- Lock at ‘Writes Raps with Other
physical ble. pics of to loved fellow in-
exercise. loved ones. ones. mate.

'What kinds of things do you do to help rid your-
self of the "blues" that often accompany being

locked up?

 

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. . 6.
Engage in Reads Bi- Look at Writes Raps with Other
physical ble. pics of to loved fellow in-
exercise. loved ones: ones. mate.

Is there any particular time that you feel blue
most?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. .
Just be- ' Follow- On Special Other.
fore bed- ing a holi- Birth-

time. visit. days. days.

Since your incarceration at Jackson, what is your
most serious and pressing concern following genera
"survival" and getting out?

1 2. 3 4. 5'

Employ- Adjustment Appeals Re-estab- Other.
ment. to family. lishmt of
social '

ties.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

Record 4

ID#

124

 

Since your incarceration at Jackson, what do
you think is your wife's most serious and press-

ine concern?

1. 2. 3, . 5.
Finan' Getting Husband’s Is husband Other.
cial ‘her social re-involmt to leave

matters. & sexual in crime. her upon

needs met, his release.
How Offen 90 you and your wife discuss‘her dating

other men?
1. 2. 3.
Never Seldom/ Frequently
discuss. sometimes discuss.
discuss.

Since your incarceration.at Jackson, how dijou
think your wife is c0ping with her sexual needs?

1 2 3

They . She is an' t
are be- abstain- discuss.
ing met. ing. .

If you and your wife were ever separated before
this imprisonment, what waS'the primary reason
for the separation (s)?

l. 2. 3. 4. 5.h
Infidel- Infidel- Finan- Disagree- 0t er.
it}! of ity of cial trou- Elfin? abmftt

01cc 0
inmate. 'wife. bles. friends.

How would you Characteristize your marriage?

1. 2.
Intact. Not
intact.

During your incarceration at.Jackson, how would
you characterize the amount of overall support
(both psychological and financial) given to you
by your wife and/or loved ones?

1. 2. 3. .4. - 5.

Much More About Much Less
more than than average. less than than
expected. expected. expected. expected.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

Record 4
ID#

125

In your effort to keep emotional ties alive,
what do you do most often?

——_—-_

1. ' 2. 3. 4. 5.
writes or Sends cards. Makes Other. Combina.
calls loved hobbycraft

ones. * items.

To what extent do you discuss your difficulties
in dealing with the "pains of imprisonment" with
fellow inmates?

l. ' 2. 3. 4. 5.
Tb a great MOre than Average. Almost Never.
degree. average. never.

When you are feeling especially "low" do you feel
there is any prison personnel to whom.you can
turn?

1. 2.
Yes .No.

If yes, whom of the following have you found

most sympathetic to your problems? -————-
Fellow C. ] . ' '
, ounse ors. Ps c' . °
1 . . y s Chaplain Other.

From what you have observed since your incarcera-
tion at Jackson, what do fellow inmates do most
often after receiving "bad" news (i.e., a Dear
John letter, etc.)

1- 2. 3. 4. .

Engage in Have 3 Smoke a Stay locked

violence. homosexual "joint". up all day. Other.
experience.

0

Since your incarceration at Jackson, how have
you handled yourself if you had a "bad'time" with
a prison official?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Got in , Talked it ‘Wrote a Wrote Other.
fight. out. grievance. home.

27.

.28.

29.

Record 4

ID#
126

On those occasions when you experience a "rotten
day" how often do you think of the negative con-
sequences of prolonging your stay at Jackson by

acting out some illicit behavior?

—_—.u‘

l. 2. » 3. 4.
Veny Often. Seldom. Never.
often. '

Which of the following best characterizes your
feelings about fellow inmates?

1. 2. 3. 4.. . 5.
Just try- Not to Trustworthy. Being his"Other.
ing to be trusted. - own time .

"get over".

 

Which of the following best characterizes your
feelings towards the guards?

 

a . 5
1. 2. 3. . - 4. . . _
Untrust- Trustworthy. Just dOing BaSically Egg
worthy. his job. hostile. -

127

LIST OF REFERENCES

128

REFERENCES

Anderson, Nancy. "When Father Goes to Gaol." Victori-
an Council of Social ServiCe. Melbourne, Australia,
1965.

Biegel, A. and Russell, M. "Suicidal Behavior in Jail:
Prognostic Considerations." B. Danto (ed.). Jail
House Blues. Orchard Lake, Michigan: Epic Books,
1973.

Blackwell, James E. "The Effects of Involuntary Separa-
tion on Selected Families of Men Committed to Pri-
son from Spokane County, washington." Unpublished
PH.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, State
College of Washington, 1959.

Bloodgood, Ruth. Welfare of Prisoners' Families in Ken—
tuck . U.S. Department offlLabor, Children‘s Bureau.
(Bureau Publication No. 182) Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1928.

Burgess, Ernest W., and Locke, Harvey J. The Family from
Institution to Companionship. New York} American
Book Company, 1945.

Carter, Robert, Daniel Glaser and L. Wilkins (eds.). Cor-
rectional Institutions. Philadelphia, Lippincott,
1972.

Cavan, Ruth 8., and Zemans, Eugene A. "Marital Relation-
ships of Prisoners in Twenty-eight Countries," Jour-
nal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science,
1%3X13g0. 1 (July-August, 1958),

Clemmer, Donald. The Prison Community. New York: Rine-
hart and Company, Inc., 1958.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clemmer, Donald. "Observations on Imprisonment as a Source
of Criminality," Journal of Criminal Law and Crimi-
nology, XLI (September-October, 1950), 311-319.

Cline, Hugh and Wheeler, Stanton. "The Determinants of
Normative Patterns in Correctional Institutions."
In Nils Christie, ed. Scandanavian Studies in Crim-
inology: Aspects of Social Control in Welfare States.
Scandanavian University Books, 2: ppl73-183, 1968.

Cloward, Richard A., et. a1. Theoretical Studies in Social
Organization of the Prison. New YOrk, Social Science
Research Council, 1960.

 

 

 

129

Cressey, Donald R. The Prison: Studies in Institutional
Organization and—Change. *New’York, Holt, Rinehart
andEWinston,7196l.

Cressey, Donald R. "Professioaal Correctional WOrk and
Professional WOrk in Corrections," National Proba-
tion and Parole Association Journal, 5: 1-15, Jan-
uary, 1959.

Danto, B. "Suicide at the wayne County Jail: 1967-1970."
B. Danto (ed.) Jail House Blues. Orchard Lake, Mich-
igan: Epic Books, 1973.

Duffy, Clinton T. "A Frank Discussion of the Prison Prob-
lem Nobody Talks About," This Week Magazine (Octo-
ber 21, 1962), 8-12.

Eaton, Joseph W. Stone walls Not a Prison Make: The Anat-
me of PlannedfiAdministrative Change. ’Springfield,
111.: Chafles C. Thomas, Publisher, 1962.

Esparza, R. "Attempted and Committed Suicide in County
Jails." B. Danto (ed.) Jail House Blues. Orchard
Lake, Michigan: Epic Books, 1973.

Fenton, Norman. The Prisoner's Family. Palo Alto, Calif.:
Pacific Books, 1959.

Fogel, David. "We Are the Living Proof." Anderson, 1975.

Forst, M. "Effects of Determinant Sentencing on Prison
Disciplinary Procedures and Inmate Inmate Misconduct."
Unpublished Manuscript, 1980.

Fox, Vernon. The Sociology of Punishment and Correction,
"Prison DiSciplinary Prdblems". John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., 1962.

Gibbs, J.J. "Violence in Prison: Its Extent, Nature and
Consequences." Critical Issues in Corrections, St.
Paul, MN ppllO-l49, 1981.

Gillin, John L. Taming the Criminal. New York: MacMillan
Company, 1931.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Glasser, Daniel. The Effectiyeness of a Prison and Parole
S stem. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc.,
1564.

Goode, William J., and Hatt, Paul L. Methods in Social Re-
search. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1952.

Griffieth, Winnie R. "Reintegration -- Need Assessment of
Female Offenders Being Released from Incarceration."
Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Psychology,
Michigan State University, 1980.

130

Hawkins, Gordon. The Prison: Policy and Practice. Uni-
versity of ChicagoPress, 1976.

Heffernan, Ester. Making It In Prison: The Square, The
Cool, and the Life. New York: ‘Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
1972.

Heilig, S. "Suicide in Jails: A Preliminary Study in Los
Angeles County." B. Danto (ed.) Jail House Blues.
Orchard Lake, Michigan: Epic Books, 1973.

Hillery, George A. Communal Organizations: A Study of
Local Societies. Chicago, ChicagoUniversity Press,
1968, p. 144.

Hopper, Columbus. "The Conjugal Visit at Mississippi State
Penitentiary," The Journal of Criminal Law, Crimi-
nology and PolicefSCIence, LIII (September, 1962),
pp. 340-344.

Hopper, Columbus. Sex in Prison: The Mississippi Experi-
ment with Conjugal Visiting. Louisiana State Uni-
versity Press, 1969.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Irwin, John. Prisons in Turmoil. Lttle Brown Press, 1980.

 

Irwin, John. The Felon. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
1970.

Irwin, John, and Cressey, Donald. "Thieves, Convicts and
the Inmate Culture," Social Problems 10, (Fall, 1962):
pp 145-147.

Jacobs, James. "Street Gangs Behind Bars." Social Prob-
lems, 21: pp395-409, 1974.

Kalinich, David B. The Inmate Economy. Lexington, Mass.,
D.C. Heath and Co., 1980.

Komarovsky, Mirra. The Unemployed Man and His Family. New
York, The DrydenPress, 1940, pp. 74F77.

Leinwand, Gerald. Prisons: Problems of American Society.
Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1972.

Locke, Harvey J., and Wallace, Karl M. "Short Marital Ad-
justment and Prediction Tests: Their Reliability and
Validity," Marriage and Family Livin , XXI (August,
1959), pp. 251:255.

McCord, William, and cCord, Joan. Psychopathyiand Delin-
quency. New York, Grune and Stratton,’1956.

McCorkle, Lloyd W., and Korn, Richard R. The Sociology of
Punishment and Correction, "ResocializationlWithin
Walls". John Wiley and Sons., Inc., 1962.

McGowan, Brenda and Blumenthal, Karen. Why Punish the
Children?. National Council on Crime and Delinquency,
1978.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

131

Morris, Norval. The Future of Imprisonment. Chicago,
University of Chicago Press, 1974.

MOrris, N. and Zimring, F. "Deterrence and Corrections."
Annals of the American Academy of Political and So-
ciaI science, 1969, pp.137-l46, Vol. 381.

Morris, Pauline. Prisoners and Their Families. London:
George Allen and Ufiwin,7Etd}, 1965.

Murton, Thomas. The Dilemma of Prison Reform. Praeger,
1976.

Nie, N.H. ‘SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sci-
ences. ’New York, McGraw Hill, Inc.{’1975.

Ohlin, Lloyd, Piven, Herman, and Pappenfort, Donald. "Ma-
jor Dilemmas of the Social WOrker in Probation and
Parole," National Probation and Parole Association
Journal, 2: pp211-225, July, 1956.

Parisi, Nicolette. Coping With Imprisonment. Beverly
Hills, Sage Publications, Inc., 1982.

Propper, Alice M. Prison Homosexuality. Lexington, Mass-
achusetts, D.C. Heath and Co.,‘1981

Reckless, Walter. The Crime Problem. New York, Appleton-
Century-Crofts, Inc., 1955: pp. 428-429.

Rector, Milton G. "Factors in Measuring Recidivism as Pre-
sented in Annual Reports," National Probation and
Parole Association Journal, 4: pp218¥232, July, 1958.

Roebuck, Julian. "A Critique of 'Thieves, Convicts and the
Inmate Culture'," Social Problems 11 (Fall, 1963):
ppl93-201.

Sacks, Jerome G. "The Social and Economic Adjustments of
the Families of a Selected Group of Imprisoned Felons."
Unpublished Master's thesis, School of Social WOrk,
Catholic University of America, 1938.

Schneller, Donald P. The Prisoner's Family: A Study of
The Effects of Imprisonment on fhe Families of Pri-

soners. San Francisco, CA: R & E Research Associ-
ates, 1976.

Schwartz, Barry. "Pre-Instiutional vs Situational Influ-
ence in a Correctional Community." Journal of Crim-
inal Law, Criminology and Police Science. Vol. 62
(1971): pp532F542:

Stanton, Ann M. When Mothers Go to Jail. Lexington, Mass-
achusetts: DQC. Heath and Co., 1980.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

132

Sutherland, E.H. and Cressey, D.R. Criminology. New
York, J.B. Lippincott Co., 1974.

Sutherland, Edwin H. The Professional Thief. Chicago,
University of Chicago Press, 1937.

Swan, L. Alex. 'Families of Black Prisoners: Survival
and Progress. PBoston: G.K. Hall and Co., 1981.

Sykes, Gresham. The Society of Captives. Princeton, 1958.

Tappan, Paul W. The Legal Rights of Prisoners. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science, May 1954, pp.99-lll.

Tittle, Charles, and Tittle, Drollene. "Structural
Handicaps to Therapeutic Participations: A Case
Study", Social Problems 13 (Summer l965):8l.

Tittle, Charles, and Tittle, Drollene. "Social Organi-
zation of Prisoners: An Empirical Test", Social
Forces 43 (December 1964): pp216-221.

Toch, Hans. Living in Prison. Free Press, 1977.

United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation. Uniform Crime Reports. Washington,
D.C., U.S. GovernmentiPrinting Office, 1980.

Waller, I. Men Released From Prison. Toronto: Uni-
versity of Toronto‘Press, 1974.

wright, Martin. Making Good: Prison, Punishment and
Beyond. Great Britain: The Anchor Press,’Ltd.,

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zalba, Serapio R. WOmen Prisoners and Their Families.
Los Angeles: Delmar Publishing Co., Inc., 1964.

Zemans, Eugene S., and Cavan, Ruth S. "Marital Relation-
ships in the United States," Journal of Criminal
Law, Criminology and Police Science, XLIII (May-
June 1968), pp50-57.

U

NIV. LIBRARIES
IHHI ‘IHIHIWIWW
5774388

ST

nICHIan
WWW“
131:2

Fl TE
WM
163

5K3