Structural discrimination and social stigma among individuals incarcerated for sexual offenses: Reentry across the rural–urban continuum

• Author: Breanne Pleggenkuhle,Beth M. Huebner,Kimberly R. Kras
• Date: 01 November 2019
• Published date: 01 November 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12226

Received: 19 February 2018 Revised: 18 July 2019 Accepted: 20 July2019

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12226

ARTICLE

Structural discrimination and social stigma among

individuals incarcerated for sexual offenses: Reentry

across the rural–urban continuum∗

Beth M. Huebner1Kimberly R. Kras2Breanne Pleggenkuhle3

1Department of Criminology and Criminal

Justice, University of Missouri—St. Louis

2Department of Criminal Justice, San Diego

State University

3Department of Criminology and Criminal

Justice, Southern Illinois

University—Carbondale

Correspondence

BethM. Huebner, University of Missouri-St.

Louis,One University Blvd., St. Louis, MO

63121.

Email:huebnerb@umsl.edu

Fundinginformation

NationalInstitute of Justice, Grant/Award

Number:2008-DD-BX-0002

∗Wededicate this paper to our good friend and

colleagueBob Bursik. Thank you for encour-

agingour exploration of this topic and for the

levityyou brought to our lives. The tribe has

spoken,and we promise to carr y the torch

forward.Thank you to Amanda Burgess-

Proctor,Stephanie Di Pietro, Jody Miller,

JosephSchafer, and the anonymous review-

ersfor their assistance on earlier versions of the

manuscript. This workwas supported by the

NationalInstitute of Justice under Grant [2008-

DD-BX-0002].The opinions and conclusions

expressedin this ar ticle are those of the authors

anddo not necessar ilyreflect the Depar tment of

Justice.

Abstract

The stigma associated with a felony conviction can impede

the reentry process, and emerging research findings

indicate that one’s community can amplify or temper the

mark of a criminal record. Researchers examining criminal

stigma have focused on individuals living in urban areas,

overlooking the experiences of persons outside these

communities. Using qualitative data collected from a

sample of men and women paroled for sexual offenses in

Missouri, we contrast how social and structural stigma

alter the reentry experiences for participants living in

communities along the rural and urban continuum. The

results show that the stigma of a sex offense conviction

was a near-universal experience and residence restrictions

stymied efforts to find housing. Residents of urban areas

and some large cities felt that the community offered

relative anonymity from stigma but the stress of their status

being discovered was omnipresent. Participants in rural

areas and small cities had less social privacy and reported

being shunned in the community, although strong social

ties did mitigate some of the consequences of stigma.

The results highlight the importance of considering place

when studying reentry and have implications for designing

correctional policies to address the needs of residents

returning to non–metropolitan locations.

KEYWORDS

community, qualitative research, rural, sex offenses, stigma

Criminology. 2019;57:715–738. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/crim © 2019 American Society of Criminology 715

716 HUEBNER ET AL.

The results of a large body of research highlight the effect of community context on crime, criminality,

and criminal justice organizations. Scholars have extended this work to describe the implications of

community and social structure for persons returning from prison (Kubrin & Stewart, 2006; Mears,

Wang, Hay, & Bales, 2008). Despite the breadth of scholarship on crime and place, extant work has

been focused on individuals returning from prison to urban communities, limiting the understanding

of whether similar processes occur in other places, such as rural contexts. Criminologists have begun

to address the urban–rural gap (Eason, Zucker, & Wildeman, 2017; Miller,2014; Ojha, Pape, & Burek,

2018), but the call for more research on the “urban–rural dimension” made by Osgood and Chambers

(2000, p. 82) two decades ago remains unanswered.

In this study, we extendt he findings frompr ior research in several ways. First, using qualitativedata

from a sample of men and women paroled to varied communities across the urban–rural landscape, we

consider how individuals experience stigma and how the features of place condition this lived experi-

ence. We adopt a broader measure of community instead of the rural and urban dichotomy common

in work of this type. Understanding place as a continuum is particularly important given the growing

overlap and flow of population and labor between urban and rural communities. The United States is

more spatially integrated than ever before, and traditional geographic divides have blurred (Lichter &

Ziliak, 2017).

Second, we focus on a unique justice-involved population—individuals convicted of a sexual

offense. Recent punitive policy mandates, like residence and registry restrictions, have primarily

resulted in separating individuals convicted of a sexual offense from everyother conviction type, mak-

ing the experience of stigma more pronounced and prolonged for this population (Edwards & Hensley,

2001; Soothill, 2010). Structural restrictions end up stigmatizing individuals by limiting where they can

live and work;t hus, place is inherentlylinked with the stigma of a sexual offense conviction (Burchfield

& Mingus, 2008; Socia, 2011). We drawon dat a fromin-dept h interviewswith a sample of 62 men and

women released on parole for a sex offenseconviction in Missouri to derive a deeper understanding of

how the social stigma of the “sex offender” and “felon” labels, and the structural stigma accompany-

ing residence restrictions, influences the reentry experience for individuals returning to communities

across the urban–rural spectrum.

1STIGMA OF A SEXUAL OFFENSE CONVICTION

Individuals convicted of crimes are stigmatized, or marked, in ways that inhibit them from fully rein-

tegrating into society (Jones et al., 1984; Pager, 2003). Persons with a criminal conviction face stigma

when seeking housing, employment, and social services, as well as by members of the community as

the “felon” label becomes their master status (Becker, 1963). Goffman (1963, p. 3) argued that social

stigma results when an individual is discredited “from a whole and usual person to a tainted, discounted

one.” Individuals, therefore, are stigmatized when “they are labeled, set apart and linked to undesirable

characteristics” that leads to status loss and discrimination (Link & Phelan, 2001, p. 369).

Social stigma results from interpersonal interactions and experiences, and it originates in the social

context and is reinforced through social exclusion by others (Major & O’Brien, 2005). Once an indi-

vidual acquires the stigmatized status, he or she may be shamed, shunned, or banished from social

engagement (Spencer, 2009). The stigmatized also experience “stigma consciousness” in which they

recognize the devaluation of the attributes they possess, and this is linked with a host of psychological

consequences, such as reduced self-worth, avoidance, and shame (Herek, 2009; Pinel, 1999). Labels

can result in diminished social opportunities and, ultimately, in a changed identity (Major & O’Brien,

2005).