Search results

This paper aims to explore the cessation of injecting amongst male drug users when in prison in England and uncovers what influenced this behaviour and why.

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 30 male drug users on release from prison to explore what happened to their injecting drug use in prison. The research was conducted from a pragmatic harm reduction approach using grounded theory.

Not injecting in prison was identified as a pertinent finding and nine overarching themes accounted for this decline. The themes often overlapped with one another, highlighting how the decision not to inject when last in prison was multi‐factorial. Running throughout the themes were participants' concerns regarding the health and social risks attributed to injecting in prison, alongside an appreciation of some of the rehabilitative measures and opportunities offered to injecting drug users when in prison.

This qualitative research offers an updated perspective on illicit drug injecting in prison in England from the view of drug users since health and prison policy changes in prescribing and practice. It contributes to evidence suggesting that prisons can be used as a time of reprieve and recovery from injecting drug use.

This chapter draws on data from young men¹ interviewed on two occasions; first as ‘children’ aged 17 years within juvenile Young Offenders’ Institutions (YOIs); and then again as ‘adults’ aged 18 years within young adult/adult prisons about their experiences of transitions. Ethical reviews typically reflect age-determined constructions of child/adult status and those aged under 18 years are deemed to be more ‘vulnerable’, thus attracting more scrutiny from research ethics committees (Economic and Social Research Council [ESRC], 2020). This concern heightens the methodological difficulties of prison research, as incarceration renders children ‘doubly vulnerable’ (Jacobson & Talbot, 2017). Such institutions may be obstructive and access must be obtained from a series of gatekeepers. Negotiating the balance between participants’ rights and their best interests (Heptinstall, 2000; Thomas & O’Kane, 1998), along with gatekeepers’ priorities can be challenging. This chapter outlines how tricky ethical tensions were balanced with participants’ best interests in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (United Nations, 1989). Despite the difficulties encountered, the researcher (J.P.) took the view that there would be ‘ethical implication[s] of NOT conducting the research’ (Girling, 2017, p. 38). The chapter offers recommendations for how researchers might conduct ethically sensitive research with similar cohorts of young people.

This article aims to describe the personal experience and ethical dilemmas that the author encountered when conducting qualitative research on a highly sensitive topic, i.e. interviews with offenders convicted of child pornography.

This study uses an autoethnographic approach to describe and reflect on my personal experience, emotions and ethical dilemmas when undertaking sensitive research that examines illegal acts.

Ethical dilemmas and emotional challenges highlighted refer to the issue of access to useful empirical material, conducting interviews with convicted offenders in prison environments, the complexity surrounding confidentiality when interviewing offenders about their criminal activities, vulnerability and insecurity for the researcher and emotional challenges for the researcher when listening to the offenders’ stories describing serious crimes against children.

This article contributes with insights and reflections on conducting qualitative research with a marginalized and stigmatized group in prison environments.

Those in prison have expert knowledge of issues affecting their health and wellbeing. The purpose of this paper is to report on work undertaken with male prisoners. This paper presents learning and findings from the process of engaging imprisoned men as peer researchers.

The peer researcher approach offers an emic perspective to understand the experience of being in prison. The authors established the peer research role as an educational initiative at a long-stay prison in Wales, UK to determine the feasibility of engaging imprisoned men as peer researchers. Focus groups, interviews and questionnaires were used by the peer researchers to identify the health and wellbeing concerns of men in prison.

The project positively demonstrated the feasibility of engaging imprisoned men as peer researchers. Four recurring themes affecting health and wellbeing for men in a prison vulnerable persons unit were identified: communication, safety, respect and emotional needs. Themes were inextricably linked demonstrating the complex relationships between prison and health.

This was the first prison peer-research project to take place in Wales, UK. It demonstrates the value men in prison can play in developing the evidence base around health and wellbeing in prison, contributing to changes within the prison to improve health and wellbeing for all.

Prisons are uniquely challenging working environments. Staff are often exposed to direct and indirect trauma, impacting negatively on their mental well-being. Due to the limited research into prison staff experience, this paper aims to explore what staff find most challenging, how they cope, what support they would like and rewarding aspects of their work.

This service development project was facilitated through a staff well-being event. A qualitative approach was used and 74 staff members provided anonymised responses. An inductive and data-driven approach was used to analyse the data, and the trustworthiness of the analysis was considered using criteria established by Lincoln and Guba (1985).

Thematic analysis identified six themes, namely, the challenging nature of the work, interactions with prisoners, staff interactions, inadequate resources, staff support and development and coping strategies. Key findings include managing distress, self-harm and violence and limited resources presenting challenges. Role variety and opportunities to support prisoners were reported as positive. A variety of coping strategies were identified. Wider availability of supervision and reflective practice was suggested by staff.

Recommendations for increased staff support are made. Suggestions for future research investigating methods to increase rewarding aspects of work within prisons are given.

This analysis adds to the limited body of qualitative research investigating prison staff experiences; in particular, aspects of the work that they find rewarding such as the role variety and opportunities to make positive changes to prisoners’ lives. Novel coping strategies were identified, including cognitive reframing and behavioural strategies for managing stress, which could be encouraged to increase resilience.

Purpose – This chapter explores the question of whether provincial prisons in Western Canada might serve as a breeding ground for radical extremism.

Methodology/Approach – A large team of researchers from the University of Alberta Prison Project conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 587 incarcerated men and women, as well as 131 correctional officers (COs) located in four provincial prisons in Western Canada. Interviews involved a series of wide-ranging questions about prison life, but also prodded on topics relating to radicalized messaging or recruitment in the prisons where the participants lived or worked.

Findings – The authors learned that unlike other jurisdictions, radicalization was not common in the institutions they studied. The authors identified several factors that appear to inhibit the emergence of extremist radicalization in this research setting: (a) the existing prisoner subculture; (b) prisoners’ beliefs in Canadian multiculturalism and understandings of Canadian race relations; and (c) COs’ efforts to single out and isolate ostensible extremists.

Originality/Value – There is no empirical research on prison radicalization in Canada, and little independent research conducted inside of Canadian prisons more generally. The findings of this study contributes to an ongoing discussion about radicalization in prison and identify factors that appear to limit the prospect that prisons might become breeding grounds for radical extremism.

The purpose of this study is to describe what a sample of men in prison believe works well for the delivery of prison-based group alcohol and other drug (AoD) treatment programs. The authors hope the findings will help inform future practise in AoD program delivery in prison.

A qualitative research paper reporting on a thematic analysis of in-depth interviews with 30 male prisoners on their perspectives on AoD group treatment approaches.

Results indicate that matching readiness and motivation to start treatment is important for group success. Program content must be relevant and delivered by empathic facilitators who maintain confidentiality. It would be advantageous if one of the program facilitators was a peer with personal experience of overcoming an AoD use disorder.

According to the authors’ knowledge, this is one of few qualitative studies into the delivery of AoD treatment for men in prison and the only study of its kind in Australia. The consumer perspective is an important element in improving quality of treatment provision.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the components of a high-quality prison healthcare system and the impact, ten-years on, of the transfer of accountability in England, from a justice ministry to a health ministry.

A rapid evidence review was undertaken, which included a review of 82 papers and qualitative interviews with key informants. The concepts and themes identified were summarised and analysed through a framework analysis, designed to improve population outcomes and address health inequalities. The use of a rapid evidence assessment, rather than a systematic review methodology, the use of abstracts (rather than full-text articles) to extract the data, and limiting the search strategy to articles published in the English language only might mean that some relevant research papers and themes were not identified. The need for the evidence to be produced within a limited time frame and with limited resources determined these pragmatic approaches.

The review found that English prison healthcare has undergone “transformation” during this period, leading to increased quality of care through organisational engagement, professionalisation of the healthcare workforce, transparency, use of evidence-based guidance and responsiveness of services. The review also highlighted that there is still room for improvement, for example, relating to the prison regime and the lack of focus on early/preventive interventions, as well as specific challenges from limited resources.

Time and resource constraints meant a rapid evidence review of papers in the English language was undertaken, rather than a systematic review. This might mean relevant papers have been missed. The review also only covered a small number of countries, which may limit the transferability of findings. The lack of quantitative data necessitated the use of qualitative data gathered from key informants. However, this enabled a good understanding of current practice.

The review findings support the World Health Organisation position on the value of integrated prison and public health systems in improving quality of healthcare. It also recommends future policy needs to take account of the “whole prison approach” recognising that healthcare in prisons cannot operate in isolation from the prison regime or the community.

This is unique research which has great value in supporting prison reform in England. It will also be of interest internationally due to the paucity of data in the published peer-reviewed literature on the impact of commissioning models on healthcare or health outcomes.

This paper aims to report findings about how prisoners experience and cope with COVID-19 restrictions, which can contribute to an understanding of how pandemic responses, and specifically the COVID-19 response, affect prisoners.

Data was collected through ethnographic fieldwork involving days of observations (N = 24) and the conduction of semi-structured interviews with prisoners (N = 30) in closed prisons and detentions in Denmark between May and December 2021. The transcribed interviews and field notes were processed and coded by using the software programme NVivo.

The data analysis reveals that the pains of imprisonment have been exacerbated to people incarcerated during the COVID-19 pandemic. To relieve pains of imprisonment, prisoners turn to censoriousness as an informal coping strategy, where they complain about inconsistency and injustice in the prison’s COVID-19 prevention strategy to reveal the prison system itself as a rule-breaking institution. The prisoners criticise the prison management for using COVID-19 as an excuse, treating prisoners unjustly or not upholding the COVID-19 rules and human rights. Furthermore, principles of justice and equality are also alleged by some prisoners who contemplate the difficulty in treating all prisoners the same.

More research will be needed to create a full picture of how prisoners cope with pandemic responses. Further research could include interviews with people working inside prisons.

In a Scandinavian context, to the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to apply an ethnographic approach in exploring prison life during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Purpose – This chapter discusses the utility of engaging in participatory action research (PAR) methodologies to investigate prison climates within correctional settings. In doing so, facilitators and barriers accompanying this research approach are highlighted.

Methodology/Approach – PAR methodologies were adopted to investigate living and working conditions within a Mid-Atlantic prison. In line with this approach, members of the incarcerated population and staff within the institution were selected to be members of the research team.

Findings – Following the PAR framework to studying prison climates, several barriers and facilitators in conducting this research were identified and are presented to inform continued efforts investigating prison conditions and culture.

Originality/Value – Overall, a limited understanding of prison conditions, culture, and quality of life within correctional institutions exists. Moreover, a lack of attention has been devoted to improving working and living conditions behind the prison walls. Therefore, efforts to improve the prison environment are limited due to a lack of data about prison conditions and quality of life within these settings. PAR methodologies provide an important framework for addressing these gaps.