The Urban Institute has explored the impact of incarceration and reentry on families and children through several projects. The Returning Home study examines reentry from the lens of family members of prisoners by interviewing them after their family member's release. The Urban Institute has also convened a conference on the impact of reentry on families, sponsored by the Department of Health and Human Services and informed by commissioned papers by leading academics. Finally, Urban Institute researchers have provided an overview of the costs of incarceration and reentry on children and family structures by synthesizing extant work on the topic from a variety of disciplines.
Recent Findings from the Urban Institute on Families and Reentry
- Most prisoners believe that family support is an important factor in helping them stay out of prison. Prior to release, over half of Illinois and Maryland Returning Home respondents reported that family support would be an important factor in helping them avoid returning to prison. After release, nearly three-quarters of Illinois and Maryland respondents felt that family support had been an important factor in avoiding prison. In a focus group, participants in Pennsylvania's Community Orientation and Reintegration (COR) Program cited family reunification as a major need in their reentry process. Prisoners in a Rhode Island focus group reported heavy reliance on their families for both emotional and financial support following their release.
- Strong family support before prison may reduce the likelihood of recidivism. Respondents in the Illinois Returning Home study who reported more positive family relationships were less likely to be reconvicted, while those with negative family relationships were more likely to be reconvicted or reincarcerated. Further, respondents in the Maryland Returning Home study with closer family relationships and strong family support were less likely to have used drugs since their release.
- While most prisoners have some regular contact with family members during their prison term, relatively few ever receive visits. The vast majority of respondents in the Illinois Returning Home study reported having had at least some telephone or mail contact with family members and intimate partners. However, only 13 percent of respondents had in-person contact with family members or children, and 29 percent had visits from partners (see Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, vol. 21, no. 2 http://ccj.sagepub.com/).
- One of the greatest challenges to maintaining contact with incarcerated family members is the distant location of the prison. Three-quarters of family members identified by respondents in the Illinois Returning Home sample reported that it was a challenge to stay in touch with their incarcerated family members because the prison was located too far away. For the two-thirds who did not visit their family members in prison, the median estimated travel time to the prison was four hours longer than those who visited, a possible indicator of why they did not visit (see forthcoming Western Criminology Review http://wcr.sonoma.edu).
- Close family relationships may improve employment outcomes for returning prisoners. Respondents in the Maryland Returning Home study who had closer family and intimate partner relationships and stronger family support were more likely to be employed after release. In Illinois, respondents who had an intimate partner after release reported having been employed for more weeks on average (30 percent more) than those without a partner.
