Incarceration and Life Course Development

Incarceration and Life Course Development

Student’s Name

Institution

Course

Instructor’s Name

Date

Incarceration and Life Course Development

Introduction:

The impacts of incarceration on individuals span throughout a person’s lifetime. Not only are the effects on the individual for multiple generations, but they also span out to impact multiple members of the family. From infancy through late adulthood there is evidence of negative mental health impacts for having family members incarcerated as well as for the people who are incarcerated themselves. Common developmental themes in regard to incarceration that have been found revolve around poor mental health, poor physical health, social isolation, and poor family social ties. We see these themes change and develop over the lifespan of individuals who are incarcerated and family members of the incarcerated.

The first section of this paper will address the impact of incarceration on prenatal and infant development. For women, pregnancy can become a harrowing experience when done in a prison facility. It is common for healthcare services for pregnant women who are incarcerated to be inadequate, as facilities often come short of following legal protocols (Kuhlik, 2017). In addition, many women who go through labor while incarcerated are separated from their children as soon as twenty- four hours after labor (Solinger, 2010). These occurrences in addition to forced separation from the mother can have detrimental impacts on infant development. Section two of this paper will address the effects of parental incarceration on early to middle childhood. During this time, teachers and other members of communities can exhibit hidden biases towards children whose family members are incarcerated, affecting how they can function socially and academically (Eddy & Poehlmann, 2010). In addition, many children whose family members and parents are incarcerated also experience poverty and familial relationship deterioration (Arditti, 2012). Incarcerated parents usually hold the hope that later on in life they will be able to watch their children grow up, even if that may not be true.

Section three will discuss juvenile delinquency and associated developmental outcomes. For example, seventy percent of incarcerated juveniles have been diagnosed with at least one psychiatric disorder and are in need of medical attention (Barnett et al., 2017). Adolescents and youth in prison also have been found to have higher rates of suicidality and poorer health if incarcerated for more than a year (Barnett et al., 2017). Incarcerated adolescents are at a higher risk for stress and violence as well. These youth often socially withdraw and create hostile relationships with their parents, which plays into family dysfunction (Harvey, 2001). In section four of this paper, the developmental consequences of incarceration for adults will be explained. For instance, Black men who are older and incarcerated appear to be more resilient in coping with the experience of incarceration than white men (Maschi et al). Cross-racially, we see differences that incarceration has on the individual as well. Finally, section five will talk about the impact of incarceration on the elderly. Currently, in late adulthood, we see that Major Depressive Disorder and physical comorbidities become common issues (Majekodunmi et al., 2017, p. 269). The normal aging process in a prison environment results in poor hygiene and many other health problems for incarcerated elderly folks.

Prenatal/Infancy:

When pregnancies occur in prisons, a wide variety of events will follow depending on the facility the mother is placed in, what they were sentenced for, and the discretion of prison personnel and health care professionals. It is estimated that five percent of incarcerated women are pregnant (Fritz & Whitacre, 2016, p. 2). Unfortunately, adverse experiences such as being chained or cuffed right before and after labor, being denied access to loved ones during labor, and forced separation from their newborn child 24 hours after giving labor are common experiences from incarcerated pregnant women (pp. 9-12). It is frightening that so many pregnant women in prison face these adverse experiences, especially given that incarcerated women are often provided with inadequate access to contraceptive options and abortion, and are frequently victims of sexual assault and rape (Kuhlik, 2017, pp. 510-511). Also, adequate healthcare access is not always available to pregnant inmates, but when it is improved, labor outcomes as less likely to result in cesarean sections and preterm deliveries (Bard et al., 2016). Coordination with community care upon release in addition to improved healthcare in prison has been found to result in decreased long-term maternal recidivism (p. 1). Fortunately, it is not likely that incarceration during pregnancy itself leads to lower infant birth weight, although a variety of related factors, including drug use and poor nutrition (Howard et al., 2010, p. 484).

When pregnant inmates have not been convicted of violent crimes or child abuse/neglect – depending on the facility they are at – they could have the opportunity to enter a prison nursery program with their newborn for any period of time between 30 days and 30 months (Fritz & Whitacre, 2016, p. 4; Stein, 2010, p. 11). As of ten years ago, only nine states in the United States offered nursery programs in their prisons, none of which were North Carolina (Stein, 2010, p. 10). Attachment theory supports the idea of these nursery programs, as they help maintain and form an attachment between the mother and child during shorter prison sentences (p. 12). Additionally, these programs usually offer parenting classes, nannies, and recreational activities to mothers; they tend to appreciate such services greatly (Fritz & Whitacre, 2016, pp. 13-15). One study completed since the increase in prison nursery availability found that children were less likely to demonstrate depression or anxiety features upon entry into preschool if they lived in prison nurseries, as opposed to being separated from their mothers close to birth (Goshin, 2014).

Needless to say, what is often a joyful and exciting developmental process for expecting mothers often becomes a dehumanizing and painful one when incarcerated (Solinger, 2010). One inmate shared the experience of “humiliating strip-searches,” every time she had to leave the facility for medical care or return (p. 90). She said that belly chains were also used on pregnant women unless doctors ordered them taken off. Eventually, one of her twins died in the womb, and she felt unsafe showing any emotion over the loss for fear of punishment by the guards. Upon giving birth, she refused to eat in order to stay with her infant for three days instead of only 24 hours (p. 91). These anecdotes alone paint a picture of the loss of control and suffering that pregnant women often experience in prisons in order to give birth to a healthy child. While there is much research to be done on the developmental outcomes of prison pregnancies, such conditions are inhumane and certainly have no positive effects on the health of incarcerated mothers and their babies.

Early and Middle Childhood:

Over many years, a great deal of research has gone into understanding the development of incarcerated persons, but only since the 21st century have researchers spent more time studying the development of children of incarcerated parents (Eddy & Poehlmann, 2010). The predominant struggle in studying the experience of parental incarceration for children is its association with so many other variables, such as parent criminality, mental health issues, parenting problems, and poverty (p. 56). Attachment theorists currently think that parental incarceration negatively impacts children’s attachment and care due to parent-child separation (Eddy & Poehlmann, 2010, p. 57; Murray et al., 2014, p. 24). Strain theory suggests that simply the loss of familial resources as the result of parental incarceration could lead to behavioral problems in children (p. 25). Social learning theorists believe that the resulting reduction in care and supervision, and difficulty for current caregivers, could affect children of incarcerated adults (p. 27). Lastly, labeling theory indicates that the resulting stigma from having an incarcerated parent could lead to a greater incidence of delinquent behavior and future charges (pp. 27-28). Even with all of these theories to draw from, studying children of incarcerated parents still remains a challenge because each child’s experience varies greatly. For instance, child age, maternal versus paternal incarceration, and quality of care while the parent is incarcerated can all be moderators to the relationship between parental incarceration and child development (Eddy & Poehlmann, 2010, p. 58).

So far, one study in the United States suggested that– even with a multitude of confounding variables controlled for – having an incarcerated mother is strongly related to children’s future rates of criminality (Eddy & Poehlmann, 2010, p. 61). Additionally, another study found by far the greatest associations between parental incarceration and children internalizing problems and demonstrating antisocial behaviors with offspring ages 11-16, followed by ages 0-5, and the least association with ages 6-10 (p. 62). This suggests that adolescent offspring are the most affected by parental incarceration, with infants and offspring in early childhood still being somewhat affected, and offspring in middle childhood being least affected. Researchers in the United States also found that, for male offspring, parental incarceration was highly predictive of future antisocial behavior, but not for female offspring (p. 66). An earlier study observed that maternal incarceration was more greatly associated with children being in trouble at school, home, or legally than having a mother on probation (p. 67). This finding supports the notion that having a convicted mother at home is more of a positive influence on children than being separated by incarceration. A later study found a positive relationship between paternal incarceration and predicted “serious and violent delinquency” of children (p. 67). One more study discovered little association between paternal incarceration and children’s internalization of problems, but a strong relationship between paternal incarceration and children’s antisocial behavior (p. 68). Finally, it is important to note that a past study found that incarcerated fathers were more likely to report their children performing externalizing behaviors, while mothers more often reported internalizing behaviors (Arditti, 2012, p. 100).

There have also been many studies on the developmental outcomes resulting from parental incarceration outside of the United States. In Denmark, a study found that paternal incarceration may be strongly associated with sons’ future incarceration rates (Eddy & Poehlmann, 2010, p. 63). Research in Australia looked at the relationship between offspring gender and the internalization of problems and antisocial behavior acquisition when a father was incarcerated. It found that girls were more likely to internalize the problems, while boys may be slightly more likely to develop antisocial behaviors. A study in England found that parental incarceration occurring between a child’s birth and age ten was strongly associated with internalizing problems, antisocial behavior development, and future offspring conviction (Eddy & Poehlmann, 2010, p. 64; Murray et al., 2014, p. 49). In Sweden, researchers discovered that parental incarceration was more predictive of future offspring conviction for girls during early childhood, and for boys during late childhood and adolescence (p. 65). Finally, a study in the Netherlands discovered that over time, the negative outcomes associated with parental incarceration (i.e. adult conviction and criminality) have substantially increased (Murray et al., 2014, p. 87). In general, the intergenerational outcomes of parental incarceration for children that have been historically studied include antisocial behavior problems, delinquency, anxiety and depression, social isolation, and school-related issues (Harris et al., 2010, p. 128).

While the methodology and results and these national and international studies differ, there is a rich amount of support for the idea that parental incarceration does predict some children’s developmental outcomes. All of these studies suggested that parental incarceration – even with confounding variables considered – negatively impacts children’s development, particularly regarding the internalization of parents’ problems, the acquisition of antisocial behavior, and future criminality. However, it is important to acknowledge that almost no studies have tried to look for positive outcomes in children of incarcerated parents (Harris et al., 2010). If they did, it is possible that some children would appear to adjust to the separation well, as some studies of children of divorced parents have found (p. 60). Also, the general assumption is that something inherent to parental incarceration increases negative outcomes for children, but one study found that when children believed their parents were away for some more conventionally accepted reason, their negative behavioral outcomes associations disappeared (Arditti, 2010, p. 100). Finally, developmental impact studies often miss confounding and modifying variables, and such information may be invaluable for improving the lives of families who have experienced incarceration. For instance, a study by Western and Smith (2018) found that accessing stable, affordable housing played a huge role in re-establishing frequent contact between formerly incarcerated parents and their children (p. 840). Studies like this one show how research – rather than vilifying incarcerated parents for impacting their children’s development in what is assumed to be a negative way – can provide policymakers and clinicians alike with concrete ideas for improving these families’ quality of life and developmental trajectories.

Adolescence/Young Adulthood:

Adolescence is the period of time in which the brain and the body of a person change as part of a transition to adulthood. During this time the psychological state of a person becomes dynamically imbalanced, and what would be considered a minor trigger could incite a stronger reaction than it would in adults (Barnert et al., 2017). Incarceration is a collective word for being put into prison or any other type of restriction for lawful reasons. For people in all age groups, incarceration has a great consequence on both the corporeal appearance and the psychological state of a person. Despite there being only a small amount of information about the impacts of confinement on the normal expansion in adolescents, there are reliable sources that have literature on the research and results that have been published so far. In this section, I will be stating words such as “ inhabited conduct facility” “secure setting” and “protected setting” all meaning prisons in which adolescents are incarcerated.

From the available resources on factors that enable positive psychological development and maturity, it becomes very obvious that incarceration is an adverse departure from “normal” teenage socialization, and is associated with experiences conjectured to cause inhibited development and psychological maturity (Barnert et al., 2017). Particularly, incarceration lowers the teenager’s opportunities to conduct reasonable decision-making and puts them exclusively amongst tough peers. It would be sensible to predict that the adverse socialization resulting from confinement could highly impact growth into psychological maturity. Research shows that secure short-term incarceration interrupts life events that build psychological maturity in ways that are consistent with such hypotheses (Barnert et al., 2017). It slows the temperance of the person, sense of responsibility, and global psychosocial maturity. These negative effects increase dynamically with age. The researchers failed to get a more concrete meaningful observation of difference during adulthood as a result of the overall time spent in protected confinement throughout the 8-years of study (Barnert et al., 2017). Combined, the short- and long-term impacts implied that protected incarceration encumbers psychological maturation, and the total impact is not aggregate and short-lived. The time that these teenagers are confined may not directly equal the total time of incarceration, but the number of months. For instance, someone confined for two years may have actually been incarcerated from year one to year two or year seven to year eight, and other short periods occurring during multiple years. Therefore, the two years of study did not last the entire seven years of incarceration and thus only short-term negative impacts could be recovered (Lee, Fang & Luo, 2013).

One short-term impact of confinement in the handling facilities was that it temporarily bolstered temperance and responsibility development among older youths. Research shows that those who spend an enormous expanse of time in a protected setting demonstrate an inferior amount of psychological development when compared to those who are not incarcerated., and those who spend a lot of their time in inhabited conduct facilities present a higher preliminary psychosocial mellowness (Lee, Fang & Luo, 2013).  This probably echoes categorization at the time of the court decision when the court makes sentences for youth depending on their viewpoints about responsibility, perspective, and temperance. Although the researchers were able to control for the past offense’s history, the information they gathered was limited to the number and type of earlier mistakes and not the details of the offense. The reason behind this is that juveniles are more susceptible, short-sighted, and impulsive in response to peer pressure, which leads to offenses that the court came to perceive as hazardous, and require longer periods of incarceration in a secure setting.

Contrary to the myths that are believed by many, youth who were in a secure setting presented quicker general growth in their viewpoint-taking abilities (Lee, Fang & Luo, 2013). Conversely, this impact seems to occur for the longer-term incarcerated youths who are trying to keep up with their own lives and with those non-incarcerated youths over a period of time. Other than the facilitative effect, as seen earlier, incarcerated youths in these facilities start with low preliminary standpoint scores. This finding may mirror deterioration, other than a real optimistic consequence of the protected confinement mostly when specifying the short-term observed shortcomings. Therefore, it is hard to draw concrete assumptions from this finding, and further research may help illuminate what it means (Heard et al., 2018).

Earlier incarceration experiences in adolescents have been found to have effects on their course of psychological maturity than those that have had successive confinements, which have more incomplete impacts. This may help to elucidate discoveries of long-term undesirable impacts resulting from confinement in residential amenities and not in protected conveniences. Youths that get sentenced for longer periods of incarceration in secure conveniences are more immature to start with, and their deterioration to the mean may mask any background impact of confinement on their psychosocial mellowness slope (Heard et al., 2018). The security of the prison's confinement on the growth of psychosocial mellowness is clear, but the short-term effects are considered hidden. When immature youth get longer sentences, their psychological functioning tends to be disrupted which has implications for public safety, they can harm themselves or others around them (Sawyer et al., 2012).

           After adolescents leave protected confines, they are even more susceptible and impulsive to aristocratic pressure, have a very high risk of being rearrested, and receive a tougher penalty with increased re-offense (Sawyer et al., 2012). Since recap offenders are subject to tougher penalties, the short-term effects of confinement may start an ongoing cycle, whereas many immature adolescents are treated in ways that can further affect their psychosocial maturity. Whether incarceration affects the adolescents’ education attainments and legal socialization, mental health and other outcomes are the most observable down-effects that come with incarceration. Incarcerated youth have been found to have many extremely unmet health requirements, which may at some point lead to mental instability (Sawyer et al., 2012).

Given the high incarceration prevalence in adolescents in the United States - added together with the current bilateral readiness to follow criminal justice reorganization - various sources have shown that months of confinement have worsened adolescent and young adult psychological stableness, as well as deteriorated their health (Sawyer et al., 2012). Persons with a past encounter with incarceration have negative mental and physical effects, which they may need increased support to overcome.

Health specialists have been standing on the frontline of the justice and juvenile reform campaign to fully reconnoiter how justice reformation can acclimatize together with healthcare improvement and are coming up with schemes that can protect instead of damage the fitness of the youth. Pediatricians have been curious and are researching the progress of long-term adolescent health and mental outcomes that come to affect them in later life by ensuring that needless and probable destructive variables related to incarceration are reduced, and for those that remain, mitigating and monitoring any negative downstream psychological and mental effects.

Early Adulthood

            The transition from adolescence into early adulthood produces many emotional, social, and cognitive changes that are necessary for greater and more positive functioning later in adulthood in many aspects of life. For many, this is a time to make mistakes, grow, face new experiences, and form personal identities. Absence of proper guidance, care, education, and independence although can result in higher rates of mental illness with comorbid substance abuse (Berk, 2007). For some youth, when exposed to these risk factors the probability of offending and incarceration increases (Shader, 2003). Although those in early adulthood (18-24) make up only 10% of inmates within the American prison system, they possess many losses and challenges cognitively, socially, and psychologically that are detrimental to stability in adult life (Frank, 2017).
            Cognitively, as described by William Perry (1970), adolescents grow out of a dualistic thought process to a more epistemic or pragmatic one in early adulthood, promoting less either-or thinking and more of a diverse, revisable approach to problem-solving and conflict. This can be seen in higher education courses, discussions, and challenges of thought with peers and faculty, as well as lived experiences within some work settings and within the home. Prison although, poses an environment within which isolation, control, manipulation, and neglect are meant to be accepted. Lawful and cultural rules and standards are taught to be adhered to and remain unquestioned, not encouraging and even unallowing youth that change in cognitive thought; from the dualistic to the pragmatic.
            Incarcerated young adults are still in the process of developing their judgment and decision-making skills during this stage of life (Berk, 2007), and they have little compared to those who are not incarcerated to rely upon if and when institutional and social structures are removed, which in turn may cause poor entry back into society if released. Some factors like lower SES, cultural standards, and previous higher education can be influential in decision-making and judgment-based skills (Berk, 2007). Long periods of isolation from other people and a lack of rehabilitation harm potential opportunities to learn from past experiences, and potentially promote poorer coping skills as a product of negative experiences both in and out of prison (Frank, 2017). Higher rates of incarceration since the 1990s - which in turn have affected living conditions - created even more unhealthy environments to live in, compromised prison management, and further limited access to helpful programs for prisoners, especially mental health and social services (Haney, 2001). The length of time an individual remains in prison, as well as having endured repetitive negative social experiences while incarcerated, can be detrimental to cognitive and psychological growth, leading to higher rates of recidivism when/if released (Haney, 2001).
            Identity development is a staple of early adulthood and can be negatively influenced and neglected when experiencing incarceration. Berk (2007) states that delinquency is a common occurrence during early adulthood. With longer socially accepted transitions into adulthood, youth may normalize delinquent acts and create believed positive connections between social acceptedness and crime. Relational-Cultural theory posits that throughout our lives, we move towards equally empowering relationships, and help to make meaning through our personal experiences (Miller & Stiver, 1997). Young inmates have vastly different contexts to work with and reflect on concerning personal actions and overall identity. Most inmates regardless of age, can share the idea of survival, and will often promote further delinquent acts while in prison such as aggressive avoidant strategies, and necessary changes in identity to make it through safely. Prison systems can also often hinder the support of, and connections to family members, creating an environment that fosters isolation and a lack of feedback from peers, as well as strict rules and regulations. This could cause a disconnect or a negative reframing of one’s own identity in connection to larger institutions as well as others in and out of the system, as well as a lack of motivation to seek feedback from healthy, reliable sources instead of negatively influential ones. With this, beliefs and the adherence to conforming, negative cultural standards of the prison system may increase.
            Adapting to new experiences can be extremely difficult in any situation, but imprisonment can lead to irreversible psychological effects on youth when released. These impacts can include a diminished sense of self-worth, emotional anesthetization, alienation and psychological distancing, hypervigilant behaviors, distrust and suspicion of others, and post-traumatic pain from imprisonment (Haney, 2001). Such psychological changes can greatly affect the overall well-being of young parents who are incarcerated, and in doing so,  can further hinder the psychological, emotional, and cognitive growth of their own children and the relationships or bonds they share with them. As described by Haney (2001, p. 16), “Parents who return from long periods of incarceration who are still dependent on institutional structures and routines cannot be expected to effectively organize the lives of their children or exercise the initiative and autonomous decision-making that parenting requires”. Consequently, their children may develop a lack of trust with others and their parents and might struggle with initiating autonomous thinking and decision-making.
            Those in their early adult years also have higher rates of unmet health needs, even more so during imprisonment. Mental illness and developmental disabilities are highly prevalent among young inmates. Forty-six percent of newly detained juveniles have urgent medical needs that require immediate attention, while seventy percent of incarcerated youth have at least one psychiatric disorder (Barnert et al, 2017, p. 2). There is a de-emphasis on mental and physical health treatment within corrective facilities and prisons overall, which has led to an unhealthy cycle of behavioral patterns and mental decline for younger inmates (Haney, 2001, p. 2). For those who are mentally ill and end up in segregated units, many prisoners face worse-off conditions than those who are capable of understanding their conditions and mental illnesses. This is especially true in cases where prisoners are placed in levels of mental health care that are not intense enough, and begin to refuse to take their medication (Barnert et al, 2017). When mental illnesses take hold of their lives, young inmates can enter a vicious cycle of hostile and aggressive behavior, break prison rules, and end up in isolation to control their perceived problem behavior. Once in punitive housing, this regression can go undetected for considerable periods of time before they again receive more closely monitored mental health care (Barnert et al, 2017). This cycle is very repetitive for many young inmates, and if they are imprisoned for longer than a year, can be fatal due to higher suicidality.   
            Social stigma surrounds both incarceration and post-incarceration and with few rehabilitative and re-entry programs, many inmates may face economic and social disadvantages after re-entry into society (Moore et al, 2015, p. 1). Incarceration can disrupt social networks, and post-incarceration can delay or negate career opportunities and learning opportunities/experiences for those in early adulthood. Social stigma also contributes to feelings of isolation, fears around judgment and rejection, and necessary survival tactics. A lack of support and connection with peers and family members can also be detrimental to regaining stability and growth after re-entry. With little social and economic credentials and added social stigma, research has shown that these deficits can lead to higher rates of drug abuse and fatal overdose, post-traumatic stress, and higher rates of recidivism, as a product of connecting with those who are more accepting and understanding (e.g. other inmates, prison management, etc) of one’s personal choices and can relate in identity (Moore et al, 2015, p. 13).

Middle Adulthood:

            The number of incarcerated adults between the ages of 40 and 65 have been steadily and rapidly increasing. Over the last few decades, the rates of incarceration of those 55 and older have risen by 278% in comparison to a 53% increase for the overall prison population (Greene et al, 2017).  With this comes greater health risks, cognitive decline, social disconnectedness, and higher rates of negative psychological effects. Some life experiences and backgrounds can also contribute to these negative effects while in prison, such as lifetime drug use/abuse and withdraw, lower SES and homelessness, and a lack of family support and community ties (Greene et al, 2017). Cultural beliefs and social stigma may also contribute to these effects, especially those who are apart of a minority group.
            Research has shown that those in midlife experience many physical changes, and are at greater risk health risk if not properly treated and/or caught during early onset. Some examples of this would be issues of vision and hearing loss, skeletal degeneration, reproductive changes, and further enduring chronic disabilities (Berk, 2017). Some diseases like type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, some forms of cancer, and other degenerative diseases are more prevalent and common with this population of adults. Because incarcerated adults have even more limited access to the appropriate healthcare and daily life needs, this leads to what some researchers call an “accelerated aging” process (Greene et al, 2017) , in which physical degeneration happens more rapidly increasing risk of early mortality. This can lead to those in midlife experiencing more geriatric-like health risks and an inability to complete one’s Activities of Daily Living (i.e. eating, bathing, toileting, or dressing), resulting in older adults being treated by the criminal justice and prison systems as geriatric inmates. Exercise and dieting is incredibly important for addressing health concerns and stress management for those in midlife. Those who are incarcerated have limited access to diet and exercise regimens, and most programs that are already in place can be hugely unaccommodating and potentially harmful to overall health concerns.
            Cognitively, information processing skills decline during midlife, making it difficult to process and respond accordingly to conflict, as well hinders overall decision-making and judgement. One theory suggests that this is due to the withering of myelin coating on the neural fibers within the cerebral cortex leads to the degeneration of neural connections more often in the prefrontal cortex (Lu et al., 2013). Another suggests that those in midlife suffer from a higher amount of information loss, causing the brain to process new information more slowly than before. With more complex tasks come more steps to process through, which can further deterioration of information with each step. Incarceration provides an unhealthy environment and little health care treatment in general, as well as fewer opportunities for healthy, and stable, cognitive training/learning and growth (Maschi et al, 2017) . Prison systems also promote a state of isolation for most inmates, especially with those with more aggressive and violent behavior. This leads to further disconnection from and the will to engage with new information, ideas, and perspectives.
            Some research has found an association between race and health among middle age adults who are incarcerated. For instance, African American men who are older and incarcerated appear to be more resilient than white men (Maschi et al, 2017) . They also appear to cope better with stress related to incarceration than white men, which may in turn affect other physical and mental health outcomes (Maschi et al, 2017). Some of this evidence points towards greater levels of mental hardiness and resilience, and demonstrates stronger skills in adjustment and adaptation to stressful and new experiences, promoting better future health for those in middle age.
            According to Erikson’s theory of lifespan development, middle-aged adults face issues of stagnation and generativity. Generativity can involve connecting with others (intimacy) in many aspects of life, giving back to one’s community through volunteering or career endeavors (identity), as well as teaching and guiding the next generation overall (Erikson, 1950). Stagnation on the hand, or becoming more self-indulgent and self-centered, greatly affects overall happiness, social connectedness, and cognitive well-being. Incarcerated adults are less likely to feel connected with those around them before and after re-entry due to social stigmas centering on crime, and may have lost family members and loved ones during incarceration. This can result in little desire to give back and to help the next generation succeed, as well as falling back on more negative influences and routines out of comfort and need for structure. Without care and support from family and community ties during or after incarceration, stress management skills can decline while mental illness rates increase such as anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders, to name a few.  
            Middle-aged adults also face familial losses, transitions, and internal struggles often during this stage of life. Launching children happens more often during this stage, and can be incredibly difficult for those who are isolated from their families due to incarceration. Strict prison rules and regulations on visitations and phone calls can keep parents disconnected from their children greatly. This can be highly important to middle-aged adults (Berk, 2007). If children deviate from adult responsibilities without parental guidance and care, it can lead to a strain on parents - whether they are incarcerated or not - as well as higher risks of delinquency, substance use/abuse, and negative social experiences (Berk, 2017). Grandparenthood can also add further strain on incarcerated adults, especially if they’re not able to help their children take care of their young ones, connect and bond with their grandchildren, and guide their children towards more effective parenting strategies. Although adults are living longer each generation, the worry and potential loss of parents is still largely concerning for those who are middle-aged. Without the frequency of quality time and contact, and the ability to care for aging parents, already stressful relationships can become more strained, as well as promote feelings of sadness, anger, isolation, judgement, and worry while incarcerated and upon re-entry.

Late Adulthood:

In late adulthood, individuals experience the deterioration of both physical and mental health, and they do so at higher rates when incarcerated (Emmanuel et al., 2017). One reason for greater declines in the health of the incarcerated elderly is that they do not have easy access to healthcare. In many cases, there is a co-morbid between physical and mental illness for individuals who are incarcerated (Emmanuel et al., 2017). Sentence length and the type of prison facility that an individual is placed in also influence the severity of incarceration’s negative impacts.

Unaccommodating environments create complications for individuals in late adulthood. Older adults who are not incarcerated can receive the care that they need, including end-of-life care (i.e. hospice services, nursing homes). Additionally, prisons do not screen individuals for cognitive impairments when they arrive (Cipriani et al., 2016).  The imprisoned elderly are separated into the same categories as those who have been imprisoned for most of their lives and those who are serving their first legal offenses. Specifically, the number of elderly men being imprisoned is not increasing substantially, however, the length of sentences for those who are elderly is increasing globally (Cipriani et al., 2016). Elderly with conditions like Dementia and Alzheimer's are at a greater risk of becoming incarcerated because they can exhibit socially abnormal behavior that can also quickly become violent. Programs in place for prisoners of all different backgrounds utilize exercise and education (Cipriani et al., 2016). People who are in late adulthood aren't able to perform these tasks as efficiently as those who are younger. They are at a greater disadvantage and suffer from not being able to finish the tasks required of them by prison facilities. There is a huge bias against the elderly in prisons as prison environments rarely ever take into consideration those that are elderly.

Maintaining order is a major reason why activity programs are in place in prisons. This social structure and functioning can greatly influence the effects that prison life has on inmates. High levels of strain with little to no coping skills increase the deviance levels of inmates (Toman, Cochran, Cochran, and Bales 2015). In addition, the longer that people are imprisoned, the longer they view the justice system to be unfair system if there is a lack of honesty within trials. Older adults have the potential to be in the prison system for longer, and could residually have less respect for the justice system. Incarcerated individuals who have been in prison consistently for many months and years do not suddenly demonstrate increases in misconduct, however, if there were prior engagements planned for them they experience greater misconduct (Toman et al., 2015). What inmates bring to prison environments affects the ways in which they are able to adjust. The strategies they have at their disposal to navigate their environment can impact their adjustment.  

Major Depressive Disorder is the leading mental illness diagnosis among elderly prison inmates. Many times there are comorbidities among the elderly including physical conditions like arthritis, or sensory deficits (Emmanuel et al., 2017). In research studies on incarcerated individuals, there is a lack of variety of SES, which neglects the possible influence that it could have on such comorbidities. Research designs tend to look at inmates who are of a low-income status (Emmanuel et al., 2017). There could be different results when examining a wide array of income and wealth statuses (Emmanuel et al., 2017). Regardless of the lack of research, it is apparent that elderly inmates have a harder time adjusting to prison life because of the strains that it puts on the human body.

Frequently, there is a need for the medical treatment of elderly prisoners. However, like with healthcare services provided to incarcerated pregnant women, the medical team provided is often not trustworthy in the eyes of elderly inmates. Many prisoners refuse treatment in prison because they would rather see a more trustworthy doctor (Heidari et al., 2017). Also, many prisoners try to hide that they are sick because they could lose their prison salary pay if they cannot work. Sick prisoners are also separated in prison confined to a room with other sick people and told to lay in a bed all day (Heidari et al., 2017). Prisons often only consider inmates to be sick if they are running a fever and show other symptoms. If an inmate is not running a fever, then they are considered to be in good enough health. Prisons are also not ideal for elderly inmates, as they lack equipment and sanitation. Those who have health issues such as asthma struggle because of the lack of air control in the facility. There are also instances of issues with mold in prison environments, which only serves to worsen the general health of inmates (Heidari et al., 2017).

In all elderly individuals, a sense of a positive environment that attends to the basic needs of an inmate is beneficial. Many different negative mental and emotional symptoms can develop for those in late adulthood when their environment is not helpful to their needs. Environments for the elderly need to be adapted to help learning and to enhance their extra care for sensory needs that may be needed due to the physical conditions of inmates  (Berk, 2014). Immune system responses are more likely to malfunction by turning against body tissue in those who are older. Many have issues with muscular degeneration and central vision center challenges (Berk, 2014). Feelings of hopelessness generally arise in aging individuals, which increases when an individual does not feel adequately cared for. Older populations tend to prefer housing that is reflective of their aging process, and that provides the resources and caretaking quality necessary to meet basic needs (Berk, 2014). Stress typically declines when individuals remain in familiar settings as they age because they are able to have feelings of being more in control over their settings. Prison environments obviously do not function as environments in which the elderly feel comfortable in daily life, however, many things can be done to help improve prison environments so that they can be adaptive to all types of prisoners.   

Conclusion:

Incarceration is often associated with long-term and short-term implications on the lives of the family members. With that said, ex-offenders often experience difficulties rebuilding their lives after incarceration. When it comes to the family, parents struggle to regain custody of their children hence creating a traumatic environment for their day-to-day lives.  The findings of this investigation are aligned with identifying the most effective means of treating the physical and mental ailments affecting incarcerated individuals. By doing so, counselors can reduce the intensity of crime and social decay within the community. Future therapists are compelled to understand which members of the family experience the most detrimental implications of incarceration. For instance, during the prenatal and infancy stages of child development, detained mothers suffer serious emotional trauma as a result of high-risk births and potential miscarriages. On top of that, parent-child separation is usually followed by depression which can hamper psychological maturity in parents and children. Accordingly, it is common for children to follow their incarcerated parents' footpaths by delving into truancy and early criminal behavior. In a nutshell, incarceration impedes the development of one’s self-identity which makes it difficult for acquitted inmates to resume their normal lives. Psychological treatment for criminal offenders and ex-offenders should be directed towards mitigating social stigma and reducing recap felonies. The unbiased disposition of counselors allows them to help ex-offenders without being impeded by the lens of judgment. With that done, therapists will be considered as advocates for initiating positive change in prison systems thereby giving ex-offenders a better chance for successfully re-integrating themselves back into the community.

References

Arditti, J. A. (2012). Parental incarceration and the family: Psychological and social effects of

imprisonment on children, parents, and caregivers. New York, NY: New York University Press.

Bard, E., Knight, M., & Plugge, E. (2016). Perinatal health care services for imprisoned pregnant

women and associated outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth, 16,

1–19. https://doi-org.proxy006.nclive.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1080-z

Berk, L. E. (2007). Development through the lifespan. 4th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Barnert, E. S., Dudovitz, R., Nelson, B. B., Coker, T. R., Biely, C., Li, N., & Chung, P. J. (2017).

How does incarcerating young people affect their adult health outcomes?. Pediatrics, 139(2), e20162624.

Cipriani, G., Danti, S., Carlesi, C., & Di Fiorino, M. (2017). Old and dangerous: Prison and

dementia. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 51, 40–44.

Eddy, J. M., & Poehlmann, J. (2010). Children of incarcerated parents: A handbook for

researchers and practitioners. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute Press.

Frank, A. (2017). Why Reimagining Prison for Young Adults Matters. Retrieved from
            https://www.vera.org/blog/why-reimagining-prison-for-young-adults-matters

Fritz, S., & Whiteacre, K. (2015). Prison nurseries: Experiences of incarcerated women during

pregnancy. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 55(1), 1-20.

doi:10.1080/10509674.2015.1107001

Goshin, L. S., Byrne, M. W., & Blanchard-Lewis, B. (2014). Preschool outcomes of children

who lived as infants in a prison nursery. The Prison Journal, 94(2), 139–158. https://doi-org.proxy006.nclive.org/10.1177/0032885514524692

Greene, M., Ahalt, C., Stijacic-Cenzer, I., Metzger, L., & Williams, B. (2018). Older adults in
            jail: high rates and early onset of geriatric conditions. Health & justice, 6(1), 3.
            doi:10.1186/s40352-018-0062-9

Harris, Y. R., Graham J. A., & Oliver Carpenter, G. J. (2010). Children of incarcerated parents

theoretical developmental clinical issues. New York; London: Springer.

Haney, C. (2001). From Prison to Home: The Effect of Incarceration and Reentry on Children,
            families, and communities. The Psychological Impact of Incarceration: Implications for
            Post-Prison Adjustment. US Department of Health & Human Services (ASPE).
            https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/psychological-impact-incarceration-implications-
            post-prison-adjustment

Heard-Garris, N., Winkelman, T. N., Choi, H., Miller, A. K., Kan, K., Shlafer, R., & Davis, M.

M. (2018). Health care use and health behaviors among young adults with a history of parental incarceration. Pediatrics, 142(3), e20174314.

Heidari, R., Wangmo, T., Galli, S., Shaw, D. M., Elger, B. S., Handtkea, V., & Bretschneider, W. (2017). Accessibility of prison healthcare for elderly inmates, a qualitative assessment.

Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 52, 223–228.

Howard, D. L., Strobino, D., Sherman, S. G., & Crum, R. M. (2010). Maternal Incarceration

During Pregnancy and Infant Birthweight. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 15(4),

478-486. doi:10.1007/s10995-010-0602-y

Kuhlik, L. (2017). Pregnancy Behind Bars: The Constitutional Argument for Reproductive

Healthcare Access in Prison. Harvard Civil Rights - Civil Liberties Law Review, 52(2),

501-535. Retrieved February 5, 2019, from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.proxy006.nclive.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=17&sid=cdf071e0-8c50-44c2-93a9-67f617daf292@sessionmgr4007&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ==#AN=124022310&db=bth

Lee, R. D., Fang, X., & Luo, F. (2013). The impact of parental incarceration on the physical and

mental health of young adults. Pediatrics, 131(4), e1188-e1195.

Lu, P. H., Lee, G. J., Tishler, T. A., Meghpara, M., Thompson, P. M., & Bartzokis, G. (2013).
            Myelin breakdown mediates age‐related slowing in cognitive processing speed in
            healthy elderly men. Brain and Cognition, 81, 131–138.

Majekodunmi, O. E., Obadeji, A., Oluwole, L. O., & Oyelami, O. (2017). Depression and

associated physical co-morbidities in elderly prison inmates. International Journal of

Mental Health, 46(4), 269–283.

Miller, J., & Stiver, I. (1997). The healing connection: How women form relationships in therapy and life. Boston: Beacon Press

Moore, K. E., Stuewig, J. B., & Tangney, J. P. (2015). The Effect of Stigma on Criminal Offenders’ Functioning: A Longitudinal Mediational Model. Deviant behavior, 37(2), 196–218. doi:10.1080/01639625.2014.1004035

Murray, J., Bijleveld, C. C. J. H., Farrington, D. P., Loeber, R. (2014). Effects of parental

incarceration on children: Cross-national comparative studies. Washington, DC:

American Psychological Association.

Perry, William G., Jr. (1970), Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston).

Sawyer, S. M., Afifi, R. A., Bearinger, L. H., Blakemore, S. J., Dick, B., Ezeh, A. C., & Patton,

G. C. (2012). Adolescence: a foundation for future health. The Lancet, 379(9826), 1630-1640.

Shader, M. (2003). Risk Factors for Delinquency: An Overview. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/jjjournal_2003_2/index.html

Solinger, R. (2010). Pregnancy, Motherhood, and Loss in Prison. In Interrupted Life: Experiences

of incarcerated women in the United States (pp. 89-93). Berkeley, CA: University of

California Press.

Stein, D. J. (2010, July/August). Babies behind bars: Nurseries for incarcerated mothers and their

children. Children's Voice, 19(4), 10-13.

Tina Maschi, Qiuhu Shi, Kirsten Forseth, Pedro Laureano & Deborah Viola (2017) Exploring the
            Association between Race and Health among Older Adults Who Are Incarcerated, Social
            Work in Public Health, 32:3, 143-153, DOI: 10.1080/19371918.2016.1160342

Toman, E. L., Cochran, J. C., Cochran, J. K., & Bales, W. D. (2015). The implications of

sentence length for inmate adjustment to prison life. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43,

510–521

Western, B., & Smith, N. (2018). Formerly Incarcerated Parents and Their Children.

Demography,55(3), 823-847.

http://dx.doi.org.proxy006.nclive.org/10.1007/s13524-018-0677-4