Abstract
This chapter outlines the goals of the book and how Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) can impact research findings while also addressing some of the ethical complexities that emerge in more traditional research. We present incarceration from a national perspective and the specific context and challenges that exist in the state of Florida and the Tampa Bay region. We provide an overview of CBPR literature and focus on existing scholarship with incarcerated individuals. We conclude with the purpose and goals of our research and the ethical concerns that are raised given this context and unique population.
“It’s about that different voice that has honour and is believable.”
~Nicolas Leech-Crier, proud father and member of the family known as the Downtown Eastside
~J. Mackie & S. E. Wood, 12 July 2018
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This source refers to the “adult correctional population” which consists of all persons 18 and older held in prisons and jails and persons on probation and parole.
- 2.
While working at a work release/court-ordered drug treatment program that was having difficulty handling an increase in women who had been incarcerated, Barbara Rhode, the founder of The Red Tent Women’s Initiative, read Dr. Shelley Taylor’s The Tending Instinct: Women, Men and the Biology of Our Relationships. In her research, Taylor finds that as social animals, women produce increased levels of oxytocin, a brain chemical that helps them feel safe and secure, after spending time in the company of other women. Tending and befriending include the act of coming together to share stories, help out, empathize, and sometimes mentor the young or those in need. Shortly after incorporating these practices into her work, Barbara read The Red Tent, a novel that tells the story of Dinah, a minor character in the Bible who is the daughter of Jacob and the sister of Joseph. The book’s title refers to the tent where women of Jacob’s tribe, according to ancient law, would take refuge while menstruating, giving birth, sick, or in need of other support, and in which they found community and encouragement from their mothers, sisters, and other women residing there (Diamant, 2010). Reading this book reinforced Barbara’s belief that “Red Tents” are needed in our time, and she created a program in the jail for women to fulfill this need and encourage and empower them to create and protect time spent in the company of other women. For the complete story go to “From our Founder” https://redtentwomensinitiative.org/about-us/from-our-founder/. See also McCracken et al. (Forthcoming 2020).
- 3.
We include brief bios of all of the participants quoted in this book in Appendix A.
- 4.
Many of the individuals involved in this research project wanted to use their real names in the book. if a name is included without an asterisk (*) the name is the participant’s given name. An asterisk designates a name has been changed for privacy.
- 5.
- 6.
A note about my positionality and our language: I have engaged in participatory research (to varying degrees) with women since 2004. I identify as a researcher who has no lived experience of incarceration, and therefore I emphasized to co-researchers the project must be led by people who had experienced incarceration. We combined my expertise as a researcher with their expertise of the criminal legal system. Throughout this study, we talked about the language we use to talk about ourselves as co-researchers, participants, etc. I identify as the lead researcher, and I had the greatest knowledge about research methods and facilitating a study. Co-researchers were the experts on the issues, and they were fundamental to developing our research process.
We make the distinction between participant and co-researcher based on the individual’s involvement with the research process as a whole. Participants gave their time and expertise and deeply informed our base and the knowledge we gained, and yet they were not part of directing and facilitating the process as a whole. The term co-researcher applies to individuals who took an active role in the research process and contributed in an ongoing way (four or more sessions) to the research process and product. Co-researchers were responsible for developing the study and staying consistently with the group as it evolved.
- 7.
The survey can be located at https://www.swopbehindbars.org/apendix-b-wrist-survey/. We provide access to our survey for informational purposes to show what we accomplished. At the time of this writing, we had not yet vetted the survey with participants. I also do not consider myself to be an expert on developing surveys and acknowledge, in its current state, it would not be an effective tool to accurately capture useful data. In order to administer the two surveys (based on whether the women are inside or outside the jail), we would require additional funding and partnerships with statisticians to ensure it could accurately capture the data most important to us. We currently have neither.
- 8.
To that end, the outside jail group applied for a St. Petersburg police department grant ($1000) whereby assets seized in potential crimes would be distributed through these grants to non-profit organizations in the community. This grant was not funded.
- 9.
Because of the discrimination and stigma that surrounds the sex industry, many sex workers are not open with their friends and family about their work. “Outing” someone to friends, partners, or families can potentially place them in significant danger and isolation.
- 10.
The analysis of our work with the IRB had to be excluded from this book due to space constraints. See McCracken (2019) for a detailed analysis of the role of IRBs, some examples of how they have historically worked with CBPR projects, and recommendations for researchers and IRBs as we continue to pursue this important and complex research.
- 11.
In the PCJ, breakfast is served at 4am, lunch at 10am, and dinner at 4 pm.
- 12.
A pod is the space where the women live while in jail. They spend most of their time in this room, and it houses between 60 and 80 people. There are two floors with eight separated “rooms” that hold two to four bunkbeds. There are no doors and the guard sitting at the station can see everyone at once. The pod is where the women eat, relax, sleep, talk on the phone, and even see their visitors. Upstairs there is a video conference room where they can communicate with people who are visiting (the visitors are off-site).
- 13.
The Prison Rape Elimination Act was signed into law on 2003. The intent was to deter, if not eliminate, the sexual assault of prisoners. Although signed into law in 2003, the standards did not take effect until 2013. For more detailed information about this law, see Dumond, 2003; National Institute of Corrections PREA/Offender Sexual Abuse.
- 14.
Many of the guards were openly disdainful of our research group, as the women expressed to me, and therefore would not pass information on to the participants. Although we cannot know the cause of this disdain, it seemed as if anything that disrupted the daily routine was problematic, if not suspect. Each guard was different, and the rules in the pods, and communication, would change based on which guard happened to be in the pod at the time. This lack of consistency led the women to feel frustrated and out of control.
References
Abraham, M., & Purkayastha, B. (2012). Making a difference: Linking research and action in practice, pedagogy, and policy for social justice: Introduction. Current Sociology, 60(2), 123–141.
Agustín, L. M. (2004). Alternate ethics, or: Telling lies to researchers. Research for Sex Work, 7(June), 6–7.
Allen, S., Flaherty, C., & Ely, G. (2010). Throwaway moms: Maternal incarceration and the criminalization of female poverty. Affilia, 25(2), 160–172.
Banks, S., Armstrong, A., Carter, K., Graham, H., Hayward, P., Henry, A., et al. (2013). Everyday ethics in community-based participatory research. Contemporary Social Science, 8(3), 263−277. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2013.769618.
Benedict, A. (2014). Using Trauma-Informed Practices to Enhance Safety and Security in Women’s Correctional Facilities. National Resource Center on Justice Involved Women. Retrieved on May 22 2019 from http://cjinvolvedwomen.org/wpcontent/uploads/2015/09/Using-Trauma-Informed-Practices-Apr-141.pdf.
Bennett, S., Whitehead, M., Eames, S., Fleming, J., Low, S., & Caldwell, E. (2016). Building capacity for knowledge translation in occupational therapy: learning through participatory action research. BMC Medical Education, 16(1), 257.
Bierria, A., & Lenz, C. (2019). Battering Court Syndrome: A Structural Critique of Failure to Protect. In J. Stoever (Ed.), Politicization of Safety. New York: New York University Press.
Blumenthal, D. S., & DiClemente, R. J. (Eds.). (2013). Community-based participatory health research: Issues, methods, and translation to practice. Springer Publishing Company.
Blumenthal, D. S., Hopkins III, Y., & Yancy, E. (2013). Community-based participatory research: An introduction. Community-based participatory health research: Issues, methods, and translation to practice, pp. 1–18.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1999). Women offenders: Special report. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Retrieved on May 22 2019 at https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=568
Cammarota, J., & Fine, M., (Eds.). (2010). Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion. Routledge.
Clayton, G., Richardson, E., Mandlin, L., & Farr, B. (2018). Because She’s Powerful: The Political Isolation and Resistance of Women with Incarcerated Loved Ones. Los Angeles and Oakland, CA: Essie Justice Group. Retrieved from https://www.becauseshespowerful.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Essie-Justice-Group_Because-Shes-Powerful-Report.pdf.
Cook, S. L., Smith, S. G., Tusher, C. P., & Raiford, J. (2005). Self-reports of traumatic events in a random sample of incarcerated women. Women & Criminal Justice, 16(1–2), 107–126.
Dallaire, D. H. (2007). Children with incarcerated mothers: Developmental outcomes, special challenges and recommendations. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28(1), 15–24.
Diamant, A. (2010). The red tent: A novel. St. Martin’s Press.
Dichter, M. E. & Osthoff, S. (2015). Women’s experiences of abuse as a risk factor for incarceration: A research update. Harrisburg, PA: VAWnet, a project of the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence. Retrieved from https://vawnet.org/material/womens-experiences-abuse-risk-factor-incarceration-researchupdate
Dumond, R. W. (2003). Confronting America’s most ignored crime problem: The prison rape elimination act of 2003. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 31(3), 354–360.
Fickenscher, A., Lapidus, P., Silk-Walker, P., & Becker, T (2001). Women behind bars: health needs of inmates in a county jail. Public Health Reports, 116(3), 191. Retrieved on January 29 2016 at http://www.publichealthreports.org/issueopen.cfm?articleID=1065.
Fields, J., & Toquinto, S. (2017). Sexuality Education in the Context of Mass Incarceration: Interruptions and Entanglements. In: The Palgrave Handbook of Sexuality Education (pp. 279–300). UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fields, J., González, I., Hentz, K., Rhee, M., & White, C. (2008a). Learning from and with incarcerated women: Emerging lessons from a participatory action study of sexuality education. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 5(2), 71–84.
Fields, J., González, I., Hentz, K., Rhee, M., & White, C. (2008b). Learning from and with incarcerated women: Emerging lessons from a participatory action study of sexuality education. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 5(2), 71–84.
Fine, M., & Torre, M. E. (2006). Intimate details: Participatory action research in prison. Action Research, 4(3), 253–269.
Fine, M., & Torre, M. E. (2007). Theorizing audience, products and provocation. The Sage handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice, 407–419.
Flicker, S., Travers, R., Guta, A., McDonald, S., & Meagher, A. (2007). Ethical dilemmas in community-based participatory research: Recommendations for institutional review boards. Journal of Urban Health, 84(4), 478–493. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11524-007-9165-7.
Florida Department of Corrections (2018a). Annual report: Fiscal year 17–18. Retrieved February 21, 2019 from http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/annual/1718/FDC_AR2017-18.pdf.
Florida Department of Corrections. (2018b). Florida county detention facilities average inmate population December 2018. Retrieved February 21, 2019 from http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/jails/2018/jails-2018-12.pdf.
Flower, S. M. (2008). Engaging women served by Power Inside: In buprenorphine treatment: Development of a program model. Baltimore, MD: Choice Research Associates.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (MB Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum, 2007.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Glaze, L. & Maruschak, L. (2008). Parents in prison and their minor children. [PDF] U.S Department of Justice.
Green, L. W., Ottoson, J. M., Garcia, C., & Hiatt, R. A. (2009). Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization, and integration in public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 30, 151–174.
Greenfeld, L. & Snell, T. (1999). Special report: Women offenders. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=568
Grella, C. E., & Greenwell, L. (2007). Treatment needs and completion of community based aftercare among substance abusing women offenders. Women’s Health Issues, 17(4), 244–255.
Guishard, M. (2009). The false paths, the endless labors, the turns now this way and now that: Participatory action research, mutual vulnerability, and the politics of inquiry. The Urban Review, 41(1), 85–105.
Hacker, K. (2013). Principles of community-based participatory research. In K. Hacker (Ed.), Community-based participatory research (pp. 1–22). London: Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452244181.
Hartney, C. (2006). US rates of incarceration: A global perspective. Oakland, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency. Accessed January 29, 2016. http://www.nccdglobal.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdf/factsheet-us-incarceration.pdf.
Hatton, D. C, & Fisher, A. A.. (2009). Women prisoners: Health issues and nursing implications. Nursing Clinics, 44(3), 365–373.
Hatton, D. C., Kleffel, D., & Fisher, A. A. (2006). Prisoners’ perspectives of health problems and healthcare in a US women’s jail. Women and Health, 44(1), 119–136.
James, D. J., & Glaze, L. E. (2006). Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates [PDF file]. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mhppji.pdf
Johnston, D. (1995). Effects of parental incarceration. In K. Gabel & D. Johnston (Eds.), Children of Incarcerated Parents (pp. 59–88). New York: Lexington Books.
Jung, H., & LaLonde, R. (2016). The relationship between re-incarceration and their own childhood foster care experience of women. Children and Youth Services Review, 62, 40–48.
Kaeble, D. & Cowhig, M. (2018). Correctional populations in the United States, 2016. Bureau of Justice Statistics, pp. 1–14.
Kaplan, A. G. (1984). The “self in relation”: Implications for depression in women (Publication No. 14). Wellesley, MA: Stone Center.
Langan, N. P., & Pelissier, B. (2001). Gender differences among prisoners in drug treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse, 13, 291–301.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of social issues, 2(4), 34–46.
Love & Protect and Survived & Punished (n.d.). #SurvivedAndPunished: Survivor Defense as Abolitionist Praxis. Retrieved from https://survivedandpunished.org/defense-campaign-toolkit/.
Lutnick, A. (2011). Beyond prescientific reasoning: The sex worker environmental assessment team study.
Lydon, J., Carrington, K., Low, H., Miller, H., & Yazdy, M. (2015). Coming out of concrete closets: A report on Black & Pink’s National LGBTQ Prisoner Survey. Black & Pink. Retrieved from http://www.blackandpink.org/wp-content/upLoads/Coming-Out-of-Concrete-Closets.-Black-and-Pink.-October-21-2015..pdf.
Lynch, S. M., Fritch, A., & Heath, N. (2012). Looking beneath the surface: The nature of incarcerated women’s experiences of interpersonal violence, treatment needs, and mental health. Feminist Criminology, 7, 381–400.
Mackie, J. & Wood, S.E. (12 July 2018). “Can reporting on vulnerable people do more harm than good?” The Tyee. Retrieved on May 22, 2019 from https://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2018/07/12/Reporting-Do-Harm-Good/.
Miller, J. B. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women. Boston: Beacon Press.
Miller, J., & Stiver, I. (1997). The healing connection: How women form relationships in therapy and life. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley Centers for Women.
Moloney, K. P., van den Bergh, B. J., & Moller, L. F. (2009). Women in prison: The central issues of gender characteristics and trauma history. Public health, 123(6), 426–430.
McCracken, J. (2013). Street Sex Workers’ Discourse: Realizing Material Change Through Agential Choice. Routledge: Research in Gender and Society.
McCracken, J. (2019). “When Institutional Review Boards Impede Community-Based Participatory Research: Recommendations for an Increasingly Ethical and Inclusive Research Process.” Manuscript submitted for publication.
McCracken, J., Ellis, A., Greene, M., & Trower, C. (Forthcoming 2020). Women in Community Sharing Wisdom: Creating Art and Our Lives in Jail. Women’s Ways of Making. In S. Rose & M. Daly Goggin (Eds.). Utah State University Press.
Messina, N., Calhoun, S., & Braithwaite, J. (2014). Trauma-informed treatment decreases posttraumatic stress disorder among women offenders. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 15(1), 6–23.
Minkler, M. (2004). Ethical challenges for the “outside” researcher in community-based participatory research. Health Education & Behavior, 31(6), 684–697.
Minkler, M. (2005). Community-based research partnerships: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Urban Health, 82, ii3–ii12.
Morris, Z. S., Wooding, S., & Grant, J. (2011). The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 104(12), 510–520.
Myers, B. J., Smarsh, T. M., Amlund-Hagen, K., & Kennon, S. (1999). Children of incarcerated mothers. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 8(1), 11–25.
National Institute of Corrections. PREA/Offender Sexual Abuse. Retrieved on May 22, 2019 from https://nicic.gov/prea-offender-sexual-abuse.
National Research Council. (2014). The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Exploring causes and consequences. Committee on Causes and Consequences of High Rates of Incarceration. In: J. Travis, B. Western, & S. Redburn (Eds.). Committee on Law and Justice, Divisions of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Resource Center on Justice Involved Women. (2016). Fact Sheet on Justice Involved Women in 2016. Retrieved from https://cjinvolvedwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Fact-Sheet.pdf.
Parsons, M. L., & Warner-Robbins, R. C. (2002). Formerly incarcerated women create healthy lives through participatory action research. Holistic Nursing Practice, 16(2), 40–49.
Pinellas County. (2008). Pinellas County, Florida Criminal Justice System Study. Retrieved on May 22, 2019 from https://www.pinellascounty.org/bcc_work/2012_02_28/FinalSystemReportPINEL.pdf.
Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office. (2014, October 17). PCSO Agency Overview. Retrieved on May 22, 2019 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kBGV44l7Ak.
Pinto, R. M., Rahman, R., & Williams, A. (2014). Policy advocacy and leadership training for formerly incarcerated women: An empowerment evaluation of ReConnect, a program of the Women in Prison Project, Correctional Association of New York. Evaluation and program planning, 47, 71–81.
Pollock, J. (1999). Criminal women. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Pont, J. (2008). Ethics in research involving prisoners. International Journal of Prisoner Health, 4(4), 184–197.
Richie, B. (2001). Challenges incarcerated women face as they return to their communities: Findings from life history interviews. Crime and Delinquency, 47, 368–389.
Richie, B. (2018). Challenges incarcerated women face as they return to their communities: Findings from life history interviews*. In D. Hatton & A. Fisher (Eds.). Women Prisoners and Health Justice: Perspectives, Issues and Advocacy for an International Hidden Population (pp. 23–43). CRC Press.
Ritchie, A. (2017). Invisible no more: Police violence against black women and women of color. New York: Beacon Press.
Ritterbusch, A. (2012). Bridging guidelines and practice: Toward a grounded care ethics in youth participatory action research. The Professional Geographer, 64(1), 16–24.
Ritterbusch, A. E. (2016). Mobilities at Gunpoint: The Geographies of (Im) mobility of Transgender Sex Workers in Colombia. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 106(2), 422–433.
Salisbury, E. J., & Van Voorhis, P. (2009). Gendered pathways: An empirical investigation of women probationers’ paths to incarceration. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 36, 541–566.
Schlosser, J. A. (2008). Issues in interviewing inmates: Navigating the methodological landmines of prison research. Qualitative Inquiry, 14(8), 1500–1525.
Schüklenk, U. (2000). Protecting the vulnerable: Testing times for clinical research ethics. Social Science and Medicine, 51(6), 969–977.
Shore, N. (2006). Re-conceptualizing the Belmont principles: A CBPR perspective. Journal of Community Practice, 14(4), 80–95.
Shore, N., Wong, K. A., Seifer, S. D., Grignon, J., & Gamble, V. N. (2008). Introduction to special issue: Advancing the ethics of community-based participatory research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 3(2), 1–4.
Silka, L., Cleghorn, G. D., Grullón, M., & Tellez, T. (2008). Creating community-based participatory research in a diverse community: A case study. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 3(2), 5–16.
Solutions Not Punishment Collaborative. (2016). The most dangerous thing out here is the police: Trans voices on police abuse and profiling in Atlanta. Solutions Not Punished Collaborative. Retrieved from http://dev.rjactioncenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/DangerPolice-40pg_4Web.pdf.
Survived & Punished. About Survived & Punished. Retrieved on May 22, 2019 from https://survivedandpunished.org/.
Survived & Punished. (2019, January). Research across the walls: A guide to participatory research projects & partnerships to free criminalized survivors. Retrieved on May 22, 2019 from https://survivedandpunished.org/research-across-the-walls-guide/.
Swantz, M. L. (2008). Participatory action research as practice. The SAGE handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice, 31–48.
The Sentencing Project. (2018). Incarcerated Women and Girls. Retrieved on May 22, 2019 from: http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/Incarcerated-Women-and-Girls.pdf.
Tripodi, S. J., & Pettus-Davis, C. (2013). Histories of childhood victimization and subsequent mental health problems, substance use, and sexual victimization for a sample of incarcerated women in the US. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 36(1), 30–40.
Trochim, W. (2010, March). Translation won’t happen without dissemination and implementation: Some measurement and evaluation issues. In: 3rd Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation. Bethesda, MD: NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research.
Wallerstein, N., & Duran, B. (2008). The theoretical, historical, and practice roots of CBPR. Community-based participatory research for health: From process to outcomes, 2, 25–46.
Westfall, J. M., Mold, J., & Fagnan, L. (2007). Practice-based research—“Blue Highways” on the NIH roadmap. JAMA, 297(4), 403–406.
World Prison Brief. (2018). Highest to lowest—Prison population rate. Retrieved on May 23, 2019 from http://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_population_rate?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All.
Wun, C. (2019). “Transformative Research” Workshop. Research Across the Walls. March 1.
Young Women’s Empowerment Project. (2009). Girls do what they have to do to survive: Illuminating methods used by girls in the sex trade and street economy to fight back and heal. A participatory action research study of resiliance and resistance. Retrieved from https://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/files/Girls%20do%20what%20they%20have%20to%20do%20to%20survive%20A%20study%20of%20resilience%20and%20resistance.pdf.
Zeng, Z. (2018). Jail Inmates in 2016. US Department of Justice. February 2018. Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ji16.pdf.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McCracken, J. (2019). Women in Jail, Research, and Ethics: Creating Community-Based Participatory Research. In: Learning with Women in Jail. SpringerBriefs in Anthropology(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27690-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27690-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27689-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27690-4
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)