The Era of Paternal Incarceration

THE ERA OF PATERNAL INCARCERATION THE LATENT CYCLE OF EFFECTS

CHRISTIAN H. BINGHAM UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT Department of Sociology

MAY 5, 2015

The Era of Paternal Incarceration: The Latent Cycle of Effects Christian H. Bingham

Page | 1

Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................................2

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................3

Literature Review ...............................................................................................................................3

Prevalence of Incarceration in the United States...............................................................................3

The Latent Effects on Children .........................................................................................................4

Applied Research ................................................................................................................................6

Purpose..........................................................................................................................................6

Methods ........................................................................................................................................6

Data Source ................................................................................................................................6

Measures ....................................................................................................................................6

Analyses .....................................................................................................................................6

Results ...........................................................................................................................................7

Demographics .............................................................................................................................7

Frequencies ................................................................................................................................7

Regression ..................................................................................................................................9

Discussion ........................................................................................................................................ 10

The Need for Change .................................................................................................................... 10

Implemented Programs................................................................................................................. 11

Research Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 11

Policy Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 12

Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................... 13


Page | 2

Abstract Paternal incarceration today has become extremely prevalent. In 2013, there was over 1.5

million individuals are in the United States prison system, of which, 1.4 million are males. These statistics

make the United States the most incarcerated nation in the world. This is largely a result of changes in

the U.S. judicial system that were enacted over the last three decades which created mandatory

minimum sentences.

Through preliminary research the author found a correlation between paternal incarceration

and the likelihood of the prisoner’s child being incarcerated. This creates a cycle of latent effects making

each child after the next in a family’s blood line more likely to be incarcerated if a current or prior

generation father was subject to incarceration. Also, paternal incarceration has been linked to a child’s:

delinquency, social disorders, defiant behaviors, and more.

Through my own research using data collected from inmates across Vermont I have been able to

not only prove these facts, but also create quantitative scale of effects paternal incarceration has

regarding an inmate’s age of incarceration. If an inmate identified as having a father who was arrested

or incarcerated, their age of first incarceration drops by three years and their age at the beginning of

their current incarceration drops by about 9 years.

As of 2007 there were more than 1.7 million children with incarcerated parents. Following

gender related data trends, most of said parents are likely to be men. The need for policy reform

becomes evident. This author postulates that to reduce the lasting effects of paternal incarceration the

United States Justice System needs: to better facilitate contact between children and their incarcerated

father, implement more family orientated programs aimed at teaching fathers to better care for their

children upon release, to look at alternatives for less serious crimes for those who are fathers.


Page | 3

Introduction The following paper is the undergraduate sociological research work of Christian H. Bingham in

conjunction with the University of Vermont’s department of sociology. The study is based around

paternal incarceration and the latent effects on the prisoner’s off-spring. Through this research the

author will: 1) give a background to the incidence of paternal incarceration, 2) demonstrate the

reoccurring effects on children, and 3) present conclusions on the topic.

The goal of the following research is to make policy change recommendations to the Vermont

Department of Corrections. Work was done in collaboration with Jill Evans, Director of Women and

Family Services, as part of Vermont’s Agency of Human Services. All research was done under the

supervision of Professor Jennifer Anne Strickler (Ph.D. Princeton University, 1993).

Literature Review Prevalence of Incarceration in the United States According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, as of December 31, 2013, there were an estimated

1,574,700 prisoners in state and federal correctional facilities. Of those incarcerated, 1,463,454 were

male while only 111,287 were female. This number has been steadily increasing since 1980, at which

point there were a mere 250,000 prisoners1 (in both state and federal facilities). “While the United

States had only 5 percent of the world’s population, it has nearly 25 percent of its prisoners” (Collier

2014). Our prison rate is followed by China, whose dictatorial leadership is arguably more draconian,

according to the International Centre for Prison Studies.

By middle of the year 2000, the imprisonment rate was around five times greater than what it

was in 1970 (Greenberg and West 2001). The comparison of worldwide incarceration rates is staggering,

1 Estimated number based off of the Bureau of Jus tice Statistics “Total State and Federal Prison Populations, 1978 -

2013” graph


Page | 4

as Lorna Collier of the American Psychological Association writes, the United States has a “per capita

rate five to 10 times higher than that in Western Europe or other democracies” (2014: 56).

The cause of our increasing imprisonment rate is due to the change of judicial punishment

policies during the early 1970’s (Collier 2014). Yet, most would foresee that imprisonment be to be

related to violent crimes, whose sentence would fit the charge and thus be beneficial to society, but a

majority of our prison population is incarcerated due to non-violent property crimes (Greenberg and

West 2001). Such tough-on-crime changes were a result of the crack and cocaine epidemic that was

occurring during the time period.

The Latent Effects on Children In 2007, there were an estimated 1,706,600 minor children with incarcerated parents in the

United States (Glaze and Maruschak 2008). This number accounts for over 2 percent of the U.S

population under the age of 18. The effects an incarcerated parent has does not simply end with the

incarcerated individual. Such effects may not be seen for years or even decades and manifest in their

children. A longitudinal study of 1395 Pittsburgh area boys (Farrington et al. 2001) showed that arrests

of any relative to a child predicted their delinquent behavior. Although, the “the most important relative

was the father; arrests of the father predicted the boy’s delinquency independently of all o ther arrested

relatives” (Farrington et al. 2001).

One major determinate in the way a child is raised is whether or not their parent is incarcerated

during their upbringing. “dysfunctions in parenting or parent-child bonding can have devastating effects

on child growth and development. This may begin in infancy with manifestations of classic non-organic

failure to thrive and can continue through childhood”. Such manifestations can be “developmental

delays and disorders, oppositional and defiant behaviors, conduct disorders, juvenile delinquency and

adult criminality” (Palusci et al. 2007:80)


Page | 5

“Studies from several countries show that paternal criminality predicts children’s own criminal

behavior in later life” (Murray, Janson, and Farrington 2007:133). To prove this, Murray, Janson, and

Farrington (2007) ran a study based out of London; the results were that, “of boys who experienced

paternal incarceration in their first 10 years of life, 48% were convicted as adults”.


Page | 6

Applied Research Purpose Research, using survey data collected throughout the State of Vermont, will be used to examine

the quantitative effects of paternal incarceration on the life-course of the prisoner’s child. The work is

based on prisoners’ responses to questions about their own lives and incarceration and the lives of their

parents and grandparents. Based on results, the author will describe a self-perpetuating cycle in the

prison system. Without interjection, the problem will get worse.

Methods

Data Source Survey data used for this research was previously gathered through face-to-face interviews with

inmates from each Vermont State Correctional Facility. The sampling method used was every 4th inmate

and the responses totaled 379. Inmates were not incentivized to participate. Survey administrators also

made it clear to participants that their participation would not impact their sentence. The sample is

generalizable among all Vermont state prison inmates.

Measures Survey participants were asked a variety of questions about their lives and their family.

Response data was coded and entered into SPSS by a third-party. More than 350 variables were studied.

The research process was deductive and initially focused on prisoners whose fathers had also been

incarcerated.

Analyses To conduct appropriate analyses, variables had to be recoded and combined. For example, to

understand how many children a father had was a three-step process. First, the author used an IF

function to identify participants who had children. Simultaneously, an SPSS compute function solved for

how many children had and at what age. Lastly, a frequency analysis was used to calculate modal

results.


Page | 7

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

Male Female

88.4%

11.6%

77%

11%

4%4% 3% 1%

Caucasian/White

African-American orBlack

Native American

Other

Latino/a or Hispanic

No Response

Significant results were found by using various regressions. To show the cycle of effects, the

author studied variables from each part of the inmate’s life. These variables consisted of attained

education, age of first incarceration, age at the beginning of their current incarceration, and adverse

living situations as a youth. The results were compared to those whose fathers had never been arrested

or incarcerated.

Results

Demographics Of those surveyed, more than 88 percent were male (Graph 1) and 77 percent identified

themselves as “Caucasian/white” (Graph 2). The gender breakdown of the inmates closely relates to

national averages. Yet, in comparison to national averages, the Vermont prison population is much more

racially homogeneous.

Graph 1 Graph 2

Frequencies 64.1 percent of those surveyed (243) identified as having children (Graphs 3 and 4). Of the

males, 63 percent (211 respondents) identified themselves as fathers (Graphs 3 and 4). Of the

incarcerated females, about 73% (32 respondents) identified themselves as mothers (Graphs 3 and4).


Page | 8

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Parent Father Mother

64.1% 63.0%72.7%

20.00

70.00

120.00

170.00

220.00

270.00

320.00

370.00

Parent Father Mother

243.00

211.00

32.00

Graph 3 Graph 4

Of those that identified as fathers, about 32 percent responded as having one child and 25

percent responded as having two children. Graph 5 exhibits these and additional results.

Graph 5

Graph 6 presents the ages of prisoners’ children. The modal response was the 6-12 age cohort,

followed closely the 2-5 age cohort.

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

None or NoResponse

1 2 3 4 5 6 13

16.1%

31.8%

25.1%

14.2%

7.1%

2.8% 2.4%0.5%

RES

PO

NSE

PER

CEN

T

NUMBER OF CHILDREN


Page | 9

0

50

100

150

Under two Between twoand five

Between sixand twelve

Betweenthirteen toseventeen

8% - 33

34% - 13438% - 149

20% - 80

CHIL

D C

OU

NT

AGE (YEARS)

17

18

19

20

21

22

Average Father was Incarcerated

Age, 21.88

Age, 19.051

INM

ATE

'S A

GE

OF

FIR

ST

INC

AR

CER

ATI

ON

(YEA

RS)

Sig. = ≤ .001

Graph 6

Regression Using a regression analysis, a correlation between paternal incarcerations and the age of the

inmate’s first incarcerated (Graph 7) and the age at the beginning of their current incarceration (Graph

8) was established.

Graph 7


Page | 10

17

22

27

32

Average Father was Incarcerated

Age, 33.732

Age, 25.061

INM

ATE

'S A

GE

AT

THE

BEG

INN

ING

OF

THEI

R

CU

RR

ENT

INC

AR

CER

ATI

ON

(YEA

RS)

Sig. = ≤ .001

Graph 8

Using two separate regression tests a significant relationship (alpha is less than .05) between

paternal incarceration, education, and adverse youth living situations was established. If an inmate’s

father was arrested or incarcerated, the inmate themselves were likely to be less educated than other

inmates. Moreover, they were more likely to have: lived in a foster home, be homeless as a child, or be

in emergency care. They were also more likely to have experienced any combination of adverse living

situations.

Discussion The Need for Change In 2007 there were more than 1.7 million children of incarcerated parents. As a result of latent

effects, many of this children can be expected to also be incarcerated. The case of a boy named Sam will

be used to illustrate this point. In Sam’s early life, his father was incarcerated. From the author’s

research, more than 30 percent of those incarcerated in Vermont identified as having a father who was

arrested or incarcerated. As a result of Sam’s father being incarcerated, he grows up in adverse

conditions. His family’s resources become are strained - his mother or caretaker may struggle to

maintain living funds. Because of this, the child is not able to spend as much time with this mother or

caretaker. Sam is then more likely to be placed in an alternate living situation or become homeless.


Page | 11

Struggling through these experiences, Sam is more likely to act out, be delinquent, or resist authority.

Sam is also less likely to get as good an education as those whose father was not arrested or

incarcerated. Sam himself is more likely to be incarcerated. Even worse, he is more likely to be

incarcerated at a younger age - before his mind can fully develop. The author’s regression tests found

that those whose father was arrested or incarcerated were more likely to go to jail three years younger

than their counterparts. If Sam has children, he is more likely to put his child at risk of growing up in

adverse conditions. At this point the cycle continues. Sam’s child is more likely to be incarcerated, his

grandchildren are more likely to be incarcerated, and so on.

Implemented Programs On December 8th 2010, President Obama signed the Claims Resolution Act (CRA). This act

authorized $150 million in grants to promote healthy marriage ($75 million) and Responsible

Fatherhood ($75 million). The grants went toward: 12 state prisons in West Virginia, 5 male correctional

facilities in South Dakota, 8 department of corrections facilities in New Jersey, 1 state prison in New

Mexico, and 3 state prisons in Ohio. The programs made possible by the CRA will help prevent fathers

from becoming incarcerated and strengthen family bonds, creating better opportunity structures for

individuals and families at risk of the latent effects of incarceration..

Research Limitations It is clear that more research is required due to the vast effects of paternal incarceration. The

research was limited to Vermont prisoners – a population that is racially homogeneous. In addition,

survey questions were not included to allow for analysis of the impact of any current programs aime d at

reducing the risk of prisoner’s children from being incarcerated. To find out more information on the

situation, interview surveys should be collect data from children about their feelings over their father

being incarcerated. This data could be used to inform intervention program design. Additional data


Page | 12

regarding life experiences, drug use, delinquency, and inmate child contact would allow for a better

understanding of this issue.

Policy Recommendations More grants like the CRA need to be implemented. On a local level, Vermont could reduce the

effects of paternal incarceration by implementing programs for incarcerated fathers that: promote

healthy and sustainable marriages and relationships, reduces the possible incidence of child abuse,

teaches fathers how to care for their child, and promotes economic stability within a family unit. The

purpose of these programs would be to: reduce adverse childhood mental and social experiences, and

break the cycle of incarceration among fathers and their children.


Page | 13

Bibliography

Palusci, Vincent J. 2007. “Changes in parenting attitudes and knowledge among inmates and other at -

risk populations after a family nurturing program.” Children and Youth Services Review 30(1): 79-89. doi:

10.1016/ j.childyouth.2007.06.006

Johnson, Elizabeth I. 2014. “Coping with Confinement: Adolescents’ Experiences with Parental

Incarceration.” Journal of Adolescent Research 30(2): 244-267. doi: 10.1177/0743558414558593

Murray, Joseph. 2007. “Crime in Adult Offspring of Prisoners A Cross-National Comparison of Two

Longitudinal Samples.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 34(1): 133-149. doi: 10.1177/0993854806289549

Wildeman, Christopher. 2009. “Parental Imprisonment, the Prison Boom, and the Concentration of

Childhood Disadvantage.” Demography 46(2): 265-280. doi: 10.1353/dem.0.0052

Farrington, David P. 2001. “The Concentration of Offenders in Families, and Family Criminality in the

Prediction of Boys’ Delinquency.” Journal of Adolescence 24(1): 579-596. doi: 10.1006/jado.2001.0424

Glaze, Lauren E. 2008. “Parents in Prison and Their Minor Children.” Bureau of Justice Statistics.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pptmc.pdf

Greenberg, David F. 2001. “State Prison Populations and Their Growth, 1971-1991.” Criminology 39(3):

615-651. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00935.x/epdf

Collier, Lorna. 2014. “Incarceration Nation” Monitor on Psychology 45(9): 56-70.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/10/incarceration.aspx

The Era of Paternal Incarceration

Documents

Transcript of The Era of Paternal Incarceration