569593 research-article2015
JMHXXX10.1177/1557988315569593American Journal of Men’s HealthDill et al.
Article
“I Want a Second Chance”: Experiences of African American Fathers in Reentry
American Journal of Men’s Health 1–7 © The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1557988315569593 ajmh.sagepub.com
LeConté J. Dill, DrPH, MPH1, Carlos Mahaffey, PharmD, MPH2, Tracey Mosley, BA3, Henrie Treadwell, PhD2, Fabeain Barkwell, BA2, and Sandra Barnhill, JD4
Abstract With over 700,000 people on average released from prison each year to communities, greater attention is warranted on the experiences and needs of those who are parents and seeking to develop healthy relationships with their children and families. This study seeks to explore the experiences of African American fathers in reentry. Qualitative data from 16 African American men enrolled in a fellowship program for fathers were collected from a focus group and analyzed for common themes and using standpoint theory. Four themes emerged that focused on fathers’ commitment toward healthy and successful reintegration postincarceration: redemption, employment, health care, and social support. Focus group participants actively strive to develop and rebuild healthy relationships with their children through seeking gainful employment and through bonding with like-minded peers. Barriers in accessing health care are also discussed. Research findings may inform future programs and policies related to supporting fathers and their children in reentry. Keywords incarceration, reentry, African American men, fathering, stigma, social determinants of health
I thought that when I saw my brother walking through the gates of the prison, he would look like a man entering his life. And he did. (Trethewey, 2010, p. 125)
Extant research and practice frames prison and incarceration as a social determinant of health and well-being (Awofeso, 2010; Freudenberg, 2001; Williams, 2007; Young, 2006). There is very little research on the daily experiences and well-being of formerly incarcerated people. Reentry is both an event and a process (Maruna & Immarigeon, 2004). It occurs the day that a person is released from incarceration, and encompasses the longterm process of preparing incarcerated people to return to the community safely and to live as law-abiding citizens (Petersilia, 2003). Except for those who die in prison, everyone who goes to prison ultimately returns home (Petersilia, 2011). From 2008 to 2012, an average of more than 700,000 people were released from prison each year (Carson & Golinelli, 2013). Every year, individuals are removed from their families and communities, incarcerated in jails and prisons, then returned home and expected to make a successful reintegration into society (Visher & Travis, 2011). On exiting the walls and gates of jails and prisons, formerly incarcerated people must
meet their basic needs such as finding housing, employment, and reuniting with family members (Holzer, Raphael, & Stoll, 2003; Opsal, 2011; Pager, 2003; Petersilia, 2003). Typically, formerly incarcerated people must struggle to meet their basic needs in structural contexts that are similar or worse than before they were incarcerated (Leverentz, 2010; Opsal, 2011). Incarcerated people suffer from a myriad of health problems and often return home in poor health and with no or limited access to health care resources. Golembeski and Fullilove (2005) reported that the prevalence of infectious disease is on average 4 to 10 times greater among incarcerated people than among the rest of the U.S. population. Chronic conditions are also quite prevalent among incarcerated people, with between 39% and 1
S tate University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA 2 Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA 3 Urban League of Greater Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA 4 Foreverfamily, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA Corresponding Author: LeConté J. Dill, School of Public Health, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, 450 Clarkson Avenue, MSC 43, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA. Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
2
American Journal of Men’s Health
44% of incarcerated people having a chronic medical condition of some kind (Maruschak, 2010; Wilper et al., 2009). Incarcerated individuals suffer tremendously from mental health conditions. The Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that more than 50% of all people in U.S. prisons and jails suffer from a mental health problem, including psychotic disorders, major depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, yet many do not receive the treatment that they need (Williams, 2007). In 2005, only one in three state prisoners and one in six jail inmates received treatment following admission (James & Glaze, 2006). Failure to provide incarcerated people with comprehensive medical care fuels public health crises both inside and outside of the correctional facility. Mid-year 2007, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported 809,800 of incarcerated people were parents to more than 1.7 million minor children; therefore, 1 in 43 children have a parent in prison—an 82% increase since 1991 (Bryan, Gunn, & Henthorn, 2007). Fifty-eight percent of children with a parent in prison are under 10 years of age (Parke & Clarke-Stewart, 2002). Among children who come from neighborhoods or ethnic groups disproportionately burdened by incarceration, the rate is much higher. Two thirds of the incarcerated parent population is non-White, and Black children are eight times more likely to have parent in prison than White children (Wildeman, 2009). Much of the extant literature and programming related to parents and reentry focuses on the relationships of adult mothers and their children or on adolescent fathers coming out of juvenile detention centers and their children (Shade, Kools, Weiss, & Pinderhughes, 2011; Shannon & Abrams, 2007; Unruh, Bullis, & Yovanoff, 2004). The separation of father and child due to incarceration remains a major issue for African American families. Therefore, greater attention to the experiences of adult fathers in reentry is warranted. Incarceration compromises the relationships between Black fathers and their children in a phenomenon that American Studies Scholar Breea Willingham (2011) calls “Black Fatherhood Arrested,” building on Nurse’s (2002) concept of “Fatherhood Arrested” and Roy’s (2005) concept of “Holding Patterns” detailing the issues and difficulties in parenting while incarcerated, on probation or parole, or in a work-release program. Fatherhood get “arrested” for Black fathers because mass incarceration deprives thousands of children the economic and social support and safety that fathers previously did or potentially could have in their lives (Willingham, 2011). When Black fathers are incarcerated, their children experience abandonment, depression, and anger, and the fathers feel isolated from their children and feel the pressure to fulfil what becomes ambiguous social expectations (Roy, 2005; Willingham,
2011). On release, they must navigate this complex terrain. In currently popular cultural memory, the VH1 reality show “T.I. & Tiny: Family Hustle” follows rapper T.I. (Clifford Harris) as he negotiates marriage, fatherhood, and his career postincarceration. Reflecting on his imprisonment, he says, “[I] lost 11 months of my life . . . missed the [kids’] first games, missed the first practices” (Harris, 2011). T.I. describes reentry as having his “head halfway out of the lion’s mouth,” but that now he is getting his “house in order” (Harris, 2011). For a population for whom incarceration has resulted in their roles as fathers to be “arrested,” what mechanisms support them to get their “house in order?”
Method In an ongoing examination of the mechanisms for healthy and productive reentry for formerly incarcerated African American fathers, our research team began to examine the following questions: What are the daily experiences of reentry for African American men? What identities are African American men in reentry negotiating? What are the experiences of fatherhood for African American men in reentry? What are the experiences of their participation in a reentry program? In order to investigate these questions, participants were recruited through the MILA Fellows Program—a joint effort consisting of the bilateral collaboration between Community Voices: Healthcare for the Underserved and Morehouse School of Medicine and Foreverfamily, Inc., a community-based organization located in Southwest Atlanta, focused on providing direct services to children with incarcerated parents. The program’s name, MILA, is an abbreviation for the Yoruba God of Compassion—Orunmila.1 MILA is intended to build and enhance the life skills of formerly incarcerated African American fathers in Southwest Atlanta so that they can meet their legal, financial, and familial obligations. The first author facilitated a focus group with 16 participants of Community Voice’s MILA Program, whose average age was 28 years. The focus group session was conducted using a semistructured discussion guide. The focus group lasted about an hour and a half, was audiotaped, and the second and third authors assisted with note taking and with framing of the discussion. Standpoint theory (Collins, 1986; Harding, 1991) was initially used as a method for analyzing the intersubjective discourses of the focus group data. This postmodern methodology challenges the positivist belief of a valueneutral researcher, noting that our social and political positions in society produce our understandings of the world, which in turn influences the researcher as well as the researched (John, 2011). The perspective of this article is shaped by the first author’s experiences as an African American woman whose father was previously
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
3
Dill et al. incarcerated for 8 years. Sharing this standpoint with the focus group participants helped build trust and rapport with the group and served as an ice breaker for the beginning of the focus group session. With roots in feminist scholarship, specifically Black Feminist Thought (Collins, 1986), standpoint theory asserts that scholars must center research and thinking from the lives of the oppressed (John, 2011), and that the perspectives of marginalized people can help create more objective accounts of the world (Harding, 1991; McGlish & Bacon, 2003; Swigonski, 1994). Standpoint theory allows traditional “outsiders” to be “insiders” of the research and of the knowledge-building process (Collins, 1986; Unrau, 2007). In this way, standpoint theory serves as a framework to analyze the extant research literature on reentry, and as a way for the voices of actual African American fathers in reentry to be amplified. In addition to standpoint theory, a qualitative interpretive approach was used for thematic analysis (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995). The data were analyzed for key themes using both a priori coding, from existing literature and prior research, and open coding, where analytic codes were identified without any preset categories or labels to discover phenomena, meaning, and characteristics within the data. Four salient themes and related excerpts that emerged from the interviews of redemption, employment, health care, and social support are presented and analyzed in the following sections.
Results “I Want a Second Chance”: Redemption Fathers in reentry want an opportunity to redeem their past wrongs. Participants in our study reiterated the desire to have a “second chance,” as fathers shared: I want a second chance. I made some wrong choices in my life, but I’m trying to make it better. I have plenty years of doing wrong; when you start doing right, it’s not going to happen overnight. You have to put in work, the right way, and it’s going to take time. We have to play by the rules. It’s a different arena, not the rules of the street, so we have to play the game.
Fathers in reentry acknowledge that they have made poor decisions in the past, some of which resulted in their former incarceration, but they remain adamant that they want and deserve a chance to prove to others, and most likely to themselves, that they can make changes in their lives for the better. Fathers in reentry are deeply invested in their relationships with their children and a “second chance” to be a “good dad.” In discussing current relationships with their children and hopes for them, fathers shared:
Just being there for them and talking to them and doing homework with them. They don’t teach kids cursive writing anymore [in school], so I take the time to teach my kids that. Being able to be there to fill in those gaps from the school has been a blessing for me. I make sure they eat before I eat. I had been gone away so long, not even in jail, but it’s been a blessing now to be a part of their lives. Teach them to make the right decisions; I don’t want them to end up being like me. You have to let them know the consequences and actions of their decisions before they even happen. If anyone had told me the consequences of my actions, I would have weighed the options.
During reentry, fathers relish in the fact that they are now able to spend quality time with their children.
“The Background Is Often a Challenge”: Employment Having a criminal record serves as a “master status” (Becker, 1973; Link, Cullen, Struening, Shrout, & Dohrenwend, 1989; Scheff, 1974) by which those in reentry are stigmatized and further penalized by others and by themselves. Fathers in MILA experienced the impacts of this “master status.” Specifically, having a criminal record is a major barrier to employment. Fathers shared: I count myself out before I get to a job. My willingness and confidence are an issue for me finding a job. The last time I filled out an application, the job made me fill out every offense I had. They [potential employers] automatically put judgment on you whether you been reformed or refined. A dude can have experience, but the background is often a challenge. I’ll describe [the whole situation] in the criminal background section. I know I can sell myself if I can get the opportunity to get to the interview, but I [usually] don’t make it that far.
Finding a job is critical to successful reentry. However, the criminal background section of employment applications serves as perceived and actual barriers for formerly incarcerated individuals to obtain employment. Having problems finding good-paying jobs limits formerly incarcerated fathers’ ability to pay child support. Related to the issue of making child support payments while in reentry, fathers shared: I’m on child support, and if I ever miss those payments, I worry that they will come get me and lock me up. I’m still not able to pay that certain amount or get a modification so that’s one of my only worries that I will be locked up. I found one [job at the Ballpark], but the job is only paying $7.25, and you’re not working 40 hours. After child support, I’m making $15 a game.
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
4
American Journal of Men’s Health
For those in reentry who are able to obtain employment, the jobs often do not pay a living wage. For formerly incarcerated fathers who have court orders to pay child support, which can average $250 per child, or who were released early because of these child support demands, having a below-living wage job creates more problems for them, perpetuating cycles of poverty and incarceration.
incarcerated people to come together to express their frustrations and feel supported by like-minded peers, allies, and role models is critically important. Additionally, the MILA Program allows for peer networking among fathers in reentry. Fathers commented of this networking: It’s my first day, but I see that it’s useful already.
“I Trick Myself Into not Even Going to the Doctor”: Health Care The perceived and actual fear of costly medical care deters those in reentry from seeking care altogether. Fathers in MILA shared the financial and psychosocial costs of seeking health care: I went to the hospital and ended up with a $1100 hospital bill. I’m trying to get a tooth pulled, but they want to charge $700 without insurance. I was in the position that I was tricking myself. More worried about getting money than my health. And I know I didn’t have insurance, so I will trick myself into not even going to the doctor. I’m overlooking pain to tough it out. They just told me it’s stress and that made me think I shouldn’t have went down there [to the doctor’s office at all].
Black men who were formerly incarcerated are undoubtedly contending with health disparities. They remain mostly unclear about their medical benefits, and when they do seek care, they often receive high bills afterward, discouraging them to seek care in the future, or further compromising their financial situations.
“Here, We Open up and Connect”: Social Support The MILA Program creates a safe, supportive space to vent and find solidarity for Black male fathers in reentry. In reflecting about the impact of MILA, participants shared: I know that I’m not alone. It’s [sic] other people in here that I can talk to that are going through the same thing. To see a group of Black men that are concerned about their children and are trying to do the right thing. It’s a beautiful thing to see Black men unite together. It needs to be another program like this that allows men to unite. We could see each other on the street and probably walk right by each other, but here, we open up and connect. We all come in and vent and share and help each other.
With the stigmatization, stress, and isolation that incarceration and reentry create, the opportunity for formerly
[We have] the opportunity to network with people that are going through the same thing.
In addition to being a social support mechanism, MILA provides opportunities for “social leverage” (Briggs, 1998; Carpiano, 2006; Sampson & Graif, 2009; Small, Jacobs, & Massengill, 2008), which affords participants access to information, such as referrals to jobs, education, housing, and transportation, in hopes of advancing their social mobility.
Discussion Many African American fathers in reentry are actively working to get their “house in order,” literally and figuratively, on a daily basis. Findings from our study highlight that fathers in reentry do this using four common strategies. First, they are seeking redemption. This notion is akin to Sociologist Elijah Anderson’s (2001) concept of “going straight,” which alludes to the complex processes of negotiating life postincarceration, with a commitment to engaging in positive behaviors and decisions (Maruna, 2001; Munn, 2011). In Maruna’s (2001) study of released inmates, incarceration becomes a turning point for them “going straight,” wanting to conform to social norms, and become a “changed” father (Dyer, 2005). Similar research indicates that formerly incarcerated men want to be better fathers, but might not know how to do so (Hairston, 1995). Men in our study are committed to redeem themselves through mending relationships with their children, as one of the first steps or goals on release. Participants in our study see this time as an opportunity to change and make things better for themselves and for the lives of their children. Future research can specifically explore formerly incarcerated fathers’ interactions and relationships with their children and how the reentry process affects these relationships. Amid this commitment to steering their children in the “right direction,” they are also actively working to counter the many stigmas working against them, such as the “absent Black father” troupe (Coles & Green, 2010; Uggen, Manza, & Behrens, 2004; Willingham, 2011) that permeates media, policy, and research debates and initiatives. Next, fathers in reentry are actively seeking gainful employment, while also contending with stigma. In the
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
5
Dill et al. 1960s, Sociologist Erving Goffman (1963, p. 3) defined stigma as “an attribute that is deeply discrediting.” Such stigma can rob a person of social opportunities, which is referred to as “public stigma,” and can diminish one’s own self-esteem, what is referred to as “self stigma” (Corrigan, 2004). Formerly incarcerated people are undoubtedly stigmatized by the public, their families and communities, and themselves (LeBel, 2006; Schnittker & John, 2007; Uggen et al., 2004; Uggen, Manza, & Thompson, 2006; Winnick & Bodkin, 2009). Further exploration is warranted on how the labels of “parolee,” “probationer,” or more pejoratively as “ex-convict” or “ex-felon” affect the reentry process. Moreover, formerly incarcerated people lose essential rights of citizenship, in what Sociologist CalvinJohn Smiley (2014) calls “neo-civil death,” losing the right to vote in many elections, and contending with restrictions in obtaining employment, professional licenses, receiving government benefits, and retaining parental rights (Petersilia, 2003). Future research can explore how “neo-civil death” and threats to citizenship affect the health behaviors and outcomes of those in reentry. Also, many states have policies and legislation regarding regulating access to criminal records and employment of formerly incarcerated people (Holzer et al., 2003). In particular, access to jobs that pay more than a living wage or that are oriented toward a career are often offlimits to those with a criminal record (Opsal, 2011; Uggen et al., 2006; Western, Kling, & Weiman, 2001). Sociologist Devah Pager (2003) refers to this as the “mark of a criminal record” in which former incarceration limits future employment opportunities for individuals and continues to stigmatize them. Fathers in our study admit that such stigma erodes their confidence when looking for and applying to jobs. They strive to make it past the criminal background section of employment applications in order to demonstrate their skillset and secure gainful employment. Furthermore, they are acutely aware that gainful employment will afford them the resources to pay child support, for failure to do so is a major cause of recidivism (Cammett, 2006; Swank, 2003), and threatens their attempts to rebuild healthy relationships with their children. Next, for fathers in reentry, seeking health care services and treatment is often not an immediate need, as compared with seeking employment, housing, food, and transportation. Already economically compromised, those in reentry tend to not seek care at all because of the threat of costly medical care. Medical expenses or threat of such expenses create immense stress in the lives of fathers in reentry. Further research is needed about the mental and physical health care–seeking experiences of those in reentry.
Finally, for fathers in reentry, fatherhood initiatives, such as MILA, allow them to be supported both as Black men and as fathers actively engaged in the processes of parenting and of restoration. Extant literature on men of color in reentry typically points to a lack of prosocial peers (Kirk, 2009). However, MILA creates a counternarrative of this. Further research is needed on the impact of reentry programs for creating such nuanced mediating or moderating mechanisms that may ultimately lead to participants’ economic and social well-being. A limitation of this study is the sample population. Findings emerged from only one focus group; however, respondents comprised a majority of the participants of MILA during the pilot year. Additionally, all participants live in the Southeastern United States, and it is possible that fathers in reentry from other regions in the United States might have different experiences or may be affected by different regional policies and trends that can further inform the discourse on “successful” reentry and developing healthy family relationships postincarceration. Findings of this qualitative focus group study have implications for programming and policy making regarding reentry. Notably, from a public health perspective, “support for people released from jails and prisons” was one of the 17 policy statements adopted at the American Public Health Association in 2013. Overall, reentry programs and policies that support fatherhood should be further developed and evaluated. Such programs should honor the rituals of “reintegration” and hire staff specializing in “reintegration.” Next, reentry programs and policies should strive to eliminate barriers to employment. The success of “Ban the Box” efforts in some cities and counties across the country to eliminate the “box” on employment applications that formerly incarcerated people must check, and the promise of the Obama Administrations’ Reentry Council, should be further explored and championed. Next, reentry programs and policies should eliminate barriers to accessing health care and further the mental health needs that lack of affordable health care exacerbates for those in reentry. Last, reentry programs and policies should foster social support systems, as those in reentry can positively model peers regarding parenting, seeking necessary resources for healthy reintegration and emotional support. And then, my brother was walking toward us, a few awkward steps, at first, until he got it—how to hold up the too-big pants with one hand, and in the other carry everything else he had. (Trethewey, 2010, p.125)
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
6
American Journal of Men’s Health
Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for HIV/ AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, the Department of Health and Human Services through the Health Resources and Services Administration and the Office of Minority Health, Kaiser Permanente, Northrop Grumman, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
Note 1. It is said that Orunmila is known for his compassion toward humans. Orunmila is always calm and always trying to find the meanings of fate (Vaz, 2006).
References American Public Health Association. (2013, November 5). American Public Health Association adopts 17 new policy statements at annual meeting. Retrieved from https:// www.apha.org/news-and-media/news-releases/aphanews-releases/american-public-health-association-adopts17-new-policy-statements-at-annual-meeting Anderson, E. (2001). Going straight: The story of a young inner-city ex-convict. Punishment & Society, 3, 135-152. Awofeso, N. (2010). Prisons as social determinants of hepatitis C virus and tuberculosis infections. Public Health Reports, 125(4), 25-33. Becker, H. (1973). Labelling theory reconsidered. In H. Becker (Ed.), Outsiders (pp. 177-208). New York, NY: Free Press. Briggs, X. d. S. (1998). Brown kids in white suburbs: Housing mobility and the many faces of social capital. Housing Policy Debate, 9, 177-221. Bryan, J. L., Gunn, A., & Henthorn, S. (2007). Using incentives to promote employment retention for formerly incarcerated individuals. New York, NY: Center for Employment Opportunities. Cammett, A. (2006). Expanding collateral sanctions: The hidden costs of aggressive child support enforcement against incarcerated parents. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy, 13, 313-340. Carpiano, R. M. (2006). Toward a neighborhood resourcebased theory of social capital for health: Can Bourdieu and sociology help? Social Science & Medicine, 62, 165-175. Carson, E. A., & Golinelli, D. (2013). Prisoners in 2012-Advance counts. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http:// www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4737 Coles, R. L., & Green, C. S. C. (Eds.). (2010). The myth of the missing Black father. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Collins, P. H. (1986). Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of Black feminist thought. Social Problems, 33, S14-S32.
Corrigan, P. (2004). How stigma interferes with mental health care. American Psychologist, 59, 614-625. Dyer, W. J. (2005). Prison, fathers, and identity: A theory of how incarceration affects men’s paternal identity. Fathering, 3, 201-219. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Freudenberg, N. (2001). Jails, prisons, and the health of urban populations: A review of the impact of the correctional system on community health. Journal of Urban Health, 78, 214-235. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Golembeski, C., & Fullilove, R. (2005). Criminal (in)justice in the city and its associated health consequences. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 1701-1706. Hairston, C. F. (1995). Fathers in prison. In D. Johnson & K. Gables (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents (pp. 3140). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Harris, C. (Writer). (2011). God, Family, Hustle [Television series episode-Season 1]. In B. Samek, B. Sher, C. Sarabia, C. Abrego, J. Holmes, K. Kelly, . . . R. Gholam (Executive producers), T.I. & Tiny: The family hustle. New York, NY: VH1. Holzer, H. J., Raphael, S., & Stoll, M. A. (2003, May). Employment barriers facing ex-offenders. Paper presented at the Urban Institute Reentry Roundtable Discussion, Washington, DC. James, D. J., & Glaze, L. E. (2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. John, C. A. (2011). Strategic ambivalence: A feminist standpoint theory reading of Nella Larsen’s novels. Feminist Formations, 23(1), 94-117. Kirk, D. S. (2009). A natural experiment on residential change and recidivism: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina. American Sociological Review, 74, 484-505. LeBel, T. P. (2006). Invisible stripes? Formerly incarcerated persons’ perceptions of and responses to stigma. Albany: State University of New York. Leverentz, A. (2010). People, places, and things: How female ex-prisoners negotiate their neighborhood context. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 646-681. Link, B. G., Cullen, F. T., Struening, E., Shrout, P. E., & Dohrenwend, B. P. (1989). A modified labeling theory approach in the area of mental disorders: An empirical assessment. American Sociological Review, 54, 400-423. Maruna, S. (2001). Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Maruna, S., & Immarigeon, R. (Eds.). (2004). After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration. New York, NY: Routledge. Maruschak, L. M. (2010). Medical problems of prisoners, 2004. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
7
Dill et al. McGlish, G., & Bacon, J. (2003). Standpoint theory. In E. Griffin (Ed.), A first look at communication theory (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Munn, M. (2011). Living in the aftermath: The impact of lengthy incarceration on post-carceral success. Howard Journal, 50, 233-246. Nurse, A. M. (2002). Fatherhood arrested: Parenting from within the juvenile justice system. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press. Opsal, T. D. (2011). Women disrupting a marginalized identity: Subverting the parolee identity through narrative. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 40, 135-167. Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937-975. Parke, R. D., & Clarke-Stewart, K. A. (2002, January). The effects of parental incarceration on children. Paper presented at the From Prison to Home Conference, Bethesda, MD. Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Petersilia, J. (2011). Beyond the prison bubble. National Institute of Justice Journal, 268, 26-31. Roy, K. (2005). Nobody can be a father in here: Identity construction and institutional constraints on incarcerated fatherhood. In W. Marsiglio, K. Roy, & G. L. Fox (Eds.), Situated fathering: A focus on physical and social spaces (pp. 163-186). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield. Sampson, R. J., & Graif, C. (2009). Neighborhood social capital as differential social organization. American Behavioral Scientist, 52, 1579-1605. Scheff, T. J. (1974). The labelling theory of mental illness. American Sociological Review, 39, 444-452. Schnittker, J., & John, A. (2007). Enduring stigma: The longterm effects of incarceration on health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 48, 115-130. Shade, K., Kools, S., Weiss, S. J., & Pinderhughes, H. (2011). A conceptual model of incarcerated adolescent fatherhood: Adolescent identity development and the concept of intersectionality. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 24, 98-104. Shannon, S. K., & Abrams, L. S. (2007). Juvenile offenders as fathers: Perceptions of fatherhood, crime and becoming an adult. Families in Society, 88, 183-191. Small, M. L., Jacobs, E. M., & Massengill, R. P. (2008). Why organizational ties matter for neighborhood effects: Resource access through childcare centers. Social Forces, 87, 387-414. Smiley, C. N. (2014). Existing but not living: Neo-civil death and the carceral state (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://works.gc.cuny.edu/etd/283/ Swank, D. A. (2003). National child non-support epidemic. Michigan State DCL Law Review, 357-388.
Swigonski, M. E. (1994). The logic of feminist standpoint theory for social work research. Social Work, 39, 387-393. Trethewey, N. (2010). Benediction. In N. Trethewey (Ed.), Beyond Katrina: A meditation on the Mississippi Gulf Coast (p. 125). Athens: University of Georgia Press. Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Behrens, A. (2004). “Less than the average citizen”: Stigma, role transformation and the civic reintegration of convicted felons. In S. Maruna, R. Immarigeon, & N. Shover (Eds.), After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration (pp. 261-293). New York, NY: Routledge. Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Thompson, M. (2006). Citizenship, democracy, and the civic reintegration of criminal offenders. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 281-310. Unrau, Y. A. (2007). Research on placement moves: Seeking the perspective of foster children. Children and Youth Services Review, 29, 122-137. Unruh, D., Bullis, M., & Yovanoff, P. (2004). Adolescent fathers who are incarcerated juvenile offenders: Explanatory study of the co-occurrence of two problem behaviors. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 13, 405-419. Vaz, K. M. (2006). Womanist archetypal psychology: A model of counseling for Black women and couples based on Yoruba mythology. In L. Phillips (Ed.), The womanist reader (pp. 233-246). New York, NY: Routledge. Visher, C. A., & Travis, J. (2011). Life on the outside: Returning home after incarceration. Prison Journal, 91(Suppl. 3), 102S-119S. Western, B., Kling, J. R., & Weiman, D. F. (2001). The labor market consequences of incarceration. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 410-427. Wildeman, C. (2009). Parental imprisonment, the prison boom, and the concentration of childhood disadvantage. Demography, 46, 265-280. Williams, N. H. (2007). Prison health and the health of the public: Ties that bind. Journal of Correctional Health Care, 13, 80-92. Willingham, B. C. (2011, May). Black fatherhood arrested: The influence of incarceration on African-American fathers and their children. Paper presented at the 2nd Global Experiencing Prison Conference, Warsaw, Poland. Wilper, A. P., Woolhandler, S., Boyd, J. W., Lasser, K. E., McCormick, D., Bor, D. H., & Himmelstein, D. U. (2009). The health and health care of U.S. prisoners: Results of a nationwide survey. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 666-672. Winnick, T. A., & Bodkin, M. (2009). Stigma, secrecy and race: An empirical examination of Black and White incarcerated men. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 131-150. Young, A. M. W. (2006). Incarceration as a public health crisis. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 589.
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
JMHXXX10.1177/1557988315569593American Journal of Men’s HealthDill et al.
Article
“I Want a Second Chance”: Experiences of African American Fathers in Reentry
American Journal of Men’s Health 1–7 © The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1557988315569593 ajmh.sagepub.com
LeConté J. Dill, DrPH, MPH1, Carlos Mahaffey, PharmD, MPH2, Tracey Mosley, BA3, Henrie Treadwell, PhD2, Fabeain Barkwell, BA2, and Sandra Barnhill, JD4
Abstract With over 700,000 people on average released from prison each year to communities, greater attention is warranted on the experiences and needs of those who are parents and seeking to develop healthy relationships with their children and families. This study seeks to explore the experiences of African American fathers in reentry. Qualitative data from 16 African American men enrolled in a fellowship program for fathers were collected from a focus group and analyzed for common themes and using standpoint theory. Four themes emerged that focused on fathers’ commitment toward healthy and successful reintegration postincarceration: redemption, employment, health care, and social support. Focus group participants actively strive to develop and rebuild healthy relationships with their children through seeking gainful employment and through bonding with like-minded peers. Barriers in accessing health care are also discussed. Research findings may inform future programs and policies related to supporting fathers and their children in reentry. Keywords incarceration, reentry, African American men, fathering, stigma, social determinants of health
I thought that when I saw my brother walking through the gates of the prison, he would look like a man entering his life. And he did. (Trethewey, 2010, p. 125)
Extant research and practice frames prison and incarceration as a social determinant of health and well-being (Awofeso, 2010; Freudenberg, 2001; Williams, 2007; Young, 2006). There is very little research on the daily experiences and well-being of formerly incarcerated people. Reentry is both an event and a process (Maruna & Immarigeon, 2004). It occurs the day that a person is released from incarceration, and encompasses the longterm process of preparing incarcerated people to return to the community safely and to live as law-abiding citizens (Petersilia, 2003). Except for those who die in prison, everyone who goes to prison ultimately returns home (Petersilia, 2011). From 2008 to 2012, an average of more than 700,000 people were released from prison each year (Carson & Golinelli, 2013). Every year, individuals are removed from their families and communities, incarcerated in jails and prisons, then returned home and expected to make a successful reintegration into society (Visher & Travis, 2011). On exiting the walls and gates of jails and prisons, formerly incarcerated people must
meet their basic needs such as finding housing, employment, and reuniting with family members (Holzer, Raphael, & Stoll, 2003; Opsal, 2011; Pager, 2003; Petersilia, 2003). Typically, formerly incarcerated people must struggle to meet their basic needs in structural contexts that are similar or worse than before they were incarcerated (Leverentz, 2010; Opsal, 2011). Incarcerated people suffer from a myriad of health problems and often return home in poor health and with no or limited access to health care resources. Golembeski and Fullilove (2005) reported that the prevalence of infectious disease is on average 4 to 10 times greater among incarcerated people than among the rest of the U.S. population. Chronic conditions are also quite prevalent among incarcerated people, with between 39% and 1
S tate University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA 2 Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA 3 Urban League of Greater Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA 4 Foreverfamily, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA Corresponding Author: LeConté J. Dill, School of Public Health, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, 450 Clarkson Avenue, MSC 43, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA. Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
2
American Journal of Men’s Health
44% of incarcerated people having a chronic medical condition of some kind (Maruschak, 2010; Wilper et al., 2009). Incarcerated individuals suffer tremendously from mental health conditions. The Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that more than 50% of all people in U.S. prisons and jails suffer from a mental health problem, including psychotic disorders, major depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, yet many do not receive the treatment that they need (Williams, 2007). In 2005, only one in three state prisoners and one in six jail inmates received treatment following admission (James & Glaze, 2006). Failure to provide incarcerated people with comprehensive medical care fuels public health crises both inside and outside of the correctional facility. Mid-year 2007, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported 809,800 of incarcerated people were parents to more than 1.7 million minor children; therefore, 1 in 43 children have a parent in prison—an 82% increase since 1991 (Bryan, Gunn, & Henthorn, 2007). Fifty-eight percent of children with a parent in prison are under 10 years of age (Parke & Clarke-Stewart, 2002). Among children who come from neighborhoods or ethnic groups disproportionately burdened by incarceration, the rate is much higher. Two thirds of the incarcerated parent population is non-White, and Black children are eight times more likely to have parent in prison than White children (Wildeman, 2009). Much of the extant literature and programming related to parents and reentry focuses on the relationships of adult mothers and their children or on adolescent fathers coming out of juvenile detention centers and their children (Shade, Kools, Weiss, & Pinderhughes, 2011; Shannon & Abrams, 2007; Unruh, Bullis, & Yovanoff, 2004). The separation of father and child due to incarceration remains a major issue for African American families. Therefore, greater attention to the experiences of adult fathers in reentry is warranted. Incarceration compromises the relationships between Black fathers and their children in a phenomenon that American Studies Scholar Breea Willingham (2011) calls “Black Fatherhood Arrested,” building on Nurse’s (2002) concept of “Fatherhood Arrested” and Roy’s (2005) concept of “Holding Patterns” detailing the issues and difficulties in parenting while incarcerated, on probation or parole, or in a work-release program. Fatherhood get “arrested” for Black fathers because mass incarceration deprives thousands of children the economic and social support and safety that fathers previously did or potentially could have in their lives (Willingham, 2011). When Black fathers are incarcerated, their children experience abandonment, depression, and anger, and the fathers feel isolated from their children and feel the pressure to fulfil what becomes ambiguous social expectations (Roy, 2005; Willingham,
2011). On release, they must navigate this complex terrain. In currently popular cultural memory, the VH1 reality show “T.I. & Tiny: Family Hustle” follows rapper T.I. (Clifford Harris) as he negotiates marriage, fatherhood, and his career postincarceration. Reflecting on his imprisonment, he says, “[I] lost 11 months of my life . . . missed the [kids’] first games, missed the first practices” (Harris, 2011). T.I. describes reentry as having his “head halfway out of the lion’s mouth,” but that now he is getting his “house in order” (Harris, 2011). For a population for whom incarceration has resulted in their roles as fathers to be “arrested,” what mechanisms support them to get their “house in order?”
Method In an ongoing examination of the mechanisms for healthy and productive reentry for formerly incarcerated African American fathers, our research team began to examine the following questions: What are the daily experiences of reentry for African American men? What identities are African American men in reentry negotiating? What are the experiences of fatherhood for African American men in reentry? What are the experiences of their participation in a reentry program? In order to investigate these questions, participants were recruited through the MILA Fellows Program—a joint effort consisting of the bilateral collaboration between Community Voices: Healthcare for the Underserved and Morehouse School of Medicine and Foreverfamily, Inc., a community-based organization located in Southwest Atlanta, focused on providing direct services to children with incarcerated parents. The program’s name, MILA, is an abbreviation for the Yoruba God of Compassion—Orunmila.1 MILA is intended to build and enhance the life skills of formerly incarcerated African American fathers in Southwest Atlanta so that they can meet their legal, financial, and familial obligations. The first author facilitated a focus group with 16 participants of Community Voice’s MILA Program, whose average age was 28 years. The focus group session was conducted using a semistructured discussion guide. The focus group lasted about an hour and a half, was audiotaped, and the second and third authors assisted with note taking and with framing of the discussion. Standpoint theory (Collins, 1986; Harding, 1991) was initially used as a method for analyzing the intersubjective discourses of the focus group data. This postmodern methodology challenges the positivist belief of a valueneutral researcher, noting that our social and political positions in society produce our understandings of the world, which in turn influences the researcher as well as the researched (John, 2011). The perspective of this article is shaped by the first author’s experiences as an African American woman whose father was previously
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
3
Dill et al. incarcerated for 8 years. Sharing this standpoint with the focus group participants helped build trust and rapport with the group and served as an ice breaker for the beginning of the focus group session. With roots in feminist scholarship, specifically Black Feminist Thought (Collins, 1986), standpoint theory asserts that scholars must center research and thinking from the lives of the oppressed (John, 2011), and that the perspectives of marginalized people can help create more objective accounts of the world (Harding, 1991; McGlish & Bacon, 2003; Swigonski, 1994). Standpoint theory allows traditional “outsiders” to be “insiders” of the research and of the knowledge-building process (Collins, 1986; Unrau, 2007). In this way, standpoint theory serves as a framework to analyze the extant research literature on reentry, and as a way for the voices of actual African American fathers in reentry to be amplified. In addition to standpoint theory, a qualitative interpretive approach was used for thematic analysis (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995). The data were analyzed for key themes using both a priori coding, from existing literature and prior research, and open coding, where analytic codes were identified without any preset categories or labels to discover phenomena, meaning, and characteristics within the data. Four salient themes and related excerpts that emerged from the interviews of redemption, employment, health care, and social support are presented and analyzed in the following sections.
Results “I Want a Second Chance”: Redemption Fathers in reentry want an opportunity to redeem their past wrongs. Participants in our study reiterated the desire to have a “second chance,” as fathers shared: I want a second chance. I made some wrong choices in my life, but I’m trying to make it better. I have plenty years of doing wrong; when you start doing right, it’s not going to happen overnight. You have to put in work, the right way, and it’s going to take time. We have to play by the rules. It’s a different arena, not the rules of the street, so we have to play the game.
Fathers in reentry acknowledge that they have made poor decisions in the past, some of which resulted in their former incarceration, but they remain adamant that they want and deserve a chance to prove to others, and most likely to themselves, that they can make changes in their lives for the better. Fathers in reentry are deeply invested in their relationships with their children and a “second chance” to be a “good dad.” In discussing current relationships with their children and hopes for them, fathers shared:
Just being there for them and talking to them and doing homework with them. They don’t teach kids cursive writing anymore [in school], so I take the time to teach my kids that. Being able to be there to fill in those gaps from the school has been a blessing for me. I make sure they eat before I eat. I had been gone away so long, not even in jail, but it’s been a blessing now to be a part of their lives. Teach them to make the right decisions; I don’t want them to end up being like me. You have to let them know the consequences and actions of their decisions before they even happen. If anyone had told me the consequences of my actions, I would have weighed the options.
During reentry, fathers relish in the fact that they are now able to spend quality time with their children.
“The Background Is Often a Challenge”: Employment Having a criminal record serves as a “master status” (Becker, 1973; Link, Cullen, Struening, Shrout, & Dohrenwend, 1989; Scheff, 1974) by which those in reentry are stigmatized and further penalized by others and by themselves. Fathers in MILA experienced the impacts of this “master status.” Specifically, having a criminal record is a major barrier to employment. Fathers shared: I count myself out before I get to a job. My willingness and confidence are an issue for me finding a job. The last time I filled out an application, the job made me fill out every offense I had. They [potential employers] automatically put judgment on you whether you been reformed or refined. A dude can have experience, but the background is often a challenge. I’ll describe [the whole situation] in the criminal background section. I know I can sell myself if I can get the opportunity to get to the interview, but I [usually] don’t make it that far.
Finding a job is critical to successful reentry. However, the criminal background section of employment applications serves as perceived and actual barriers for formerly incarcerated individuals to obtain employment. Having problems finding good-paying jobs limits formerly incarcerated fathers’ ability to pay child support. Related to the issue of making child support payments while in reentry, fathers shared: I’m on child support, and if I ever miss those payments, I worry that they will come get me and lock me up. I’m still not able to pay that certain amount or get a modification so that’s one of my only worries that I will be locked up. I found one [job at the Ballpark], but the job is only paying $7.25, and you’re not working 40 hours. After child support, I’m making $15 a game.
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
4
American Journal of Men’s Health
For those in reentry who are able to obtain employment, the jobs often do not pay a living wage. For formerly incarcerated fathers who have court orders to pay child support, which can average $250 per child, or who were released early because of these child support demands, having a below-living wage job creates more problems for them, perpetuating cycles of poverty and incarceration.
incarcerated people to come together to express their frustrations and feel supported by like-minded peers, allies, and role models is critically important. Additionally, the MILA Program allows for peer networking among fathers in reentry. Fathers commented of this networking: It’s my first day, but I see that it’s useful already.
“I Trick Myself Into not Even Going to the Doctor”: Health Care The perceived and actual fear of costly medical care deters those in reentry from seeking care altogether. Fathers in MILA shared the financial and psychosocial costs of seeking health care: I went to the hospital and ended up with a $1100 hospital bill. I’m trying to get a tooth pulled, but they want to charge $700 without insurance. I was in the position that I was tricking myself. More worried about getting money than my health. And I know I didn’t have insurance, so I will trick myself into not even going to the doctor. I’m overlooking pain to tough it out. They just told me it’s stress and that made me think I shouldn’t have went down there [to the doctor’s office at all].
Black men who were formerly incarcerated are undoubtedly contending with health disparities. They remain mostly unclear about their medical benefits, and when they do seek care, they often receive high bills afterward, discouraging them to seek care in the future, or further compromising their financial situations.
“Here, We Open up and Connect”: Social Support The MILA Program creates a safe, supportive space to vent and find solidarity for Black male fathers in reentry. In reflecting about the impact of MILA, participants shared: I know that I’m not alone. It’s [sic] other people in here that I can talk to that are going through the same thing. To see a group of Black men that are concerned about their children and are trying to do the right thing. It’s a beautiful thing to see Black men unite together. It needs to be another program like this that allows men to unite. We could see each other on the street and probably walk right by each other, but here, we open up and connect. We all come in and vent and share and help each other.
With the stigmatization, stress, and isolation that incarceration and reentry create, the opportunity for formerly
[We have] the opportunity to network with people that are going through the same thing.
In addition to being a social support mechanism, MILA provides opportunities for “social leverage” (Briggs, 1998; Carpiano, 2006; Sampson & Graif, 2009; Small, Jacobs, & Massengill, 2008), which affords participants access to information, such as referrals to jobs, education, housing, and transportation, in hopes of advancing their social mobility.
Discussion Many African American fathers in reentry are actively working to get their “house in order,” literally and figuratively, on a daily basis. Findings from our study highlight that fathers in reentry do this using four common strategies. First, they are seeking redemption. This notion is akin to Sociologist Elijah Anderson’s (2001) concept of “going straight,” which alludes to the complex processes of negotiating life postincarceration, with a commitment to engaging in positive behaviors and decisions (Maruna, 2001; Munn, 2011). In Maruna’s (2001) study of released inmates, incarceration becomes a turning point for them “going straight,” wanting to conform to social norms, and become a “changed” father (Dyer, 2005). Similar research indicates that formerly incarcerated men want to be better fathers, but might not know how to do so (Hairston, 1995). Men in our study are committed to redeem themselves through mending relationships with their children, as one of the first steps or goals on release. Participants in our study see this time as an opportunity to change and make things better for themselves and for the lives of their children. Future research can specifically explore formerly incarcerated fathers’ interactions and relationships with their children and how the reentry process affects these relationships. Amid this commitment to steering their children in the “right direction,” they are also actively working to counter the many stigmas working against them, such as the “absent Black father” troupe (Coles & Green, 2010; Uggen, Manza, & Behrens, 2004; Willingham, 2011) that permeates media, policy, and research debates and initiatives. Next, fathers in reentry are actively seeking gainful employment, while also contending with stigma. In the
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
5
Dill et al. 1960s, Sociologist Erving Goffman (1963, p. 3) defined stigma as “an attribute that is deeply discrediting.” Such stigma can rob a person of social opportunities, which is referred to as “public stigma,” and can diminish one’s own self-esteem, what is referred to as “self stigma” (Corrigan, 2004). Formerly incarcerated people are undoubtedly stigmatized by the public, their families and communities, and themselves (LeBel, 2006; Schnittker & John, 2007; Uggen et al., 2004; Uggen, Manza, & Thompson, 2006; Winnick & Bodkin, 2009). Further exploration is warranted on how the labels of “parolee,” “probationer,” or more pejoratively as “ex-convict” or “ex-felon” affect the reentry process. Moreover, formerly incarcerated people lose essential rights of citizenship, in what Sociologist CalvinJohn Smiley (2014) calls “neo-civil death,” losing the right to vote in many elections, and contending with restrictions in obtaining employment, professional licenses, receiving government benefits, and retaining parental rights (Petersilia, 2003). Future research can explore how “neo-civil death” and threats to citizenship affect the health behaviors and outcomes of those in reentry. Also, many states have policies and legislation regarding regulating access to criminal records and employment of formerly incarcerated people (Holzer et al., 2003). In particular, access to jobs that pay more than a living wage or that are oriented toward a career are often offlimits to those with a criminal record (Opsal, 2011; Uggen et al., 2006; Western, Kling, & Weiman, 2001). Sociologist Devah Pager (2003) refers to this as the “mark of a criminal record” in which former incarceration limits future employment opportunities for individuals and continues to stigmatize them. Fathers in our study admit that such stigma erodes their confidence when looking for and applying to jobs. They strive to make it past the criminal background section of employment applications in order to demonstrate their skillset and secure gainful employment. Furthermore, they are acutely aware that gainful employment will afford them the resources to pay child support, for failure to do so is a major cause of recidivism (Cammett, 2006; Swank, 2003), and threatens their attempts to rebuild healthy relationships with their children. Next, for fathers in reentry, seeking health care services and treatment is often not an immediate need, as compared with seeking employment, housing, food, and transportation. Already economically compromised, those in reentry tend to not seek care at all because of the threat of costly medical care. Medical expenses or threat of such expenses create immense stress in the lives of fathers in reentry. Further research is needed about the mental and physical health care–seeking experiences of those in reentry.
Finally, for fathers in reentry, fatherhood initiatives, such as MILA, allow them to be supported both as Black men and as fathers actively engaged in the processes of parenting and of restoration. Extant literature on men of color in reentry typically points to a lack of prosocial peers (Kirk, 2009). However, MILA creates a counternarrative of this. Further research is needed on the impact of reentry programs for creating such nuanced mediating or moderating mechanisms that may ultimately lead to participants’ economic and social well-being. A limitation of this study is the sample population. Findings emerged from only one focus group; however, respondents comprised a majority of the participants of MILA during the pilot year. Additionally, all participants live in the Southeastern United States, and it is possible that fathers in reentry from other regions in the United States might have different experiences or may be affected by different regional policies and trends that can further inform the discourse on “successful” reentry and developing healthy family relationships postincarceration. Findings of this qualitative focus group study have implications for programming and policy making regarding reentry. Notably, from a public health perspective, “support for people released from jails and prisons” was one of the 17 policy statements adopted at the American Public Health Association in 2013. Overall, reentry programs and policies that support fatherhood should be further developed and evaluated. Such programs should honor the rituals of “reintegration” and hire staff specializing in “reintegration.” Next, reentry programs and policies should strive to eliminate barriers to employment. The success of “Ban the Box” efforts in some cities and counties across the country to eliminate the “box” on employment applications that formerly incarcerated people must check, and the promise of the Obama Administrations’ Reentry Council, should be further explored and championed. Next, reentry programs and policies should eliminate barriers to accessing health care and further the mental health needs that lack of affordable health care exacerbates for those in reentry. Last, reentry programs and policies should foster social support systems, as those in reentry can positively model peers regarding parenting, seeking necessary resources for healthy reintegration and emotional support. And then, my brother was walking toward us, a few awkward steps, at first, until he got it—how to hold up the too-big pants with one hand, and in the other carry everything else he had. (Trethewey, 2010, p.125)
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
6
American Journal of Men’s Health
Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for HIV/ AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, the Department of Health and Human Services through the Health Resources and Services Administration and the Office of Minority Health, Kaiser Permanente, Northrop Grumman, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
Note 1. It is said that Orunmila is known for his compassion toward humans. Orunmila is always calm and always trying to find the meanings of fate (Vaz, 2006).
References American Public Health Association. (2013, November 5). American Public Health Association adopts 17 new policy statements at annual meeting. Retrieved from https:// www.apha.org/news-and-media/news-releases/aphanews-releases/american-public-health-association-adopts17-new-policy-statements-at-annual-meeting Anderson, E. (2001). Going straight: The story of a young inner-city ex-convict. Punishment & Society, 3, 135-152. Awofeso, N. (2010). Prisons as social determinants of hepatitis C virus and tuberculosis infections. Public Health Reports, 125(4), 25-33. Becker, H. (1973). Labelling theory reconsidered. In H. Becker (Ed.), Outsiders (pp. 177-208). New York, NY: Free Press. Briggs, X. d. S. (1998). Brown kids in white suburbs: Housing mobility and the many faces of social capital. Housing Policy Debate, 9, 177-221. Bryan, J. L., Gunn, A., & Henthorn, S. (2007). Using incentives to promote employment retention for formerly incarcerated individuals. New York, NY: Center for Employment Opportunities. Cammett, A. (2006). Expanding collateral sanctions: The hidden costs of aggressive child support enforcement against incarcerated parents. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy, 13, 313-340. Carpiano, R. M. (2006). Toward a neighborhood resourcebased theory of social capital for health: Can Bourdieu and sociology help? Social Science & Medicine, 62, 165-175. Carson, E. A., & Golinelli, D. (2013). Prisoners in 2012-Advance counts. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http:// www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4737 Coles, R. L., & Green, C. S. C. (Eds.). (2010). The myth of the missing Black father. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Collins, P. H. (1986). Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of Black feminist thought. Social Problems, 33, S14-S32.
Corrigan, P. (2004). How stigma interferes with mental health care. American Psychologist, 59, 614-625. Dyer, W. J. (2005). Prison, fathers, and identity: A theory of how incarceration affects men’s paternal identity. Fathering, 3, 201-219. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Freudenberg, N. (2001). Jails, prisons, and the health of urban populations: A review of the impact of the correctional system on community health. Journal of Urban Health, 78, 214-235. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Golembeski, C., & Fullilove, R. (2005). Criminal (in)justice in the city and its associated health consequences. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 1701-1706. Hairston, C. F. (1995). Fathers in prison. In D. Johnson & K. Gables (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents (pp. 3140). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Harris, C. (Writer). (2011). God, Family, Hustle [Television series episode-Season 1]. In B. Samek, B. Sher, C. Sarabia, C. Abrego, J. Holmes, K. Kelly, . . . R. Gholam (Executive producers), T.I. & Tiny: The family hustle. New York, NY: VH1. Holzer, H. J., Raphael, S., & Stoll, M. A. (2003, May). Employment barriers facing ex-offenders. Paper presented at the Urban Institute Reentry Roundtable Discussion, Washington, DC. James, D. J., & Glaze, L. E. (2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. John, C. A. (2011). Strategic ambivalence: A feminist standpoint theory reading of Nella Larsen’s novels. Feminist Formations, 23(1), 94-117. Kirk, D. S. (2009). A natural experiment on residential change and recidivism: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina. American Sociological Review, 74, 484-505. LeBel, T. P. (2006). Invisible stripes? Formerly incarcerated persons’ perceptions of and responses to stigma. Albany: State University of New York. Leverentz, A. (2010). People, places, and things: How female ex-prisoners negotiate their neighborhood context. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 646-681. Link, B. G., Cullen, F. T., Struening, E., Shrout, P. E., & Dohrenwend, B. P. (1989). A modified labeling theory approach in the area of mental disorders: An empirical assessment. American Sociological Review, 54, 400-423. Maruna, S. (2001). Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Maruna, S., & Immarigeon, R. (Eds.). (2004). After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration. New York, NY: Routledge. Maruschak, L. M. (2010). Medical problems of prisoners, 2004. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
7
Dill et al. McGlish, G., & Bacon, J. (2003). Standpoint theory. In E. Griffin (Ed.), A first look at communication theory (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Munn, M. (2011). Living in the aftermath: The impact of lengthy incarceration on post-carceral success. Howard Journal, 50, 233-246. Nurse, A. M. (2002). Fatherhood arrested: Parenting from within the juvenile justice system. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press. Opsal, T. D. (2011). Women disrupting a marginalized identity: Subverting the parolee identity through narrative. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 40, 135-167. Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937-975. Parke, R. D., & Clarke-Stewart, K. A. (2002, January). The effects of parental incarceration on children. Paper presented at the From Prison to Home Conference, Bethesda, MD. Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Petersilia, J. (2011). Beyond the prison bubble. National Institute of Justice Journal, 268, 26-31. Roy, K. (2005). Nobody can be a father in here: Identity construction and institutional constraints on incarcerated fatherhood. In W. Marsiglio, K. Roy, & G. L. Fox (Eds.), Situated fathering: A focus on physical and social spaces (pp. 163-186). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield. Sampson, R. J., & Graif, C. (2009). Neighborhood social capital as differential social organization. American Behavioral Scientist, 52, 1579-1605. Scheff, T. J. (1974). The labelling theory of mental illness. American Sociological Review, 39, 444-452. Schnittker, J., & John, A. (2007). Enduring stigma: The longterm effects of incarceration on health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 48, 115-130. Shade, K., Kools, S., Weiss, S. J., & Pinderhughes, H. (2011). A conceptual model of incarcerated adolescent fatherhood: Adolescent identity development and the concept of intersectionality. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 24, 98-104. Shannon, S. K., & Abrams, L. S. (2007). Juvenile offenders as fathers: Perceptions of fatherhood, crime and becoming an adult. Families in Society, 88, 183-191. Small, M. L., Jacobs, E. M., & Massengill, R. P. (2008). Why organizational ties matter for neighborhood effects: Resource access through childcare centers. Social Forces, 87, 387-414. Smiley, C. N. (2014). Existing but not living: Neo-civil death and the carceral state (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://works.gc.cuny.edu/etd/283/ Swank, D. A. (2003). National child non-support epidemic. Michigan State DCL Law Review, 357-388.
Swigonski, M. E. (1994). The logic of feminist standpoint theory for social work research. Social Work, 39, 387-393. Trethewey, N. (2010). Benediction. In N. Trethewey (Ed.), Beyond Katrina: A meditation on the Mississippi Gulf Coast (p. 125). Athens: University of Georgia Press. Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Behrens, A. (2004). “Less than the average citizen”: Stigma, role transformation and the civic reintegration of convicted felons. In S. Maruna, R. Immarigeon, & N. Shover (Eds.), After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration (pp. 261-293). New York, NY: Routledge. Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Thompson, M. (2006). Citizenship, democracy, and the civic reintegration of criminal offenders. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605, 281-310. Unrau, Y. A. (2007). Research on placement moves: Seeking the perspective of foster children. Children and Youth Services Review, 29, 122-137. Unruh, D., Bullis, M., & Yovanoff, P. (2004). Adolescent fathers who are incarcerated juvenile offenders: Explanatory study of the co-occurrence of two problem behaviors. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 13, 405-419. Vaz, K. M. (2006). Womanist archetypal psychology: A model of counseling for Black women and couples based on Yoruba mythology. In L. Phillips (Ed.), The womanist reader (pp. 233-246). New York, NY: Routledge. Visher, C. A., & Travis, J. (2011). Life on the outside: Returning home after incarceration. Prison Journal, 91(Suppl. 3), 102S-119S. Western, B., Kling, J. R., & Weiman, D. F. (2001). The labor market consequences of incarceration. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 410-427. Wildeman, C. (2009). Parental imprisonment, the prison boom, and the concentration of childhood disadvantage. Demography, 46, 265-280. Williams, N. H. (2007). Prison health and the health of the public: Ties that bind. Journal of Correctional Health Care, 13, 80-92. Willingham, B. C. (2011, May). Black fatherhood arrested: The influence of incarceration on African-American fathers and their children. Paper presented at the 2nd Global Experiencing Prison Conference, Warsaw, Poland. Wilper, A. P., Woolhandler, S., Boyd, J. W., Lasser, K. E., McCormick, D., Bor, D. H., & Himmelstein, D. U. (2009). The health and health care of U.S. prisoners: Results of a nationwide survey. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 666-672. Winnick, T. A., & Bodkin, M. (2009). Stigma, secrecy and race: An empirical examination of Black and White incarcerated men. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 131-150. Young, A. M. W. (2006). Incarceration as a public health crisis. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 589.
Downloaded from jmh.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 5, 2016
