Social and family effects of detention

Social and family effects of detention

Report (1)

Doc. 7816

15 May 1997

Rapporteur: Earl of Dundee, United Kingdom, European Democratic Group

Summary

Imprisonment involves many social issues. Often the prisoner is not the only one affected by the sentence: the whole family is subjected to secondary effects such as its financial situation and emotional hiatus. As regards employment the ex-convict experiences insurmountable difficulties. The present economic situation and unemployment aggravates his or her integration. It is therefore necessary to remove the stigma and the perverse effects of imprisonment.

Some new experiences that are carried out in member states ought to be considered carefully and their results be assessed objectively, without ideological bias.

I. Draft recommendation

1.The Assembly refers to its Recommendation 1257 (1995) on the conditions of detention in Council of Europe member states and to its Order No. 503 (1995) on the same subject, under which the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee was instructed to prepare a report on the social problems relating to imprisonment.

2.The Assembly notes that imprisonment poses a whole range of social problems, in particular with regard to family and working life, which have so far received little attention. It also notes that the effects of custodial sentences are not entirely in keeping with the rule that the punishment should apply to the offender only: in practice, prisoners' families also suffer indirect effects, if only deterioration in their financial situation.

3.The rule that the punishment should be limited to the duration of the sentence itself does not appear to apply either: the effects extend beyond the actual period of imprisonment, as is clearly demonstrated by the difficulties which former prisoners face in finding employment.

4.In view of the adverse effects of imprisonment at social and family levels, which run counter to the aims of rehabilitation and reintegration, the Assembly reasserts the views set out in the above-mentioned recommendation.

5.The Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers invite member states:

to reduce, in the case of short sentences, the qualifying periods for prison leave with a view to preventing the breakdown of family relations;
to introduce and make greater use of systems of semi-detention which enable prisoners both to remain in employment and to maintain real contacts with their families;
to continue to secure social benefits to prisoners' families and to ensure emergency aid to help them overcome the immediate financial difficulties caused by the loss of income;
to expand welfare services for prisoners' families and to provide the necessary information about the existence of such services for the poorest families;
to improve conditions for prison visits by families, in particular by providing places where prisoners can be alone with family visitors;
to provide, where necessary, medical, psychological and psychiatric care within prisons;
to adapt the conditions of detention on health grounds such as pregnancy and child-birth, or pathologically severe diseases;
to step up vocational rehabilitation activities within prisons, and, to this end, develop effective education and vocational training matched to labour market opportunities;
to provide rehabilitation procedures, during and after detention, to assist stability and to remove addiction to drugs and alcohol;
to minimise the adverse effects of the criminal record which for former prisoners are a barrier to entering the labour market;
to introduce special measures for foreign prisoners, such as interpretation and translation facilities, freedom of worship and diet, and the possibility of contacting their consular authorities;
to implement strategies to encourage the employment of former prisoners.

6.The Assembly urges the Committee of Ministers

to develop and expand cooperation and studies at European level of the social effects linked to imprisonment, such as the mental and physical health of prisoners, poverty in prison, the question of children in prison, the specific problems posed by the growing number of female prisoners, etc.;
to examine closely the results of certain experiments regarding penal institutions, considering the failure of present detention systems;
to encourage expedients to reduce recidivism and to support the role of the prisoner's family and community for assisting rehabilitation during and after detention.

II. Explanatory memorandum by the Rapporteur

Following Recommendation 1257 (1995) on the conditions of detention in Council of Europe member States and Order n� 503 (1995) on the same subject, the Rapporteur was instructed by the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee to prepare a report on the social aspects of imprisonment.

This report considers how detention may affect and be affected by the prisoner's family and community. In so doing it addresses two related issues.

Firstly, there is the extent to which prisoners' family and community can participate within the detention system itself in order to assist his rehabilitation and help prevent his return to crime.

Appendix I concerns the Verne Prison in Dorset, United Kingdom, and describes how such approaches to dentention have so far been organised and draws attention to their success in reducing recidivism

Secondly, there is the way in which the penalty of detention goes wider than it intends. This is since it disadvantages the prisoner's family. It also disadvantages the prisoner himself beyond his term of detention, since its stigma threatens his later prospects for employment and reintegration within society.

Such inconsistencies between the purpose and effect of detention are illustrated in the Appendix II by Professor Tulkens, who thus refers to the family crisis when one of its members goes to prison, and to the special difficulty in finding a job for those with a prison record.

These two themes (of how detention may affect and be affected by the prisoner's family and community) become closely related when family and community are given a part to play within the detention system. While such involvement assists the prisoner's rehabilitation, it assists his own family's stability at the same time. Equally, the community's supporting role to any extent will improve future prospects of employment and reintegration for the ex-prisoner.

Prisoner and family: mutual help

Since the penalty of detention is intended to deter crime, it is thus anomalous that most who experience detention return to prison.

And since the penalty of detention is also intended to encourage reintegration within families and society, it is equally anomalous that mainly it increases alienation from both.

Conversely, however, if the involvement of prisoners' families within the system of detention reduces recidivism, then such practice should be developed by many more prisons and their prison service.

Regarding families themselves, they should be offered counselling and be paid an income supplement to compensate for the emotional stress and loss of income caused by the detention of a family member.

Apart from the special role for the management of rehabilitation afforded to the families of prisoners in some prisons (see Appendix I), more frequent family visits to prison should be permitted in any event. Home leave should also be granted more often, particularly in the case of those serving short sentences.

Paradoxically, however tough it might appear to be, a term of detention which lacks rehabilitation may be easier to serve than one which includes it. This is since the prisoner's hardest task is to face up to the crime which he has committed and to seek to cure bad habits, including drug and alcohol addiction. Hence the relevance of the family and community to the successful management of rehabilitation during and after detention.

The prisoner and work: during and after detention

Where no distinction is made between loss of liberty on the one hand and enforced idleness on the other hand, then the declared purpose of detention to deter crime becomes further anomalous. That is since enforced idleness prevents the prisoner from adapting and improving himself.

Conversely, however, through work carried out during detention, the prisoner can gain a measure of confidence and a sense of purpose.

When the prisoner is paid for work done during detention, then the loss to family income is partially redressed and the relationship between the prisoner and his family thereby assisted.

Detention also presents an opportunity for the prisoner to learn specific skills in order to prepare for future employment and to receive basic education and knowledge which will often be lacking in the first place.

The prisoner's progress in work, education and training may be monitored in prison along with other aspects of his behaviour. Such monitoring will serve to decrease the prejudice against the employment of ex-prisoners.

Further study of the social effects of detention

In Council of Europe member states, the majority of those detained still return to prison. However, small attention is given to the causes and control of recidivism. Nor are proper comparisons made between prisons for best results after detentions arising from different policies during detention on work, health and morale.

Some prisons support work and training while others allow the majority of their prisoners to remain idle. Studies should therefore compare the results after detention from both such policies during detention.

Most prisoners have health problems or are drug addicts, yet only some prisons seek to cure. Within many, the circulation of drugs is even considered to be necessary to the maintenance of harmony and security. Studies should thus also compare the results after detention from different policies during detention on prisoners' health problems.

Delinquent children have been held in prisons despite commitments to the contrary by Council of Europe member states in conforming to the convention by the United Nations on the rights of the child. Equally, adult prisoners who are detained are often mentally ill. Comparative studies should therefore identify best results from particular arrangements for delinquent children on the one hand and for mentally ill adult prisoners on the other hand.

In addition to policies on work and health, some prisons assist prisoners to face up to their crimes and shortcomings. Studies should therefore compare the results after detention from such prisons which encourage self awareness in the prisoner during detention and from those others which do not.

Experimenting with new approaches to detention

Although recidivism is far too high in Council of Europe member states, in Europe and elsewhere some prisons already demonstrate much better results owing to policies carried out during detention.

In varying degrees during detention, such prisons encourage work, training, improved health, self awareness and not least the involvement of the prisoner's family and community volunteers. The Apac/Kairos system for prison management (UK) combines all these aspects (see Appendix I).

If improved recidivism depends upon new approaches to detention, then the adoption itself of such approaches will depend upon the examples of certain prisons and upon comparative evidence between them and others.

Within Council of Europe member states and in order to improve recidivism, prisons should therefore be encouraged on their own to adopt better practices to do so owing to accumulating evidence and in so doing to seek the backing of their national prison services.

Appendix I

The APAC Project at the Verne Prison, Dorset (United Kingdom) (2)

The idea

There is a worldwide crisis in terms of rising crime rates and prison overcrowding. In Britain the problem is acute.

It is widely recognised that the recommendations of Lord Woolf and of Judge Stephen Tumim, in regard to English and Welsh prisons, need urgently to be addressed.

In Brazil there is in operation a penal system which is now the focus of international study and research. A related programme has been running successfully in over a hundred prisons in the United States and is now being introduced to Australia.

In 1971, the prison at San Jose dos Campos in Brazil was overcrowded and chaotic. There were six men for every space. There were daily riots and escapes.

The prison authorities turned to the local judge with jurisdiction over the prison. Things were desperate. Half the prison cells were handed over to a group of Christian volunteers who had been visiting some of the inmates for some time. These people were united through the Cursillo movement.

Two years later, APAC - the Association for the Protection and Assistance of the Convicted - was formed.

For ten years the prison remained divided; half was under APAC control and half remained under the control of the police. In 1984 the entire prison was handed over to be run by APAC. The governor, Dr Mario Ottoboni, has lead APAC throughout its development. A lawyer and a member of the City Council, he is an ex-prisoner.

The national rate of re-offending in Brazil is 84%. In the original APAC prison the rate of recidivism is under 4% and has been so for 10 years.

In the other one hundred and forty APAC wings in Brazilian prisons, the effect of the system has also been profound. In Britain the recidivism rate is over 75%. Yet the cost of Brazil's APAC prisons is minimal. The inmates are effectively responsible for discipline and security, in consultation with the Governor and with support from trained Christian volunteers.

The unique, transforming ingredient in APAC is Cursillo. This is an international movement within the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches. It has its origins in a short course in Christianity devised in Spain to help men who suffered emotional damage in the Civil War and the Second World War.

The Cursillo programme has since been adapted for use by many denominations under various names.

Kairos is a cross-denominational adaptation of the Cursillo programme; designed especially for prisons in the United States. Begun 20 years ago, it is now in operation in over a hundred top-security establishments in that country. In the United States, the programme draws on the unchurched as well as Christians. It has also appealed to inmates who were previously highly disruptive and had negative attitudes to authority.

A vital element in APAC and in Kairos is the active involvement of inmates, their families and Christian "partners" both inside the gaol and where their families live.

In short, the APAC idea has worked everywhere it has been tried.

The practicalities

Under the authority of Governor Turner, the facilitator for the The Verne APAC Project is Principal Office (PO) Geoffrey Hebbern. Mr Hebbern is currently PO of D Wing and is responsible throughout the gaol for inmate sentence planning and for race relations. PO Hebbern is an active and practising Christian.

In planning the project, Mr Hebbern is supported by the prison's chaplaincy team under the Reverend John Bloomfield, by experts in the Cursillo movement and in the APAC prisons and by a couple of inmates with relevant experience.

In the first instance, the intention is to refurbish three 9-bed dormitories for inmates who will participate in an intensive 18-week, Cursillo-based course. These men will have their own classroom/common room area and there will be a nightly Christian-based programme. Some of these nightly activities will be held in the prison Chapel and will be open to all prisoners, others will be exclusively for the APAC men and held in D Wing.

A vital element of the APAC Project is the active involvement of the family of each participating inmate. As each man will be allocated a volunteer partner, so each family will be encouraged to join a Kairos programme outside the prison and, where possible, will be linked with Cursillo volunteers. A growth together of their Christian development is needed for the full benefits of the scheme to be realised, and thus Unit members will be helped to maximise and enhance family contacts.

In addition to the twenty-seven men on the programme at any one time, there is planned to be a couple of 9-man dormitories set aside for men waiting for space on the Unit.

The APAC Unit will have a strict code of conduct, a requirement that a compact be entered into by participants and a comprehensive follow-up network. The unit will be segregated from the remainder of D Wing by a gate to which only participants will have keys.

Of course, course members will be encouraged to associate with the general prison populations and will work or study in the same way as all other inmates, but access to the APAC Unit will be limited to participants, volunteers and support staff.

The Unit will employ its own Director, who will be an ex-offender, and a relief to deputise during days off and leave. Both men will be Christians, whose salaries will be paid by a Trust to be set up to receive donations from interested individuals and organisations. The reason for having the Director's and Deputy Director's salaries paid privately is to protect the posts from future cuts which might be made to The Verne's budget. A former prisoner has already been selected as Director-designate.

All other activities on the Unit will be dependent on voluntary help, link partners from the local Christian community, inmates who have passed through the initial course and the Chaplaincy. Probation, education, security and general support services will continue to be provided by the prison staff, as for any other inmate.

Appendix II

Social effects linked with detention(3)

Introduction

The topic "social effects linked with detention" is very broad and extensively documented; therefore, if the question is to be suitably addressed its various aspects must be specified in order to adopt a selective approach.

1.The first requirement is to identify the party who bears the "costs" under consideration. While it is obvious that imprisonment generates significant social effects not only within the criminal justice system but throughout society as well, in this instance we have elected to concentrate on the individuals who personally undergo detention and their family members.

It is then necessary to ascertain the social dimension of the problems discussed, ie the content of what are termed the "social problems". This refers to the difficulties experienced by detainees in their interaction with the outside world. This relationship with the outside world may be studied from two angles. The first question is what impact does detention have on the social universe of the imprisoned man or woman. The intrapsychic dimension of these individuals is left out of account in this study, focusing on the repercussions at the level of social relations with other people whether represented by an individual entity or a collective identity. If the outside world is understood as the antithesis of the prison environment, the second question is what happens to the interaction between the detainee and the outside world.

The state of detention must also be clarified. Generally speaking, the prison experience has a special connotation of time or duration. Arguably, detention is a time continuum. The impact of detention can be assessed while it is in progress, in which case the negative effects arising throughout the prison term are analysed. These are the consequences referred to as the internal costs of detention, which may vary according to a number of parameters: first-time imprisonment or reconviction; pre-trial or post-trial detention; long or short sentence. In addition, it is necessary to consider the recovery made after release and to examine the social trajectory of persons who have stood trial. These are the secondary effects of the penalty which surface when the released prisoner resumes, or tries to, his/her place in society. In this study they are referred to as the external costs of detention.

Finally, the concept of effect may be variously construed. The generation of detention-related social costs can be investigated by studying the direct effects of detention either in isolation or with reference to a status quo. In the first instance, the only factors deemed relevant are those arising from detention alone and as such. This type of analysis bears on the cost-generating mechanism actuated wholly and solely by imprisonment. In the second instance, what has to be assessed is the amplifying effect of detention on pre-detention situations, ie it is a matter of finding out how the prison experience comes to over-determine other factors such as economic climate and social background. Furthermore, either general or specific analysis of the difficulties undergone by detainees is possible. It may be confined to apprehending the common core of the social costs levied by imprisonment, to understanding the common predicament of the entire prison population. Such am approach runs the risk of being quickly dissipated in generalities which the writer considers sufficiently well-established. Another option, considered the most productive, is to examine the differential and specific impact of imprisonment on the various sections of the prison population.

2.In the light of these clarifications, analysis of detention-related social effects is necessarily selective. This report will discuss two questions perceived as perennial major problems today, directly linked with detention and differentiated according to whether the inmate is male or female, serving a first or subsequent prison sentence, and for a short or long term. Wherever relevant, the gender-specific social effects of detention will be mentioned. In Europe this has been little studied owing to women's traditional under-representation in prisons. The situation is nevertheless changing, in certain countries mainly because of women's increasing involvement in drug offences. In North America, debate concerning the social trajectory of female prisoners is further ahead(4), and I consider it essential to initiate research on the subject in the European countries. On the other hand, the limited scope of this report precludes the question of prisoners' (physical and mental) health, which would require a separate report. Lastly, the question of poverty and deprivation in prison, a major research topic in France(5), plainly intersects with the subject under discussion but cannot be pursued in the present limited context. This is another avenue of research to be developed.

The first problem concerns the difficulties which imprisonment causes the prisoner and family. In a detention situation, the principle of the personal application of a penalty seems fallacious. For the prisoner's family, the trial of imprisonment raises a series of extremely acute problems. The difficulties experienced in the family circle constitute outright accessory penalties to the primary custodial penalty. Especially in the case of long sentences, ever more common nowadays, this family deprivation is irreconcilable with Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms securing the right to respect for family life. Research on prisoners' families hitherto has principally sought to uncover the causative factors of crime or to identify predictive variables of social rehabilitation. The need to set up help facilities for prisoners' families calls for a better understanding of their living reality, disrupted by the custodial penalty.

The second problem to be addressed concerns the impediments raised by detention once the former prisoner tries to embark on occupational resettlement. With custodial penalties, the principle of definite duration is also exposed as somewhat fallacious. Post-sentence penalisation is an increasingly prevalent occurrence. Expiry of the prison term does not end the process of rejection by society. There have already been numerous studies on the re-employment difficulties of persons convicted at some stage, but these do not exhaust the subject. The problem of re-entry to the labour market, far from being resolved, has acquired particular immediacy of late. In the countries of Europe the economic climate and unemployment make the difficulties of resettlement especially critical and demand new strategies.

Section 1. The prisoner and family

1.Family causation of lawbreaking or rehabilitation

In the 1970s the question of prisoner and family made considerable advances as a subject of scholarship. As hinted above, the goals inspiring this type of research are rather remote from our present line of questioning. The first type of research sets out to reveal the sociological or psychological variables relating to family causation of lawbreaking(6). Studies analysing the link between the father's criminal behaviour and the children's are the typical example(7). The second type of research identifies predictive family variables in social rehabilitation(8). The following, for instance, would constitute positive predictive variables for rehabilitation: presence of a spouse, amount of visiting and correspondence during detention, absence of divorce or separation during the term of imprisonment, etc. These studies on causes of lawbreaking and prognosis of social rehabilitation have a common feature in that they single out the family as a decisive factor to be "worked over" and fitted in. That is, instead of investigating the negative effects which the correctional system has on prisoners' families, these studies seek to mould the families to the specific requirements of the system. The constant objective is actually greater control over the family unit for the sake of greater efficiency in the correctional system.

Social costs of detention to the family

Research projects specifically intended to establish the impact on families of a member's imprisonment are far less numerous, often exploratory and with little theoretical content(9). Furthermore, they are somewhat contradictory. This compels caution: only new and more systematic research would be capable of providing more sophisticated information. On the strength of the available data, it is nevertheless reasonable to contend that imprisonment of the spouse, father, mother or offspring has economic, social and psychological repercussions for the prisoner's partner, children or family of origin. The principle of personal penalisation is altogether superficial in the case of imprisonment.

Some authorities claim that blood relationships nonetheless withstand the test of time and branding more effectively than bonds of friendship(10).

A.In general, the stigma afflicting persons sentenced to a custodial penalty is passed on to the family. A number of labels and stereotypes materialise in the day-to-day life of close relatives. This branding takes various forms including isolation, distrust and suspicion, with rejection and exploitation at either extreme. Neighbourhood and school are an ideal setting for the disparaging attitudes adopted by other people, for example the scathing reactions of schoolmates: "Your father's a jailbird". The female convict stigma is found to be both subjectively and objectively still more persistent and represents a sometimes insuperable handicap.

B.Information on the likelihood of deterioration in family relations is singularly inconsistent(11). Some sources pinpoint a temporary breakdown of family relations while others regard the disintegration of the family as absolute. Conversely, still other studies hold that imprisonment can make for closer family ties. This observed disparity should motivate more rigorous analysis, particularly as regards the definition of the family. Is it the family of origin or the constituted family? Family of origin is understood as the family to which a person is a natural or legal heir by the various types of descent. Biological heredity thus defined embodies the cultural, social, relational or economic legacy of the family. Constituted family is understood as the one which the individual personally chooses or founds.

1.In the family of origin, the prison experience seems capable of producing a bonding or reintegrating effect, particularly where a rift preceded imprisonment. Working-class families very often have a record of similar experiences. This community of experience accounts for the fact that the family of origin does not necessarily reject the imprisoned member except in the case of what might be called a criminal career. The family's presence has an important supportive function at the emotional level during detention and upon release. On the other hand, as will be demonstrated, the material economic weakness of these families means that the financial consequences of imprisonment are impossible to counteract. Better-off families are brought into contact with the prison environment usually by accident via an imprisoned member. Here, imprisonment tends to stimulate a process of reactivation of family relations. Since the family also enjoys more favourable economic and social conditions in which to overcome the impact of imprisonment, it can contribute to the prisoner's (possible) retention within that social class. Is the situation the same for male and female prisoners? It does not seem so, mainly because of the stereotypes nurtured regarding women in prison, but this question should be pursued on the basis of empirical research.

2.For the constituted family, the situation appears rather the reverse. The bond which has been formed withstands detention less readily, the more so because in day-to-day life it is attended by loss of means of support. In other words, financial circumstances and deterioration of family relationships are correlated; family breakup is liable to affect underprivileged groups more than others. Finally, where a released prisoner has a spouse waiting, it is usually a wife and seldom a husband.

C.In the vast majority of cases, imprisonment - especially for the first time - alters the financial situation of the prisoner's family. It normally causes a sudden financial cutback. For a prisoner who used to be comparatively well-integrated vocationally and economically, imprisonment has particularly noticeable effects within the family circle even though class resources and family loyalties may make it possible to mount defensive strategies. Nonetheless, the instant loss of social status, occupational income and confiscated movable and immovable property are directly discernible factors. It is the intermediate categories that pay the heaviest - or at least most visible - price for imprisonment in that their means were sufficient to be forfeited but insufficient for their effective protection(12). Irrespective of the socio-economic context, the family thus has to rebuild itself around this unprovoked absence and also around the resultant loss of income. The most disadvantaged families are very often the least well-informed about the appropriate procedures and dealings with the welfare services needed to cope with this urgent situation. The question of securing social benefits to prisoners' families has already been considered but should be brought up to date.

The family's financial situation is also known to improve during and precisely because of the spouse's detention. Different variables account for this recovery: the female partner returns to work; the imprisoned spouse was the cause of financial hardship; a new partner enters the household and redresses the financial situation; etc. However, such stabilisation presupposes a period of adaptation, and time for this is lacking in the emergency of the early stages of imprisonment.

D.Prison also means abeyance of the couple's affective and sexual fulfilment for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike. Prison is no place for tenderness. Denial of this human dimension is an indirect and critical consequence of the custodial penalty. It affects the partner at liberty as severely as the imprisoned partner. This secondary effect of the penalty immerses both partners in states of profound loneliness, depression and anxiety over their gender identity. As a result, the resumption of married life and sexual relations with a discharged prisoner can be problematic. During separation the significant other has lost substance. The combination of psychological and physical frustrations and fantasised images of the other partner compel the couple to undergo a phase of readjustment, very often doomed to failure. In this respect, the emotional and sexual hiatus during detention negates the rehabilitative function of the penalty.

Prison administrations on the whole have yet to make a general practice of conjugal visits in prison. Maintenance of order and security in prison establishments and the dictates of a policy of non-discrimination among inmates are the main supporting arguments for failure to apply these measures. Swinnen's study on sex life in prison uses pilot experiments conducted in the United States, Canada, Denmark, Sweden and Mexico to demonstrate that conjugal visits, when fixed in cultural mores, benefit prison discipline. While each situation raises its own special difficulties, the problems occurring in prisons which allow such visits are apparently unrelated to the violent and insecure tensions prevailing in other prisons(13).

E.Children's position, finally consideration, should receive special attention. There is not only the question of children born and spending the first few months of infancy in prison, but also that of the child or children left behind outside, for whom the parent's detention means separation. In the former case, the precise effect on children of an intramural upbringing, with all the implicit tension, deprivation and unreasonableness, is not yet known. At all events, a child's residence in prison entails adaptation of custodial living conditions(14). In the latter case, the influence of the father's or mother's detention on the child's self-realisation and development is social and psychological as well as material. The impact of stigmatisation at school and in the neighbourhood has already been noted, and reference has been made to the question of economic insecurity which obviously affects the children, so these points need not be re-discussed.

The impact of separation can be partially remedied if the other spouse accepts custody of the child. This is uncommon in the case of female prisoners, where imprisonment results in public guardianship, placement in a foster home and sometimes even adoption, whereby the mother may forfeit the last remaining link of socialisation and integration. According to accounts given by female prisoners, the loss of their parental rights leaves them "free" to rejoin the underworld. Where the social, and particularly juvenile, welfare services assume responsibility for care, their co-operation with the prison welfare department is quite clearly (perhaps unduly) selective. All too often the respective institutional viewpoints govern the perception of what is good for the child and its father or mother. Forced separation should not blind these services to the reality of their mutual client's affective ties. Prison administrations seem to appreciate this reality, and accept that continued family contact should be "preserved" throughout and beyond the prison term. This concern is borne out by visiting arrangements and prison leave. However, the institutional scruples of prison establishments are liable to impair the quality and suitability of these moments of reunion. Prison leave is granted only after a considerable lapse of time, but the alleged risk of absconding mainly in the case of short sentences seems an inconclusive argument having regard to the low failure rate of prison leave.

As to children visiting a detained parent inside the prison, intramural security requirements are still poorly reconciled with the desirability of a humanising encounter. This is because the respective needs are viewed as conflicting or altogether irreconcilable. The ever-present surveillance by prison officers, the bleakness of the reception, the impersonality of the uniform and sometimes even the physical impossibility of all bodily contact, distress the child and parent. Rethinking the relaxation of the conditions would not, the writer feels, necessarily entail risks of disturbances. Maintaining by means of visits the right to personal relations between children and parent even if imprisoned is an aspect of the right to respect for family life secured by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Article 8.1), a right which may not be restricted except where such a measure is necessary in a democratic society "in the interests of ... public safety ... for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others" (Article 8.2). According to the figures registered in Canada in 1989, 50-70% female prisoners have young children for whom they are solely responsible; consequently, the problem requires special attention. Proposed solutions, such as prison nurseries, should nevertheless be treated with caution. The need to maintain contacts must not expose the child to the ill-effects of the prison experience or prevent the mother from receiving vital training for her return to work. Responsibility towards children of imprisoned parents cannot be one-sided(15).

Lastly, attention should be drawn to worthwhile initiatives which can help keep prisoners in contact with their family surroundings, such as the accommodation facilities for prisoners' family and friends provided in France. They offer persons visiting an imprisoned friend or relation a package of services which assist their approach to the prisoner both psychologically and practically(16).

Section 2.The prisoner and work

This section deals with two difficulties relating to the occupational resettlement of former prisoners: employers' recruitment policies and their differential impact on ex-prisoners.

1.Employment policies

A.A succession of differing explanatory hypotheses have been put forward to gain insight into the job-finding difficulties facing persons who have been imprisoned. The first is an explanation based on personality, purporting to lay the blame for unsuccessful occupational resettlement on the individual. The arguments range from low educational standard to lack of experience and training and finally unwillingness. The second hypothesis invokes the current economic situation and takes into account the precarious state of the labour market itself, together with the growth of unemployment, as structural obstacles to former prisoners' occupational resettlement. The third hypothesis propounds the stereotyped, stigmatising perceptions applying to persons who have been tried and sentenced. Hence the prison experience itself is seen as constituting a barrier to the labour market.

Research has been carried out in New Zealand and the Netherlands to test these hypotheses, the last in particular(17). The method was employment simulation in which fictitious letters of application were sent to potential employers and backed up with questionnaires. These were used to a lesser extent because of the risk of registering employers' personal perception of their practice rather than the actual nature thereof. Over and above the differences in results which can be ascribed to methodological variations and underlying cultural differences in the survey, a common profile emerges. For applications of equal quality with identical skill profiles, the percentage of favourable replies to previously convicted persons was plainly discriminatory. In objective terms, applications from persons who were once imprisoned received significantly less attention than applications from the group used as a control. This group consisted of persons who had no record of convictions or did not mention their antecedents. Thus, applicants who admit to having served prison sentences experience insuperable difficulties in being considered by employers, which would suggest that the consequences of a conviction go beyond the actual term of detention. When the former prisoner imagines that his debt to society has been paid, secondary effects are added to the primary penalty: this is post-sentence penalisation. Concealment of a penal record only gives the worker a reprieve; should the employer learn of it on the job, immediate dismissal is likely to ensue.

While on the one hand the after-effects of the criminal record should be eliminated and rehabilitation procedures applied (occurring automatically after a certain time), on the other hand the present economic climate would require these measures to be supported by other forms of incentive to the employment of former prisoners. Indeed, while a person who must refrain from mentioning any judicial past ostensibly runs less immediate risk of discrimination, the term of imprisonment nonetheless marks an absence from the labour market, and this "gap" elicits questions from the prospective employer. This is the invisible stigma of imprisonment.

B.The above assessment should be duly qualified by mentioning two decisive variables in corporate recruitment policies: scale and sector of activity(18).

Large firms appear the least flexible and the least accessible to previously convicted persons. In this type of firm, the recruitment process is entrusted to specialists and operates in a highly systematised way. The job-seeker must give details of past periods of employment, name previous employers and provide references. Professional recruiters closely examine applications and often resort to enquiries in the applicant's entourage. This will quickly bring any judicial history to light and cause the application to be turned down. Small and medium-sized enterprises seem more receptive to the employment of former prisoners. The fact that the task of recruitment is not assigned to specialists but rests with the director and administrative staff is one explanation. Direct contact with the decision-maker helps mitigate the stereotyped representation that presses heavily on persons who have been convicted. Lastly, examination of applications is not on the same professional, bureaucratised scale as observed in large concerns.

The firm's sector of activity is also a decisive variable in the employment of former prisoners. For instance, civil service entry appears as tightly closed to them as large firms. It may seem paradoxical that the public authorities, with their professed interest in the vocational rehabilitation of former offenders, do not set an example of integration as regards employment. Other sectors among those inaccessible or virtually so for applicants who have stood trial are the financial and banking sectors, insurance, business and services. These sectors invariably assimilate the stereotyped view of these persons as inferior and untrustworthy workers. The discriminatory policy applied in these sectors means inter alia that the most impermeable job market for former prisoners is the "primary" job market, the very one that commonly ensures decent wages, good working conditions and some stability. By contrast, the building and manufacturing sectors and seasonal and unskilled employment have more flexible recruitment procedures. However, these are the sectors of activity forming the "secondary" job market where working conditions are often arduous, pay unrewarding and stability problematic.

2.Differential impact

Two further elements should be included in the analysis of occupational resettlement difficulties for former prisoners: their socio-economic class of origin, in combination with the type of offence committed(19). The impact of detention on resettlement cannot be apprehended in its full complexity without allowing for the peculiarities of the different social classes. Indeed, the consequences of imprisonment differ according to the class affected because the ability of each class to counteract the effects of detention differs. The same observation would apply to gender, but empirical research from which inferences could be drawn is not yet available.

A.For prisoners already disqualified from normal job-holding and imprisoned for serious offences, the income curve resembles the Gaussian curve. The wage level peaks at about age 30, beyond which the wane of physical strength, accidents and illness, incompatible with the type of employment engaged in, take their toll by causing a substantial income reduction. As a result, imprisonment of men from age 20 to 30 or 35 -the average age of male prisoners - has drastic effects. Imprisonment at that time of life burns up the most active and remunerative years. Furthermore, difficulties in occupational resettlement cannot be resolved either by the family of origin or the constituted family, for neither possesses the necessary economic, social or cultural capital for even partial redress of the precarious situation.

B.Prisoners who were better integrated socially and economically at the outset and tend more to be tried for the conventional types of serious offences have objective advantages enabling them to overcome the adverse effects of detention. For one thing, in the same age band as the aforementioned group, their working career has not yet really begun. Besides, as mentioned above, subjection to the prison experience may lead to reinstatement in the family context, a "disciplinary effect" which assists recovery. Lastly, the family's cultural and financial attainments and social connections are instrumental in restoring the prisoner's occupational prospects. Thanks to the conditions enjoyed by this group, the ill-effects of imprisonment can be fairly effectively counteracted in the long run.

Where white-collar criminals are concerned, it has already been noted that transit through the correctional system produces particularly conspicuous effects. However, notwithstanding their obtrusiveness, the effects of imprisonment have the redeeming feature of being merely transient in some cases. Partial retention of assets, professional experience and useful connections are major advantages which may allow reinstatement in the social scale.

The impact of detention on occupational resettlement is thus largely dependent on the economic and social position held by former prisoners who do not have the same objective possibilities for offsetting the adverse effects of imprisonment. Though less noticeable with prisoners belonging to the most vulnerable socio-economic categories, the consequences of imprisonment appear more lasting and raise a further impediment to their already perilously straitened plans for the future. This point should be taken into consideration and lead to penal and economic policies under which the rehabilitation of former defendants in the primary job market can be encouraged.

Conclusions

With all the caution demanded by a necessarily restricted report, one can venture to propose some lines of enquiry as a guide for priority action.

The report by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on conditions of detention in Council of Europe member states recommends more limited recourse to prison sentences(20). This suggestion is founded on the observation of overcrowding in prisons. The adverse effects of imprisonment in the family and social context, for which no other kind of compensation is usually possible, prompt me to support this recommendation which can be called radical in that it gets to the root of the problem.

Yet how is social assistance for convicted persons and their families to be conceived? Certainly, some present-day trends in criminology provide food for thought by suggesting that prisoners and their families be given back their status of "actor and subject" as part of "introverted" and "extroverted" regulation of the penalty(21).

"Introverted" regulation handles the difficulties which arise for the convicted person and family during and due to detention. Several priority measures could be envisaged in this connection. Firstly, with short sentences, reduction of the qualifying period for prison leave might allow family relations to be maintained. In addition, an effort of humanisation should be made as regards visits by children and spouses. Provision of places where people can be alone should be organised with the participation of all concerned - including the prison officers committed to the specific interest of prison security. There should also be efforts to make family welfare services higher-profile. The economic and emotional insecurity into which the families of convicted persons are thrust, especially in the case of first-time imprisonment, is a state of emergency which calls for rapid intervention. Mobilisation of energies must be planned to operate almost instantaneously.

"Extroverted" regulation of the penalty entails the preparation, during detention, of occupational resettlement prospects, and should extend beyond the jurisdiction of prison administrations. The public authorities should accordingly consider implementing strategies to improve the permeability of the primary employment sector for ex-prisoners. Considering the extreme vulnerability of the most disadvantaged category, intramural rehabilitation work should be activated. Education and vocational training thus need to be developed efficiently and in keeping with labour market potential.

Bibliography

Blankevoort V., Landreville P., and Pires A., (1981) "Syst�me p�nal et trajectoire sociale", D�viance et Soci�t�, Vol, pp. 319-345.

Boshier R. and Johnson D., (1974), "Does Conviction Affect Employment opportunities?", British Journal of Criminology, Vol. XIV, pp. 264-268.

Bourgoin N., (1993), "Le suicide en prison: l'exemple du criminel contre un proche", Revue de science criminelle et de droit p�nal compar�, Vol. III, pp. 575-580.

Buikhisen W. and Dijksterhuis P.H., (1971), "Delinquency and Stigmatisation", British Journal of Criminology, Vol. XI, pp. 185-186.

Campioli G. and De Coninck G., (1977) "Paroles de d�tenus", D�viance et Soci�t�, Vol. I, pp. 219-237.

Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly, (1995), Report on conditions of detention in Council of Europe member states, Council of Europe, Doc. 7215.

Cormier B., Kennedy M., Sangowicz J. and Trottier M., (1961), "Family Conflicts and Criminal Behaviour", Revue canadienne de criminologie, Vol. III, pp. 18-37.

Darbeda P., (1987), "Prison et Sant�", Revue de science criminelle et de droit p�nal compar�, No. 3, pp. 743-748.

De Coninck G., (1982), "La famille du d�tenu: de la suspicion � l'id�alisation", D�viance et Soci�t�, Vol. IV, pp. 83-103.

Demerliac E., (1986), "Le parloir des familles", Esprit, Vol. III, pp. 84-86.

Devos A., Houchon G., Reynaert P., Riguel S. and Vanneste C., (1991), "L'aide aux d�enus. Cette aide vaut-elle la peine?", in Mary P., (ed.), L'aide sociale aux justiciables: aspects criminologiques, sociaux et juridiques, Brussels, Bruylant, pp. 103-138.

F�d�ration r�gionale des maisons d'accueil des familles et amis de d�tenus de la r�gion p�nitentiaire de Bordeaux, Guide des maisons d'accueil des familles et amis de d�tenus.

Goethals J., (1980), "Les effets psychosociaux des longues peines d'emprisonnement", D�viance et Soci�t�, Vol, IV, pp. 81-101.

Groupe d'�tude sur les femmes purgeant une peine f�d�rale - study group on women serving a federal sentence, (1990), La cr�ation de choix, Ottawa, Service correctionnel de Canada, (167 p.).

Groupe du travail sur la condition des femmes dans le syst�me correctionnel - Working group on women's status in the correctional system, (1995), Voix de femmes, choix de femmes, Ottawa, (49 p. and appendices).

Harding-Pink D., (1990), "Mortality Following release from Prison", Medicine Science and the Law, Vol. XXX, pp. 12-16.

Hamelin M., (1989), Femmes et prison, Montr�al, M�ridien.

Hattem T., Normandeau A. and Parent C., (1982), "Les cons�quences d'une condamnation p�nale dans le domaine du travail", D�viance et Soci�t�, Vol. VI, pp. 311-326.

Ingstrup O., (1982), "Apr�s la prison", Revue internationale de criminologie et de police technique, pp. 155-157 and 386-387.

Jansen V., Lalieux K. and Mary P., (1991), "Le sida dans les prisons belge", Journal des juristes d�mocrates, No. 78, pp. 6-8.

Jenkins, (1993), "Being gay in Prison", Probation Journal, pp. 85-87.

Marchetti A.M and al., (1995), Rapport final sur la recherche "pauvret�s en prison", Paris, Centre de sociologie de l'�ducation et de la culture (176 p.).

Martin J.P. and Webster D., (1971), The Social Consequences of Conviction, London, Heinemann.

Mary Ph., (1990) "Prison et droits de l'homme: resocialisation des d�tenus or resocialisation de la justice p�nal", Revue de droit p�nal et de criminologie, pp. 733-740.

Minist�re de affairs sociales, de la sant� et de la ville et Minist�re de la Justice -French Ministries of Social Affairs and Justice, (1991), Conclusions du groupe de travail portant sur les conditions d'accueil des enfants laiss�s aupr�s de leur m�re d�tenus - Conclusions of the working group on the care of children left with the mother in prison, Paris (98 p. and appendices).

Monnereau A., (1984), "La privation sexuelle et affective du prisonnier", Promovere, No. 38, pp. 71-77.

Pir�s A., Landreville P. and Blankevoort V,. (1981), "Syst�me p�nal et trajectoire sociale", D�viance et soci�t�, Vols. 5 and 4, pp. 319-345.

Schneller D., (1975), "Prisoners' Families : A Study of Some Social and Psychological Effects of Incarceration on the Families of Negro Prisoners", Criminology, pp. 402-412.

Shaw M. and al., (1992) Elles paient le prix. Les femmes purgeant une peine d'une dur�e de deux ans ou plus: leur v�cu, Ottawa, Minist�re du solliciteur g�n�ral, Direction des affaires correctionnelles - Solicitor General's Department, Prison Affairs Directorate, (p. 63).

Shaw M. and al., (1991), Les d�tenus sous responsabilit� f�d�rale, Ottawa, Minist�re du solliciteur g�n�ral, Direction des affairs correctionnelles - Solicitor General's Department, Prison Affairs Directorate, (p. 110).

Swinnen E., (1981), "La sexualit� en prison", Bulletin de l'administration p�nitentiaire, pp. 259-282.

Swinnen E., (1982), "La sexualit� en prison", Bulletin de l'administration p�nitentiaire, pp. 15-40, 129-150 and 189-201.

Thiry L., (1985), "Interview", Le journal des proc�s, No. 67, pp. 10-12.

Thiry L., (1986), "La prison et le sida", Le journal des proc�s, No. 76, pp. 24-25.

Van Nuland J., (1973), "Les enfants de d�tenus", Revue de droit p�nal et criminologie, pp. 936-961.

Waller I., (1974), Men Released from Prison, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, pp. 86-145.

Zimmermann E., (1988), "Attentes et r�alit� des soutiens pendant la d�tention pr�ventive � la prison genevoise de Champ-Dolon", D�viance et Soci�t�, Vol. XII, pp. 361-380.

Appendix III

Reporting committee: Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee

Budgetary implications for the Assembly: none

Reference to committee: Order n� 503 (1995)

Draft recommendation adopted by the committee on 8 May 1997 with 4 abstentions

Members of the committee: Mr Gusenbauer, Chairman, Mrs Ragnarsdottir, Mr Gross (Vice-Chairmen), Mr About, Mrs Albrink, Mr Alis Font, Mrs Andnor, Mr Arnau, Mrs Aytaman, Mr Banks, Mrs Belohorska, Mrs Biga-Friganovic, Sir Andrew Bowden (Alternate: Earl of Dundee), MM. Bugli, De Carolis, Christodoulides, Chyzh (Alternate: Stepanov), Dees, Din�er, Djerov, Mrs Fleetwood, Mrs Gatterer, MM. Geoffroy, Haack, Hegyi, Mrs H�egh, Baroness Hooper, MM. Jacquat, Janecek, Mrs Jirousova, MM. Keller, Kotlar, Mrs Kusnere, Mrs Laternser, Mr Leitner, Mrs Lucyga, Mrs Luhtanen, MM. Lupu, (Alternate: Popescu), Malachowski, Marmazov (Alternate: Khunov), Martelli, Mrs Maximus, MM. Moliviatis, Mozgan, Nestor, Niza, Mrs Oleinik, MM. Pattison (Alternate: Mitchell), Po�as Santos, Mrs Poptodorova, Mrs Pozza Tasca, Mrs Pulgar, MM. Raskinis, Regenwetter, Sceberras Trigona (Alternate: Vella), Sharapov, Sincai, Skoularikis, Valk, Valkeniers, Mrs Vermot-Mangold, MM. Volodin, Wielowieyski

N.B. The names of those members present at the meeting are printed in italics

Secretaries to the committee: Mr Perin and Ms Meunier

Note: 1By the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee

Note: 2The paper has been written by the principal officer at the Verne Prison, Geoffrey Hebbern. The APAC/Kairos project has been launched at The Verne prison by its current prison governor, Timothy Turner. The initiative has been supported by the English prison service, and backed by its area manager, Alan Walker.

Note: 3 Fran�oise Tulkens, Professor in the Law Faculty, Catholic University of Louvain, Coll�ge Thomas More, 2 Place Montesquieu, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve (Belgium). Tel. 32 2-10-47.46.70; Fax. 32-2-10.47.46.77.

Note: 4M. Hamelin (1989); study group on women serving a federal sentence (990) M. Shaw (1991, 1992); working group on women's status in the penitentiary system (1995). I am grateful to Sylvie Frigon, Assistant Professor in the Criminology Department of the University of Ottawa, for drawing my attention to this issue and supplying me with the relevant documentation.

Note: 5A.M. Marchetti (1995).

Note: 6B. Cormier, M. Kennedy and J. Sangowicz (1961).

Note: 7J. Van Nuland (1970).

Note: 8J.P. Martin and D. Webster (1971), I. Waller (1974), D. Schneller (1975).

Note: 9G. Campioli and G. De Coninck (1977), E. Demerliac (1986), A. Monnereau (1984).

Note: 10M. Hamelin (1989), p. 225.

Note: 11G. De Coninck (1982).

Note: 12A.M. Marchetti (1995), p. 155.

Note: 13E. Swinnen (1981 and 1982).

Note: 14French Ministry of Social, Health and Urban Affairs and Ministry of Justice (1991).

Note: 15M. Hamelin (1989), p. 224.

Note: 16Federation of reception centres for prisoner's family and friends serving the Bordeaux prison district.

Note: 17R. Boshier and D. Johnson (1974); W. Buikuisen and P.H. Dijksterhuis (1971).

Note: 18T. Hattem, A Normandeau and C. Parent (1982).

Note: 19V. Blankevoort, P. Landreville and A. Pires (1981).

Note: 20Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly (1995).

Note: 21A. Devos, G. Houchon, P. Reynaert, S. Riguel, C. Vanneste (1991).