Navigating the Carceral State: The Experience of Citizens With Criminal Backgrounds After Finding Stable Housing

Abstract

A pilot project demonstrating the importance of access to stable housing for people with criminal backgrounds and experiencing homelessness produced exploratory qualitative findings that illuminate the experience of folks who must navigate the carceral state of supervision. Principles of a participatory action paradigm guided development and implementation of the pilot project. Grounded Theory and narrative research principles guided data collection and analysis in the 3-year study. A convenience sample of 27 participants was obtained by the organization’s staff recruiting each of the individuals on behalf of the researchers as they entered the pilot program during the 3 years of pilot activity. Qualitative data collection was carried out during the 3 years of program implementation. A semi-structured open-ended interview script was utilized by the research team as a guide to ensure focus on the experience of participants. Current extreme challenges included living with a criminal background and carrying the weight of a troubled past. Great strength was evidenced in their navigation of their worlds. Essential resources for successful navigation were identified including the use of prayer, religion and spirituality, persistent hopefulness, recognition of personal change, and the use of supportive relationships. Getting stable housing and employment, while important, was not seen as enough in itself to ensure successful reentry. Therefore, relationships that recognize strengths and help navigating inevitable disappointments and challenges must also be incorporated into the available housing, educational, mental health, employment programs, and other services. The findings of this study suggest that practice approaches, services, and policies that are intended to help people with criminal backgrounds must incorporate and emphasize the lived experiences of returning citizens as they navigate the challenging tasks of living in a carceral state.

Keywords

reentry process carceral supervision criminal justice housing programs spiritual and psychological protective factors

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alexander

(2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press.

Denzin

Lincoln

(2000). Handbook of qualitative research. Sage.

Dweck

(2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success (1st ed.). Random House.

Foucault

(1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Random House.

Fredrickson

(1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300

Fredrickson

(2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218

Fredrickson

(2013). Positive emotions broaden and build. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1–53.

Glazer

(2002). Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 23–38.

Glazer

Strauss

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.

10.

Hesse-Biber

(2017). The practice of qualitative research: Engaging students in the research process (3rd ed). SAGE.

11.

Hlavka

Wheelock

Jones

(2015). Ex-offender accounts of successful reentry from prison. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 54(6), 406–428.

12.

(2019). Psychological factors that impact long-term reentry [Doctoral Dissertation, Loyola University Chicago]. Proquest.

13.

Kaeble

Glaze

Tsoutis

Minton

(2016). Correctional populations in the United States, 2014. US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

14.

Kenemore

T. K.

(2013). Social work practice with reentry from incarceration. In Rosenberger

(Ed.), Relational social work practice with diverse populations (pp. 239–260). Springer.

15.

Kenemore

T. K.

(2020). Relationship matters with citizens returning from prison: Qualitative Findings from a mentoring program. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 59, 315–333.

16.

Kenemore

T. K.

Roldan

(2006) Staying straight: Lessons from ex-offenders. Clinical Social Work Journal, 34(1), 5–21.

17.

Lincoln

Guba

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

18.

Maruna

(2001). Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. American Psychological Association.

19.

Maur

Chesney-Lind

(Eds.). (2002). Invisible punishment: The collateral consequences of mass imprisonment. The New Press.

20.

Miller

(2014). Devolving the carceral state: Race, prisoner reentry and the micro-politics of urban poverty management. Punishment & Society, 16(3), 305–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474514527487

21.

Miller

(2017). Prisoner reentry in an era of smart decarceration. In Epperson

Pettus-Davis

(Eds.), Smart decarceration: Achieving criminal justice transformation in the 21st century (pp. 101–114). Oxford University Press.

22.

Miller

(2021). Halfway home: Race, punishment, and the afterlife of mass incarceration. Little, Brown & Company.

23.

Miller

R. J.

Alexander

(2016). The price of carceral citizenship: Punishment, surveillance, and social welfare policy in an age of carceral expansion. Michigan Journal of Race & Law, 21, 291.

24.

Muhlhausen

(2015). Studies cast doubt on effectiveness of prisoner reentry programs (No. 3010). Heritage Foundation.

25.

Ndrecka

(2014). The impact of reentry programs on recidivism: A meta-analysis [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Cincinnati.

26.

O’Brien

(2001). Making it in the free world. State University of New York Press.

27.

Ozanne

Saatcioglu

(2008) Participatory action research. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 423–439.

28.

Padgett

(2016). Qualitative methods in social work research (2nd ed.). Sage.

29.

Paternoster

Bachman

Bushway

Kerrison

O’Connell

(2015). Human agency and explanations of criminal desistance: Arguments for a rational choice theory. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 1(3), 209–235.

30.

Patterson

G. T.

(2013). Prisoner reentry: A public health or public safety issue for social work practice? Social Work in Public Health, 28, 129–141.

31.

Patton

(2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.

32.

Petersilia

. (2002). When prisoners return to the community: Political, economic, and social consequences. Sentencing & Corrections: Issues for the 21st Century, 9, 1–8.

33.

Petersilia

(2004). What works in prison reentry? Reviewing and questioning the evidence. Federal Probation, 68(2), 4–8.

34.

Pettus-Davis

Renn

Veeh

C. A.

Eikenberry

(2019) Intervention development study of the five-key model for reentry: An evidence-driven prisoner reentry intervention. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 58(7), 614–643. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2019.1635242

35.

Sampson

Laub

(2016). Turning points and the future of life-course criminology: Reflections on the 1986 criminal careers report. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 53(3), 321–335.

36.

Skardhamar

Savolainen

(2014). Changes in criminal offending around the time of job entry: A study of employment and desistance. Criminology, 52(2), 263–291.

37.

Strauss

Corbin

(1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

38.

Tapia

(2018). The Carceral state project 2028-2029k symposium. University of Michigan, Department of Political Science.

39.

Visher

WInterfield

Coggeshall

(2005). Ex-offender employment programs and recidivism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 295–315.

40.

Wacquant

(2009) Prisons of poverty (expanded edition). University of Minnesota Press.

41.

Wacquant

(2010). ‘Prisoner reentry as myth and ceremony’. Dialectical Anthropology, 34(4), 605–620.

42.

Wheeler

Patterson

(2008). Prisoner reentry. Health & Social Work, 33(2), 145–147. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/33.2.145