Sophie, her new baby and her toddler spend a lot of time visiting prison. Sophie’s partner was initially held on remand awaiting trial, so she was able to visit most days. Sophie came while she was pregnant, soon after the baby was born, and at least twice a week once her partner was sentenced.
Sophie struggles financially but continues to pay for bus fares to the prison, phone calls, her partner’s spending money at the prison canteen, and the clothes that he needs. This stops Sophie from paying off their debts, thus driving the young family deeper into poverty, especially as her partner is no longer contributing financially to the household. Consequently, Sophie feels scared, isolated and like she has been left to cope alone.
Explaining the emotional toll of her situation, Sophie tells me that prison officers could be kinder, more flexible, less judgemental and more ‘family friendly’. Yet, she does not complain that it is largely poor people who are sent to prison, nor say that it is unfair that her partner was held for so long on remand.
As a criminologist, this is surprising. Scotland has one of the highest rates of imprisonment in Europe, we disproportionately imprison the poorest people, and concerns about the use of remand have repeatedly been expressed not only by academics, but also by the Howard League Scotland, the Scottish Government Justice Committee and the Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland. However, there are three reasons to think that prison itself can limit the ability of families to make political critiques of the justice system or to challenge how it treats them as citizens.
Firstly, Sophie’s story is not unusual among families supporting someone through a prison sentence. Families are often overlooked in discussions of crime and punishment, yet imprisonment can be extremely difficult for them emotionally, financially and practically, leaving little time and resource for other aspects of their lives, or indeed for political action. The families I spoke to described lost homes and jobs, issues with childcare, struggles with mental health and difficulties navigating the complexities of the criminal justice system. However, while the rules which govern prison visiting can be opaque, poorly explained and applied inconsistently, they are enforced by people. These exercises of penal power – for instance telling families when they can visit, or what ID will be accepted – are particularly confronting, and therefore harder for families to challenge or critique as unfair.
Secondly, while policy decisions – such as those governing remand, sentence progression, prison wages, prison visiting and support for family contact – have clear implications for families, families are rarely invited into these decision-making spaces. Efforts to support families have grown in recent years, however the Scottish Prison Service did not publish its first Family Strategy until 2017, and while Family Strategy Groups exist, their activities are variable and do not always include families. This lack of consistent and meaningful engagement with families makes it more difficult for families to envisage and articulate what changes they would like to see at a policy level. In this sense, we can say that the exercise of penal power at a policy level does not have the same ‘solidness’ for families as more immediate interpersonal interactions with prison staff, making it more difficult to challenge.
Finally, repeated contacts with the criminal justice system send families powerful messages about their value as citizens, and what changes are possible and desirable. When discussing what they wanted to change in their lives, families often described their hopes for a better future by making different choices, for instance finding employment, ‘getting my grades’ or ‘changing my social circle’, or even seeking help and support through the justice system. This reflects a form of citizenship often embraced by contemporary criminal justice systems which emphasises the need to take personal responsibility for issues such as unemployment, addiction, poor mental health or offending, while also downplaying or denying the structural drivers of these harms (such as inequality, deindustrialisation, a lack of suitable housing or the absence of affordable childcare). This exercise of penal power is the least ‘solid’ of all of those discussed so far, but nonetheless has profound effects. By reinforcing to families that they – rather than these structural issues – are the problem, the prison cements itself both in the imaginations of families and wider society as a key means of solving social difficulties.
Thinking about the power of the prison in these different dimensions, or different degrees of solidness, helps us better understand the multiple harms of imprisonment, including how it reinforces social inequality and limits families’ opportunities to have their voices heard. To counter this exclusion, criminal justice professionals could consider how they might make more abstract policy discussions more meaningful to families, for example through continuing or forming family-led groups, providing financial support to participate, employing peer researchers, and embracing different forms of media or arts-based or creative methods of engagement and consultation. Collaborating with families in this way would also affirm their value as citizens, rather than reinforcing narratives that they are to blame for their own difficulties. However, such proactive work must be carried out alongside urgent and meaningful efforts to reduce our very high prison population. Challenging our overreliance on the prison is the most effective way of sparing families like Sophie’s from the financial, emotional and social harms caused by imprisonment.
Dr Cara Jardine, Senior Lecturer, Social Work and Social Policy, University of Strathclyde.
Families, imprisonment and penal power: a radical analysis by Cara Jardine for Justice, Power and Resistance is available to read open access on Bristol University Press Digital here.
Bristol University Press/Policy Press newsletter subscribers receive a 25% discount – sign up here.
Follow Transforming Society so we can let you know when new articles publish.
The views and opinions expressed on this blog site are solely those of the original blog post authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Bristol University Press and/or any/all contributors to this site.
Image credit: Ricardo Mörtl via Unsplash