Jordan M Hyatt

The "danger imperative" in policing, as noted by Sierra-Ar & eacute;valo, defines how officers perceive both their job and the environment in which they work. It is unclear how this may generalize to others working in the public safety field, including prison staff. Although public perceptions and media narratives suggest a preoccupation with danger in American prisons, other narratives, including that of dynamic security and incarcerated people as future "good neighbors" portrayed in the Scandinavian countries, exist. To gain insight into these contrasting visions, we examine interview data from correctional staff participating in a reform-oriented project in an East Coast state, which provides a lens through which a correctional culture in transition can be viewed. Although we find some degree of adherence to a danger-oriented professional identity, characterized by distrust and othering of prison residents, and to some extent other staff, we also observe resistance to the principles of the danger imperative and expression of humanitarian concern for the welfare of incarcerated people and the communities to which they may eventually return.

Legal financial obligations (LFOs) encompass a range of costs, surcharges, fines, fees, and restitution imposed during the justice process. Though research often highlights their negative impacts on individuals, questions remain about the broader community-level distribution of LFOs and the associated, wide-ranging effects of these financial burdens. Using ten years of data (2010 – 2020) from the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC), we examine the geospatial distribution of LFOs in Philadelphia and its correlation with community-level marginalization. The findings highlight significant disparities in the distribution of LFOs across Philadelphia, disproportionately affecting economically disadvantaged areas, areas with higher crime rates, and those with larger Black and Latino populations. Given this distribution, LFOs may function as an additional axis of concentrated disadvantage – not simply being a downstream outcome of inequality, but actively reproducing it at the neighborhood level. This analysis underscores the importance of considering community-level impacts and solutions in the broader conversation about LFO reform, and the inequitable burden of LFOs on communities.

Community corrections is commonly proposed as one avenue to reduce incarceration rates. Shifting punishment from correctional facilities to probation, parole, and other non-custodial sanctions is one potential – but not foolproof – method of decarceration. In this paper, we contribute another data point to an increasingly significant threat to the promise of community corrections as a true alternative to incarceration: legal financial obligations (LFOs) incurred through court processing and, uniquely for community corrections, the punishment itself. We analyze how LFOs correlate with supervision violation hearings, the formal rule infractions initiated by probation officers that can be the first in a series of escalating sanctions that, ultimately, can result in incarceration. Using an administrative dataset of cases sentenced to probation in two Pennsylvania counties, we explore associations across assessment types, assessment amounts, and counties featuring distinct policy contexts to identify the specific circumstances in which LFOs can initiate these possible backchannels to confinement. We advance the literature by revealing that LFOs specifically incurred by community corrections sentences (as well as restitution) are positively and consistently linked with the likelihood of a probation violation hearing, suggesting that LFOs and their enforcement may complicate the goal of reducing incarceration through community corrections.

The prison environment requires incarcerated individuals to navigate myriad norms, rules, personal constraints, and informal social dynamics that permeate the carceral experience. While research has gained valuable insights into the lived experience of imprisonment through surveys and interviews, an opportunity arises when incarcerated people are given a chance to voice their concerns firsthand. To better understand the priorities and concerns of incarcerated individuals, this paper employs a qualitative thematic analysis, rooted in grounded theory, of written, optional, open-ended responses to a survey on prison climate amongst incarcerated men in the U.S. (N = 376). When given a chance to reflect on issues that are important to them, participants often focused on negative perceptions of staff stemming from previous communication and interactions. Findings suggest that incarcerated people desire accessibility, support, and humane treatment from staff; when perceived as lacking, the adversarial distance between the two groups may widen. Acknowledging the systemic nature of these dynamics, the study offers avenues to support and encourage prosocial communication in order to improve relationships between staff and those incarcerated.
•Open-ended responses by incarcerated people from the Prison Climate Questionnaire.•Thematic analysis revealed that most participants talked about staff (COs).•Primarily negative descriptors indicate tense relationships and systemic barriers.•Positive comments indicate the importance of prosocial communication.•Results suggest improving relations could aid rehabilitation and benefit staff well-being.

The communities that develop in prison are often small, insular, and central to the experience of incarceration. In these carceral communities, the deaths of individuals—especially those integral to these groups—can echo heavily within a housing unit, and even an entire institution, resulting in a collective experience of grief. While grief is experienced universally, it manifests in unique ways in the carceral context. The shared sorrow, loss, and sadness characterizing the experiences of those left behind are central to this form of mourning, and among imprisoned communities, grief is experienced uniquely. This paper draws on semi-structured interviews with 58 men imprisoned during the COVID-19 pandemic in an institution where over a dozen men died in a relatively short time. Their experiences suggest that, while grieving in prison is often complicated and may be repressed by both the individual and the carceral institution, bereavement may take a different form when experienced collectively and broadly within the carceral context. We develop the concept of mass carceral grief to explain this phenomenon. While unique in many ways, the lessons on carceral grief from this public health crisis can inform our broader understanding of how loss impacts those incarcerated.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The current review will provide criminal justice and policymakers with information regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of co‐responder programs on criminal justice and social service outcomes. Specifically, the authors will address the following research questions: (1) Do co‐responder police‐mental health programs reduce the frequency or likelihood of criminal justice system involvement (e.g., offending, police welfare check, victimization) among those experiencing homelessness, drug and/or alcohol addiction, or mental health crises (hereafter “vulnerable populations”)? (2) Do co‐responder police‐mental health programs improve social service outcomes among vulnerable populations? (3) Do the effects of co‐responder police‐mental health programs vary by the following factors: study research design, geographical location, type of population, type of outcome (e.g., official vs. unofficial reports), and intervention characteristics (e.g., setting, type of practitioners)?

There has been a recent push towards person-first language to describe people detained in the carceral system. This paper widens that lens, focusing on the language used to describe individuals who work in the system, specifically those perceived as pursuing too much dignity for incarcerated people. The paper revolves around a qualitative analysis of data from semi-structured interviews with 14 DOC employees involved in a prison reform project. By semantically analyzing variations in language meaning and purpose, the study finds that reform-minded correctional officers differentiate how they talk to and about incarcerated people. Also salient is that prison staff can be subject to language-based stigma if they are perceived as too sympathetic to incarcerated people. Specifically, the terms “inmate-lover” and “hug-a-thug” are pejorative and are employed by other correctional officers to undermine reform-oriented colleagues. We explore the various definitions and meanings of these terms and contemplate their policy significance.
• This study presents an examination of language-based obstacles that may face reform-oriented correctional officers and leaders.
• The terms “inmate-lover” and “hug-a-thug” are identified as pejorative words used against reform-oriented prison staff by other prison staff.
• The definitions and meanings of “inmate-lover” and “hug-a-thug” are explored.
• Implications for the role of language in the context of correctional reform are discussed.