The Hearing is Just a Formality: You’re Never Getting Out

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate how individuals incarcerated who were denied parole navigated the parole process and their subsequent denial for release. This study used in-depth qualitative interviews with 66 men and women who were currently incarcerated and denied parole. The results illustrated how their experiences with the parole process affected their perceptions of fairness and legitimacy. The degree of fairness and legitimacy were also interconnected with how they internally processed the decision as well as how they perceived their prospects for release. Implications are that if individuals perceive the parole hearings as not legitimate, they may be less willing to participate in the process and instead chose to max out their time.

Keywords

parole release parole boards parole remorse

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Annison

Condry

(2022). The pains of hope: Families of indeterminate sentenced prisoners and political campaigning by lay citizens. British Journal of Criminology, 62(5), 1252–1269. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azac039

Bandes

S. A.

(2016). Remorse and criminal justice. Emotion Review, 8(1), 14–19.

Best

B. L.

Wodahl

E. J.

Holmes

M. D.

(2014). Waiving away the chance of freedom: Exploring why prisoners decide against applying for parole. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58(3), 320–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X12470812.

Bottoms

Tankebe

(2012). Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. The Journal of Criminal and Criminology, 102(1), 19–170.

Caplan

J. M.

(2007). What factors affect parole: A review of empirical research. Federal Probation: A Journal of Correctional Philosophy and Practice, 71(1), 16–19.

Cohen

Taylor

(2003). Escape attempts: The theory and practice of resistance in everyday life. Routledge.

Conley

J. A.

Zimmerman

S. E.

(1982). Decision making by a part-time parole board: An observational and empirical study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 9(4), 396–431.

Connor

D. P.

(2016). How to get out of prison: Views from parole board members. Corrections, 1(2), 107–126.

Cotton

R. F.

(2008). Time to move on: The California Parole Board’s fixation with the original sentence. Law & Policy Review, 27(1), 239–247.

10.

Creswell

Poth

(2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.

11.

Crewe

(2011). Depth, weight, tightness: Revisiting the pains of imprisonment. Punishment & Society, 13(5), 509–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474511422172

12.

Daly

K. J.

(2007). Qualitative methods for family studies & human development. Sage.

13.

Elion

V. H.

Megargee

E. I.

(1979). Racial identity, length of incarceration, and parole release decision making. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 16(2), 232–245.

14.

Greene

Dalke

(2021). You’re still an angry man: Parole boards and logics of criminalized masculinity. Theoretical Criminology, 25(1), 639–662. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480620910222

15.

Hannah-Moffat

Yule

(2011). Gaining insight, changing attitudes and managing ‘risk’: Parole release decisions for women convicted of violent crimes. Punishment & Society, 13(2), 149–175.

16.

Huebner

B. M.

Bynum

T. S.

(2008). The role of race and ethnicity in parole decisions. Criminology, 46(4), 907–938.

17.

Lambert

S. D.

Loiselle

C. G.

(2008). Combining individual interviews and focus groups to enhance data richness. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(2), 228–237.

18.

MacDougall

Baum

(1997). The devil’s advocate: A strategy to avoid groupthink and stimulate discussion in focus groups. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 532–541.

19.

Martel

(2010). Remorse and the production of truth. Punishment & Society, 12(4), 414–437.

20.

Maycock

(2021). The transgender pains of imprisonment. European Journal of Criminology, 19, 1521–1541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370820984488

21.

Merton

R. K.

(1940), Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 18(4), 560–568. https://doi.org/10.2307/2570634

22.

Michel

(1999). Combining focus groups and interviews: Telling how it is; Telling how it feels. In Barbour

Kitzinger

(Eds.), Developing focus group research (pp. 36–46). Sage.

23.

Moyd

(1986). Racial disparities inherent in America’s fragmented parole system. Criminal Justice, 36(1), 6–12.

24.

Ostermann

(2011). Parole? Nope, not for me: Voluntarily maxing out of prison. Crime & Delinquency, 57(5), 686–708.

25.

Paparozzi

M. A.

Caplan

J. M.

(2009). A profile of paroling authorities in America: The strange bedfellows of politics and professionalism. The Prison Journal, 89(4), 401–425.

26.

Patton

(2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage.

27.

Petersilia

Threatt

(2017). Release from Prison. In The Encyclopedia of Corrections. K.R. Kerley (Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118845387.wbeoc019

28.

Reitz

K. R.

Rhine

E. E.

(2020). Parole release and supervision: Critical drivers of American prison policy. Annual Review of Criminology, 3(1), 281–298.

29.

Reitz

K. R.

Rhine

E. E.

Lukac

Griffith

(2022). American prison-release systems: Indeterminacy in sentencing and the control of prison population size. University of Minnesota Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice.

30.

Rhine

E. E.

(2012). The present status and future prospects of parole boards and parole supervision. In Petersilia

Reitz

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sentencing and corrections (pp. 627–656). Oxford University Press.

31.

Rhine

E. E.

Petersilia

Reitz

K. R.

(2017). The future of parole release. Crime and Justice, 46(1), 279–338.

32.

Rhine

E. E

Smith

W. R.

Jackson

R. W.

(1991). Paroling authorities: Recent history and current practices. American Correctional Association.

33.

Rivera

(2020). Traumatized to death: The cumulative effects of serial parole denials. The City of University of New York Law Review, 23(2), 25–39.

34.

Rubin

A. T.

(2021). Rocking qualitative social science. Stanford University Press.

35.

Ruhland

E. L.

(2020). Philosophies and decision making in parole board members. The Prison Journal, 100(5), 640–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885520956566

36.

Ruhland

E. L.

Rhine

E. E.

Robey

J. P.

Mitchell

K. L.

(2016). The continuing leverage of releasing authorities: Findings from a national survey, Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice. https://robinainstitute.umn.edu/publications/continuing-leverage-releasing-authorities-findings-national-survey

37.

Schwartzapfel

(2015). Parole boards: Problems and promise. Federal Sentencing Report, 28(2), 79–84.

38.

Shantz

L. R.

Frigon

(2009). Aging, women and health: From the pains of imprisonment to the pains of reintegration. International Journal of Prisoner Health, 5(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449200802692045

39.

Soffer

Ajzenstadt

(2010). The multidimensionality of “pains of imprisonment” among incarcerated women in Israel. Women & Health, 50(6), 491–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2010.510388

40.

Sykes

(1958) The society of captives: A study of a maximum security prison. Princeton University Press.

41.

Tyler

T. R.

(2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 84–99.

42.

Ugelvik

(2014). Paternal pains of imprisonment: Incarcerated fathers, ethnic minority masculinity and resistance narratives. Punishment & Society, 16(2), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474513517020

43.

Warr

(2016). The prisoner: Inside and out. In Jewkes

Bennett

Crewe

(Eds.), Handbook on prisons (2nd ed., pp. 586–604). Routledge.

44.

West-Smith

Pogrebin

M. R.

Poole

E. D.

(2000). Denial of parole: An inmate perspective. Federal Probation, 64(3), 3–10.

45.

Yang

(2019). Measuring hope in jail inmates with substance use problem. Federal Probation, 83(2), 21–26.

46.

Zhong

Baranoski

Feigenson

Davidson

Buchanan

Nonana

H. V.

(2014). So you’re sorry? The role of remorse in criminal law. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 42, 39–48.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB