Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prison Visits and Desistance: A Human Rights Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Perspectives on Desistance

Abstract

The important role of family contact in the desistance process is almost universally acknowledged and enshrined in policy on prison visits in England and Wales. In the first instance, this chapter challenges these dominant narratives and questions the extent to which such a discourse is legitimate and appropriate. With that in mind, the chapter then goes on to critically examine the operation of the Incentives and Earned Privileges (IEP) scheme in prisons. In National Offender Management Service (NOMS) policy, access to prison visits is simultaneously treated as a prisoners’ right under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 (ECHR) and a privilege under the IEP scheme; an incentive for good behaviour, a reward for complying with the regime and, most tellingly, a mechanism of punishment for not. This chapter argues that such a contradictory approach fundamentally undermines the desistance process potentially inhibiting post-release desistance from crime.

Mail, visits and food should be the three things that they do not fuck about with and they do, they always have done. (John, Prisoner, HMP Anon)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Both prisons’ names have been anonymised for the purpose of this study.

  2. 2.

    Despite current uncertainty at the time of writing as to the status of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the potential alternative of a British Bill of Rights the UK will still be bound not to act in contravention of Article 8 ECHR. In order to absolve themselves of this responsibility, the UK would have to withdraw from the ECHR, which is not currently on the political agenda.

  3. 3.

    For a fuller discussion of human rights and imprisonment, see Van Zyl Smit and Snacken (2009).

  4. 4.

    Application 41418/04.

  5. 5.

    The wording in the PSI does not accurately reflect the wording of Article 8 ECHR, i.e. the requirement is that everyone has the right to ‘respect’ for their private and family life.

  6. 6.

    The recently introduced ‘Entry level’ is not discussed here as it is of limited relevance.

References

  • Bales, W.D., and D.P. Mears. 2008. ‘Inmate Social Ties and the Transition to Society: Does Visitation Reduce Recidivism?.’ Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 45: 287–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunton-Smith, I., and K. Hopkins. 2013. ‘The Factors Associated with Proven Re-Offending Following Release from Prison: Findings from Waves 1 to 3 of SPCR.’ Results from the Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR) Longitudinal Cohort Study of Prisoners. London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christian, J. 2005. ‘Riding the Bus: Barriers to Prison Visitation and Family Management Strategies.’ Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 21(1): 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christian, J., and L.W. Kennedy. 2011. ‘Secondary Narratives in the Aftermath of Crime: Defining Family Members’ Relationships with Prisoners.’ Punishment and Society 13(4): 379–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, J.C. 2014. ‘Breaches in the Wall: Imprisonment, Social Support, and Recidivism.’ Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 51(2): 200–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Codd, H. 2008. In the Shadow of Prison: Families, Imprisonment and Criminal Justice. Cullompton: Willan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Codd, H., and D. Scott. 2010. Controversial Issues in Prisons. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comfort, M. 2007. Doing Time Together: Love and Family in the Shadow of the Prison. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyle, A. 2002. A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management. London: Kings College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, B. 2011. ‘Depth, Weight, Tightness: Revisiting the Pains of Imprisonment.’ Punishment and Society 13(5): 509–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, B. 2012. The Prisoner Society: Power, Adaptation and Social Life in an English Prison. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, B., J. Warr, P. Bennett, and A. Smith. 2013. ‘The Emotional Geography of Prison Life.’ Theoretical Criminology 18(1): 56–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ditchfield, J. 1994. Family Ties and Recidivism: Main Findings in the Literature (Research Bulletin No. 36). London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixey, R., and J. Woodall. 2012. ‘The Significance of “the Visit” in an English Category-B Prison: Views from Prisoners, Prisoners’ Families and Prison Staff.’ Community, Work and Family 15(1): 29–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duwe, G., and V. Clark. 2013. ‘Blessed Be the Social Tie that Binds: The Effects of Prison Visitation on Offender Recidivism.’ Criminal Justice Policy Review 24(3): 271–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girshick, L.B. 1996. Soledad Women: Wives of Prisoners Speak Out. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harper, G., and C. Chitty. 2005. The Impact of Corrections on Re-Offending: A Review of ‘What Works’. Home Office Research Study No. 291. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Inspectorate of Prisons, HM Inspectorate of Probation, and Ofsted. 2014. Resettlement Provision for Adult Offenders: Accommodation and Education, Training and Employment. London: HMIP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutton, M. 2016. ‘Visiting Time: A Tale of Two Prisons.’ Probation Journal 63(3): 347–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebling, A. with H. Arnold 2004. Prisons and Their Moral Performance: A Study of Values, Quality and Prison Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebling, A. 2008. ‘Incentives and Earned Privileges Revisited: Fairness, Discretion and the Quality of Prison Life.’ Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention 9(S1): 25–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Light, M., E. Grant, and K. Hopkins. 2013. ‘Gender Differences in Substance Misuse and Mental Health amongst Prisoners.’ Results from the Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR) Longitudinal Cohort Study of Prisoners. London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandela, N. 1994. Long Walk to Freedom. London: Abacus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maruna, S. 2001. Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild Their Lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • May, C., N. Sharma, and D. Stewart. 2008. Factors Linked to Reoffending: A One-Year Follow-Up of Prisoners Who Took Part in the Resettlement Surveys 2001, 2003 and 2004. London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mears, D.P., J.C. Cochran, S.E. Siennick, and W.D. Bales. 2012. ‘Prison Visitation and Recidivism.’ Justice Quarterly 29(6): 888–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, A., and H. Codd. 2008. ‘Prisoners’ Families and Offender Management: Mobilizing Social Capital.’ Probation Journal 55(1): 9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Justice. 2016. Table A2.6, Offender Management Statistics Annual Tables 2015. London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, T., and N. Whitty. 2007. ‘Risk and Human Rights in UK Prison Governance.’ British Journal of Criminology 47(5): 798–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, T., and N. Whitty. 2013. ‘Making History Academic: Criminology and Human Rights.’ British Journal of Criminology 3(4): 568–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, J., D.P. Farrington, I. Sekol, and R.F. Olsen. 2009. ‘Effects of Parental Imprisonment on Child Antisocial Behaviour and Mental Health: A Systematic Review.’ Campbell Systematic Reviews 2009 (4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Niven, S., and D. Stewart. 2005. ‘Resettlement Outcomes on Release from Prison in 2003.’ Home Office Research Findings 248(7): 456–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raikes, B. 2016. ‘“Unsung Heroines”: Celebrating the Care Provided by Grandmothers for Children with Parents in Prison.’ Probation Journal (Advance Online Publication). doi: 10.1177/0264550516648396.

  • Sharratt, K. 2014. ‘Children’s Experiences of Contact with Imprisoned Parents: A Comparison between Four European Countries.’ European Journal of Criminology 11(6): 760–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G. 1958. The Society of Captives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Zyl Smit, D., and S. Snacken. 2009. Principles of European Prison Law and Policy: Penology and Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Sussex, Falmer, UK

    Marie A. Hutton

Authors
  1. Marie A. Hutton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie A. Hutton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Law School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom

    Emily Luise Hart

  2. Institute for Criminal Law & Criminology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Esther F.J.C. van Ginneken

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hutton, M.A. (2017). Prison Visits and Desistance: A Human Rights Perspective. In: Hart, E., van Ginneken, E. (eds) New Perspectives on Desistance. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95185-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95185-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-95184-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-349-95185-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation