The Reproduction of Social Disadvantage Through Educational Demobilization: A Critical Analysis of Parental Incarceration
The focus of this study concerns the intergenerational consequences of the era of mass incarceration and its role in promoting an educational demobilization of primarily marginalized groups. Using the Howard B. Kaplan Multigenerational and Longitudinal data set, this article links incarceration in the first generation to educational experiences of the second generation at two stages in the life course: adolescence (N = 1303) and emerging adulthood (N = 1621). Intergenerational theories of strain and stigma are argued to be mechanisms in the transmission of reduced educational success and attainment among the second generation. The findings reveal that children of once incarcerated parents are significantly more likely to report that they are experiencing unhappiness in school and have significantly lower levels of educational success than their counterparts not experiencing parental incarceration. Due to these outcomes, I argue that the reproduction of disadvantage produced by the intergenerational effects of parental incarceration will linger in society even with a reduction of incarcerated populations. The need for understanding the intergenerational implications of mass incarceration among disadvantaged populations is discussed.
- Carson, E. A. (2018). Prisoners in 2016 (NCJ 251149). Retrieved from Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p16.pdf. Accessed November 11, 2018.
- City of Houston Planning and Development Department. (2009). Houston’s comparison with major U.S. cities. http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Publications/planrpt/How_fulldoc.pdf. Accessed May 26, 2015.
- deVuono-powell, S., Schweidler, C., Walters, A., & Zohrabi, A. (2015). Who pays? The true costs of incarceration on families. Oakland, CA: Ella Baker Center.Google Scholar
- Fredericksen, A., & Omli, D. (2016). Jobs after jail: Ending the prison to poverty pipeline, alliance for a just society. Washington: Seattle.Google Scholar
- Garland, D. (Ed.). (2001). Mass imprisonment: Social causes and consequences. Kern County, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on a spoiled identity. San Diego: Jenkins, JH & Carpenter.Google Scholar
- Kaeble, D., & Cowhig, M. (2018). Correctional populations in the United States, 2016 (NCJ 251211). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
- Kruttschnitt, C., & Gartner, R. (2005). Marking time in the Golden State: Women’s imprisonment in California. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Lemert, E. M. (1972). Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
- Mauer, M. (2006). Race to incarcerate. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
- Pager, D. (2008). Marked: Race, crime, and finding work in an era of mass incarceration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Rodriguez, C. E. (2000). Changing race: Latinos, the census, and the history of ethnicity in the United States. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
- Schirmer, S., Nellis, A., & Mauer, M. (2009). Incarcerated parents and their children: Trends 1991–2007. Washington: Sentencing Project.Google Scholar
- The Sentencing Project. (2015). Factsheet: Incarcerated women and girls. https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Incarcerated-Women-and-Girls.pdf. Accessed November 11, 2018
- Vallas, R., Boteach, M., West, R., & Odum, J. (2015). Removing barriers to opportunity for parents with criminal records and their children: A two-generation approach. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.Google Scholar
- Western, B. (2006). Punishment and inequality in America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Western, B., & Pettit, B. (2010). Collateral costs: Incarceration’s effect on economic mobility. Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts.Google Scholar
- Western, B., & Wildeman, C. (2008). Punishment, inequality, and the future of mass incarceration. University of Kansas Law Review, 57(4), 851.Google Scholar