Search results

Prisoners with substance use disorder (SUD) are at risk of mental health problems. Given the common co-occurring of psychopathic traits with SUDs, probably because of underlying impulsive traits (Ellingson et al., 2018), this study aims to examine the relation between psychopathy (impulsive antisociality and fearless dominance) and the functioning of incarcerated individuals with SUD. The authors investigated whether impulsivity (motor, nonplanning and attentional) can account for the relationship between one psychopathy facet (impulsive antisociality) and craving and mental health problems.

The authors assessed self-reported impulsivity, psychopathy, craving and mental health problems in 121 male incarcerated individuals with SUD and calculated cross-sectional linear regression analyses and mediation models.

Impulsive antisociality was positively related to all impulsivity facets, craving and mental health problems. Attentional impulsivity mediated the relationship of impulsive antisociality with craving and mental health problems. Fearless dominance was related to lower attentional and nonplanning impulsivity, craving and mental health problems.

Future studies should investigate these relations in longitudinal studies and evaluate tailored approaches, for example, mindfulness interventions.

Interventions to reduce craving and improve mental health might be important for those who display self-centered, antisocial behavior but are less relevant for those with fearless, dominant interpersonal behavior. Addressing attentional impulsivity may be of special interest in this regard.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study was the first to investigate the mediating role of different impulsivity facets for the association of impulsive antisociality with craving and with mental health problems in incarcerated individuals with SUD.

Re-entry refers to the process of transitioning back into society after incarceration, and it is a complex phenomenon that requires further exploration. Therefore, this study aims to identify the readiness for re-entry among pre-release prisoners in Sarawak, Malaysia.

Using Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory as the theoretical foundation, quantitative place-based research was conducted among 384 pre-release prisoners in Kuching, Sri Aman, Sibu, Miri, Bintulu and Limbang prisons.

This study’s results indicated that most respondents were Malay male offenders between the ages of 25 and 29, Malaysian citizens, single and had completed their education up to the upper secondary level. Most respondents had multiple prior convictions (52.3%), were convicted for drug-related offences (50.3%), had served sentences ranging from two to five years (56.0%) and were scheduled for release in 2023 (60.7%). The findings also demonstrated that factors such as personal development, perceived employability, social development and health development significantly predict readiness for re-entry among pre-release prisoners [F(4, 379) = 96.269, p < 0.01].

The findings of this study provide place-based evidence for the state government to understand the prisoner profile for further policy intervention measures and to enhance the personal development, perceived employability, social development and health development of pre-release prisoners. Given that most offenses were drug-related, it is crucial to highlight the state government’s need to invest in evidence-based drug treatment programmes. Synergy among different stakeholders is important to devise appropriate drug treatment programmes tailored to the current needs of the prison population to ensure successful reintegration into society and to actualise their potential.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research study conducted in Sarawak, Malaysia, that examined re-entry readiness among pre-release prisoners. It contributes to the knowledge pool by providing place-based evidence that takes into account readiness for re-entry among pre-release prisoners in Sarawak, Malaysia, from an Asian perspective to promote the attainment of SDG16.

Following the ‘Sarkozy’ era (2007–2012), France has engaged in ‘zero-tolerance’ policies, which have brought an increasing number of people into the criminal justice system (CJS). In an already extremely impoverished CJS, these policies have led to serious financial problems and have made an already existing prison overcrowding problem worse. Consequently, the CJS has gradually opted for a McDonald (Ritzer, 2019; Robinson, 2019) type of offender processing, whether in prosecutor-led procedures (representing roughly half of all penal procedures: Ministry of Justice, 2019) or in the sentencing phase (Danet, 2013). A similar trend has been found in probation and in prisoner release (in French: ‘sentences’ management).

The prison and probation services, which merged in 1999, have since then been in a position to benefit from the 1958 French Republic Constitution, which places the executive in a dominant position and notably allows it to draft the bills presented to a rather passive legislative power (Rousseau, 2007) and even to enjoy its own set of normative powers (‘autonomous decrees’ – Hamon & Troper, 2019). By way of law reforming (2009, 2014, and 2019 laws), the prison and probation services have thus embraced the McDonaldisation ethos. Their main obsession has been to early release as many prisoners as possible in order to free space and to accommodate more sentenced people. To do so, the prison services have created a series of so-called ‘simplified’ early release procedures, where prisoners are neither prepared for nor supported through release, where they are deprived of agency and where due process and attorney advice are removed. Behind a pretend rehabilitative discourse, the executive is only interested in efficiently flushing people out of prison; not about re-entry efficacy. As Ritzer (2019) points out, McDonaldisation often leads to counter-productive or absurd consequences. In the case of early release, the stubborn reality is that one cannot bypass actually doing the rehabilitative and re-entry work. I shall additionally argue that not everything truly qualifies as an early release measure (Ostermann, 2013). Only measures which respect prisoners’ agency prepare them for their release, which support them once they are in the community, which address their socio-psychological and criminogenic needs, and which are pronounced in the context of due process and defence rights truly qualify as such. As it is, French ‘simplified’ release procedures amount to McRe-entry and mass nothingness.

The study aimed to identify and define core components of Throughcare. The global prison population has reached its highest level to date (11.5 million), with comparative data on recidivism unavailable. Despite the global shift away from punitive and towards rehabilitative approaches, reintegration programming (Throughcare) is limited, ill-resourced or non-existent in many countries.

This study conducted a global e-Delphi consensus study of professionals working in prison and correctional services to define critical components of effective rehabilitation and reintegration programming. Consensus was defined a priori as 70% or more participants scoring an outcome from 7 to 9 and fewer than 15% scoring it 1 to 3.

Following a call for expression of interest circulated to the International Corrections and Prisons Association member list (n = 7282), 175 members agreed to partake in the e-Delphi rounds. In Round One, 130 individuals completed an online survey where 35 statements were scored by importance, each with opportunity to provide written feedback. A total of 33 statements exceeded the set threshold of consensus. Written feedback supported refinement and further development of statements in Round Two. A total of 108 individuals completed Round Two. A total of 39 out of the 40 statements exceeded the set threshold of consensus.

Consensus statements are useful to provide a shared understanding for inter-agency Throughcare partnerships, to inform national prison policies and to expand prison and support staff capacity building and programmes all over the world.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, to date, this is the first known attempt to elicit consensus from a broad range of professionals working in the field of prison and correctional services on core components of effective rehabilitation and reintegration programming.

This paper aims to illustrate by means of a case study how HKT-R Spider reference profiles of recidivists and non-recidivists may be supportive in leave decisions.

The authors describe what is known for recidivists and non-recidivists about changes in risk factors during treatment. The HKT-R Spider is introduced. By comparing a case study to group profiles, the authors illustrate how discussions about leave may be rationalised. From a study among 278 patients to explore the profiles, the authors report the inter agreement, and differences between recidivists and non-recidivists of the clinical HKT-R factors. Intra correlation coefficients, Wilcoxon signed ranks test and independent and paired t-tests are applied. To explore which combination of factors are discriminating between both groups, the authors also performed logistic regression analyses at six treatment stages.

The inter agreement reliability and internal consistency of the clinical HKT-R scale were acceptable to good in all six stages studied. The HKT-R Spider and profiles can be used to assist in evidence-informed decision-making about leave.

Globally recidivists had somewhat higher levels of clinical risk factors at all six decision moments, but the interpretation of HKT-R Spiders profiles should always be adapted to the individual’s context.

Applying the HKT-R Spider reference profiles on individual cases may structure and rationalize discussions lead to decisions based on clinical facts.