Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Prison Dog Programs pp 99–122Cite as

Considering the Correctional Context: Security Issues in Prison-Based Dog Training Programs

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The popularity of prison-based dog training programs as a new and innovative approach toward offender rehabilitation has led to the growth of these programs nationally and internationally. Despite the overwhelmingly positive perception of dog programs by prison administrators, the introduction of dogs into any correctional setting does raise some security concerns. Such concerns include perimeter security, control of inmate movement and potential for escape, control of contraband , and issues with staff perceptions of dog training programs . Additionally, when implementing a dog training program, correctional administrators must consider the potential for abuse, inmate conflict, and concerns regarding the dogs injuring inmates, staff, or visitors. The purpose of this chapter is to discuss some of the security issues that have arisen when dogs are introduced to a correctional facility. Furthermore, this chapter will discuss efforts made in successful programs to alleviate or minimize such security concerns. Thus far, the evidence has indicated that if implemented properly, not only are the security concerns of dog training programs quite manageable but these innovative programs can provide a number of positive results that could enhance the security of a correctional facility.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Many facilities at SCDC implement a character dorm which is usually the best behaved unit in the yard. The inmates have to participate in a cognitive retraining program and sign a behavior contract to be allowed in the dorm. However, Allendale C.I. is a character institution, meaning all the inmates must behave or risk being sent to a higher custody level .

References

  • Achen, S. (2018, May 14). Personal telephone interview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachi, K. (2013). Equine-facilitated prison-based programs within the context of prison-based animal programs: State of the science review. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 52, 46–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britton, D. M., & Button, A. (2005). Prison Pups: Assessing the effects of dog training programs in correctional facilities. Journal of Family Social Work, 9(4), 79–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, H. L., Rogers, A., Kapadia, D., Pilgrim, J., Reevers, D., & Vassilev, I. (2012). Creature comforts: Personal communities, pets, and the work of managing a long term condition. Chronic Illness, 9, 87–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, H. D., Johnson, W. W., & Griffin, O. H. (2014). The treatment of mentally ill supermax: An evaluation of state supermax policies. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(11), 1338–1353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, B. J., & Farrington, D. P. (2014). Perceived effects of dog-training programmes in correctional Settings. Journal of Forensic Practice, 16(3), 171–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, B. J., & Farrington, D. P. (2016). The effectiveness of dog-training programs in prison. Prison Journal, 96(6), 854–876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, A. (2016). Watch, listen and learn: Contraband prevention plans. American Jails, (3), 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Currie, N. (2008). A case study of incarcerated males participating in a canine training program (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cusack, C. M. (2015). Animals and criminal justice. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (2007). Perspectives of youth in an animal-centered correctional vocational program: A qualitive evaluation of Project Pooch (Unpublished research monograph). Portland State University, Portland, Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deaton, C. (2005). Humanizing prisons with animals: A closer look at “Cell Dogs” and horse programs in correctional institutions. Journal of Correctional Education, 56, 46–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, E. F., O’Connell, D. J., & Scarpitti, F. R. (2003). Therapeutic communities and prison management: An examination of the effects of operating an in-prison therapeutic community on levels of institutional disorder. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 47, 210–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farber, M. (2018, September 3). Ohio animal rescue center claims inmates with prison program killed dog: ‘We are absolutely heartbroken.’ Fox News. Retrieved November 27, 2018 from: https://www.foxnews.com/us/ohio-animal-rescue-center-claims-inmates-with-prison-program-killed-dog-we-are-absolutely-heartbroken.

  • Florida Department of Corrections. (2018). February 13). Service dog training and canine obedience training for canine adoptions, Procedure, 506, 102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fournier, A., Geller, E., & Fortney, E. (2007). Human-animal interaction in prison setting: Impact on criminal behavior, treatment progress and social skills. Behavior and Social Issues, 16, 89–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2006). Prison-based animal programs: A national survey. The Prison Journal, 86(4), 407–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2007). Without words to get in the way: Symbolic interaction in prison-based animal programs. Qualitative Sociology Review, 3(1), 96–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furst, G. (2011). Animal programs in prison: A comprehensive assessment. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grohs, M. (2017). Contraband frustration (pp. 12–18). July/August: Corrections Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grommon, E. (2017). Managed access technology to combat contraband cell phones in prison: Findings from a process evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 66, 39–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerico, G. F. (2017). Layers of security optimize contraband detection (pp. 34–40). March/April: Corrections Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gussak, D. (2004). A pilot research study on the efficacy of art therapy with prison inmates. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 31(245–25), 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harkrader, T., Burke, T. W., & Owen, S. S. (2004). Pound puppies: The rehabilitative uses of dogs in correctional facilities. Corrections Today, 66(2), 74–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, L. (2016). Becoming the person your dog thinks you are: An assessment of Florida prison-based dog training programs on prison misconduct, post-release employment and recidivism. Florida State University. Retrieved March 1, 2018 from: http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_2016SP_Hill_fsu_0071E_13183.

  • Hogle, P. S. (2009). Going to the dogs: Prison-based training programs are win-win. Corrections Today, 71(4), 69–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunsicker, L. (2008). Security and treatment collaboration. Corrections today, 70(5), 26–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, D., & Glaze, L. (2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Josi, D., & Sechrest, D. (1996). Treatment versus security. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 23(1–2), 167–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katcher, A., Beck, A., & Levine, D. (1989). Evaluation of a pet program in prison—The Pal Project at Lorton. Anthrozoös, 2(3), 175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korten, D. (2007, May 31). Indiana State Prison, Michigan City, Indiana: A Better Place for Everyone, Cat Odyssey. Retrieved from: http://catodyssey.blogspot.com/2007/05/indiana-state-prison-michigan-city.html.

  • Lai, J. (1998). Literature review: Pet facilitated therapy in correctional institutions. Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Services of Canada. Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Women Correctional.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langan, N. P., & Pelissier, B. M. (2001). Gender differences among prisoners in drug treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse, 13, 291–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulcahy, C., & McLaughlin, D. (2013). Is the tail wagging the dog? A review of the evidence for prison animal programs. Australian Psychologist, 48(5), 370–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Women. (1998). Literature review: Pet facilitated therapy in correctional institutions. Ottawa, Canada: Correctional Service Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ormerod, E. (2008). Companion animals and offender rehabilitation: Experiences from a prison therapeutic community in Scotland. Therapeutic Communities, 29, 285–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam Correctional Facility. (2012, January 25). Prison Greyhound Program. Facility Directive ISF 108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson-Taylor, K., & Blanchette, K. (2001). Results of an evaluation of the Pawsitive Directions Canine Program at Nova Institution for Women. Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Service of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seiter, R. (2011). Corrections: An introduction. Upper Saddle River, NJ.: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seiter, R. (2012). Correctional administration: Integrating theory and practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ.: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • South Carolina Department of Corrections. (2016, June 17). Animal based programs. Policy PS-10.16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strimple, E. O. (2003). A history of prison inmate-animal interaction programs. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(1), 70–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, W. (2007). The experiences of offenders in a prison canine program. Federal Probation, 71(1), 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washington Department of Corrections. (2016, January 1). Offender dog/cat programs. Policy DOC 700.350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, L., Giles-Corti, B., Bulsara, M., & Bosch, D. (2007). More than a furry companion; The Ripple Effect of companion animals on neighborhood interactions and sense of community. Society and Animals, 15, 43–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoonotic Diseases. (2018, August 9). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved October 1, 2018 from: https://www.cdc.gov/onehealth/basics/zoonotic-diseases.htm.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Citadel, Charleston, SC, USA

    Leslie B. Hill

  2. Radford University, Radford, VA, USA

    Benjamin Wright

Authors
  1. Leslie B. Hill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leslie B. Hill .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Emerita, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, PA, USA

    Mary Renck Jalongo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hill, L.B., Wright, B. (2019). Considering the Correctional Context: Security Issues in Prison-Based Dog Training Programs. In: Jalongo, M. (eds) Prison Dog Programs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25618-0_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25618-0_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25617-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25618-0

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation