Prison Family Engagement Policies: A Multistate Systematic Review and Content Analysis

• Published date: 01 November 2024
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00328855241278183
• Author: Laceé N. Pappas,Nancy Rodriguez,H. Daniel Butler
• Date: 01 November 2024

Prison Family

Engagement Policies: A

Multistate Systematic

Review and Content

Analysis

Laceé N. Pappas

1

, Nancy Rodriguez

1

,

and H. Daniel Butler

2

Abstract

Opportunities for incarcerated persons to connect with their loved ones exist

in several forms. Yet, there is limited evidence documenting the scope of state

prison family engagement policies beyond visitation. To f‌ill this gap, a systematic

policy review and content analysis of nine state prison family engagement poli-

cies was conducted. The results provide evidence of both consistencies and

inconsistencies in policies across forms of prison contact, as well as opportuni-

ties and barriers for incarcerated persons. Important policy and practice take-

aways are discussed, particularly the need for more timely, transparent, and

clear policies regarding family engagement in correctional settings.

Keywords

prison contact, family engagement, correctional policies, prison, visitation

1

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA

2

Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Laceé N. Pappas, Department of Criminology, Law & Society, University of California,

Irvine, 2326 Social Ecology II, Irvine, CA 92697-7050, USA.

Email: Inpappas@uci.edu

Article

The Prison Journal

2024, Vol. 104(5) 547–570

© 2024 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00328855241278183

journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj

Introduction

Prisons should be places where family matters—not just for those seeking to

transition home—but for all who live and work in prisons. Consequently, a

comprehensive approach to prison reform and safety, health, and wellness

in correctional systems must include holistic models of family engagement.

Strong connections between incarcerated persons and their loved ones on

the outside have the potential to improve prison adjustment and community

reentry outcomes (Baker et al., 2022; Duwe & McNeeley, 2021).

Therefore, family engagement policies provide a salient landscape for the

possibility of enhancing or reducing strong social support networks. With

such a powerful opportunity to shape experiences of incarcerated persons’

links to their loved ones, state prison policies regarding family engagement

are thus responsible for gatekeeping these experiences.

Importantly, research on family engagement has largely focused on

in-person visitation (e.g., Baker et al., 2022; Cochran, 2012; Cochran &

Mears, 2013; Mears et al., 2012; Mitchell et al., 2016), excluding other

forms of engagement (e.g., phone and (e)mail contact, relevant program-

ming). Only recently have researchers included video visitation as part of

prison “visitation”research (e.g., Dallaire et al., 2021; Duwe & McNeeley,

2021; Muñiz et al., 2023; Murdoch & King, 2020). Yet, visitation is not

the only means by which incarcerated persons stay connected with their fam-

ilies. As such, a comprehensive exploration into family engagement in all its

forms, such as in-person visitation, video visitation, phone calls, e-mail, and

written mail, is necessary to provide an inclusive picture of all the contact

opportunities available to incarcerated persons.

Departmental policies and procedures are responsible for setting the expec-

tations and guidelines for how people in prison to connect with their loved

ones. Visitation was halted for an extended period during the COVID-19 pan-

demic, and such policies were altered several times over the last few years

(see Muñiz et al., 2023). Other reviews of state policies (e.g., Dallaire

et al., 2021; Muñiz et al., 2023) centered exclusively on the changes to

prison visitation policies before and after the pandemic. COVID-19 impacted

how prisons provided access to contact with families on the outside, including

expanding the use of alternative means of contact (e.g., video visits, e-mail),

as well as offering f‌inancial support (e.g., free phone calls and video visits

during the pandemic) (Dallaire et al., 2021). These policies created in

response to COVID-19 have shifted institutional strategies to ensure

contact with loved ones on the outsideis available to individuals in prison,

even in the event of another health crisis. An examination of the scope of

these contact policies beyond prison visitation has yet to be conducted.

548 The Prison Journal 104(5)