Skip to main content

Reentering the Community after Prison: Perspectives on the Role and Importance of Social Support

American Journal of Criminal Justice volume 47, pages 176–201 (2022)Cite this article

Abstract

Individuals reentering the community after prison can face a host of complex challenges. Social support appears to be an important factor in helping recently released men and women by promoting adjustment and success in multiple areas of life. However, social support during the reentry is not well understood in terms of what types of support help individuals, who can best provide this support, how certain aspects of social support might be harmful, and pathways through which support helps individuals. This qualitative study explores four common types of social support that have been identified in the research literature: emotional, instrumental, informational, and companionship. In-depth interviews with 26 adults recently released from prison found variation in the type of support received, the source of the support (primary or secondary groups), and whether the support was primarily positive, negative or harmful, or absent. Exploratory findings surfaced around seven potential pathways through which social support might help individuals who are reentering the community. Suggestions are made for the future work of practitioners and researchers during the reentry period.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Ajrouch, K. J., Reisine, S., Lim, S., Sohn, W., & Ismail, A. (2010). Perceived everyday discrimination and psychological distress: Does social support matter? Ethnicity & Health, 15(4), 417–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anfara, V. A., Brown, K. M., & Mangione, T. L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031007028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arditti, J., & Parkman, T. S. (2011). Young men's reentry after incarceration: A developmental paradox. Family Relations, 60(2), 205–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00643.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahr, S. J., Harris, L., Fisher, J. K., & Armstrong, A. H. (2010). Successful reentry: What differentiates successful and unsuccessful parolees? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54(5), 667–692. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X09342435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bares, K. J., & Mowen, T. J. (2020). Examining the parole officer as a mechanism of social support during reentry from prison. Crime & Delinquency, 66(6–7), 1023–1051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth, J., Schneider, S., & Von Känel, R. (2010). Lack of social support in the etiology and the prognosis of coronary heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychosomatic Medicine, 72(3), 229–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, M. T., & Huebner, B. M. (2011). Reentry and the ties that bind: An examination of social ties, employment, and recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 28(2), 382–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2010.498383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkman, L. F. (1995). The role of social relations in health promotion. Psychosomatic Medicine, 57(3), 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-199505000-00006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (4th ed.). New York: Pearson Education Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boman IV, J. H., & Mowen, T. J. (2017). Building the ties that bind, breaking the ties that don't: Family support, criminal peers, and reentry success. Criminology & Public Policy, 16(3), 753–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M., & Ross, S. (2010). Assisting and supporting women released from prison: Is mentoring the answer? Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 22(2), 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, E. A., & Anderson, E. R. (2016). Prisoners in 2015. The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

  • Clone, S., & DeHart, D. (2014). Social support networks of incarcerated women: Types of support, sources of support, and implications for reentry. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(7), 503–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobbina, J. E., Huebner, B. M., & Berg, M. T. (2012). Men, women, and postrelease offending: An examination of the nature of the link between relational ties and recidivism. Crime & Delinquency, 58(3), 331–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S., & Janicki-Deverts, D. (2009). Can we improve our physical health by altering our social networks? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(4), 375–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01141.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2016). 30 essential skills for the qualitative researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallaire, D. H. (2007). Incarcerated mothers and fathers: A comparison of risks for children and families. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 56(5), 440–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2007.00472.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodge, K. A., Dishion, T. J., & Lansford, J. E. (2007). Deviant peer influences in programs for youth: Problems and solutions. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eddy, J. M., Kjellstrand, J. M., & Lorber, M. F. (2020). A randomized trial of a transitional housing-based volunteer mentoring program for men and women during reentry from prison [Manuscript submitted for publication].

  • Eddy, J. M., Kjellstrand, J. M., Martinez, C. R., & Newton, R. (2010). Theory-based multi-modal parenting intervention for incarcerated parents and their families. In J. M. Eddy & J. Poehlmann (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents: Multidisciplinary perspectives on research, intervention, and policy. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahmy, C., & Wallace, D. (2019). The influence of familial social support on physical health during reentry. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(12), 1738–1756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, H., & Hagan, J. (2007). Incarceration and intergenerational social exclusion. Social Problems, 54(4), 399–433. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2007.54.4.399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gariepy, G., Honkaniemi, H., & Quesnel-Vallee, A. (2016). Social support and protection from depression: Systematic review of current findings in Western countries. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 209(4), 284–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hochstetler, A., DeLisi, M., & Pratt, T. C. (2010). Social support and feelings of hostility among released inmates. Crime & Delinquency, 56(4), 588–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • House, J. S., & Kahn, R. L. (1985). Measures and concepts of social support. In S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 83–108). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. A., & Wilson, D. J. (2003). Reentry trends in the United States. The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

  • Johnson Listwan, S., Colvin, M., Hanley, D., & Flannery, D. (2010). Victimization, social support, and psychological well-being: A study of recently released prisoners. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(10), 1140–1159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Vigne, N., & Kachnowski, V. (2005). Texas’ prisoners reflections on returning home. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • La Vigne, N. G., Shollenberger, T. L., & Debus, S. A. (2009). One year out: Tracking the experiences of male prisoners returning to Houston. Houston: Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lila, M., Gracia, E., & Murgui, S. (2013). Psychological adjustment and victim-blaming among intimate partner violence offenders: The role of social support and stressful life events. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 5(2), 147–153. https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2013a4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livhits, M., Mercado, C., Yermilov, I., Parikh, J. A., Dutson, E., Mehran, A., Ko, C. Y., Shekelle, P. G., & Gibbons, M. M. (2011). Is social support associated with greater weight loss after bariatric surgery? A systematic review. Obesity Reviews, 12(2), 142–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, D. J., & Abrams, L. S. (2013). Informal social support among returning young offenders: A metasynthesis of the literature. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57(2), 169–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morenoff, J. D., & Harding, D. J. (2014). Incarceration, prisoner reentry, and communities. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 411–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowen, T. J., Stansfield, R., & Boman IV, J. H. (2019). Family matters: Moving beyond “if” family support matters to “why” family support matters during reentry from prison. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 56(4), 483–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowen, T. J., Stansfield, R., & Boman, J. H. (2018). During, after, or both? Isolating the effect of religious support on recidivism during reentry. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 34(4), 1079–1101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, R., Peter, C., Cieza, A., & Geyh, S. (2012). The role of social support and social skills in people with spinal cord injury: A systematic review of the literature. Spinal Cord, 50(2), 94–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naser, R. L., & La Vigne, N. G. (2006). Family support in the prisoner reentry process: Expectations and realities. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 43(1), 93–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northcutt Bohmert, M., Duwe, G., & Hipple, N. K. (2016). Evaluating restorative justice circles of support and accountability: Can social support overcome structural barriers? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62, 739–758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16652627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orrick, E. A., Worrall, J. L., Morris, R. G., Piquero, A. R., Bales, W. D., & Wang, X. (2011). Testing social support theory: A multilevel analysis of recidivism. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(6), 499–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, M. S. (2018). Ending mass probation: Sentencing, supervision, and revocation. The Future of Children, 28(1), 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2018.0006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rook, K. S. (1990). Parallels in the study of social support and social strain. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(1), 118–132. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1990.9.1.118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rueger, S. Y., Malecki, C. K., Pyun, Y., Aycock, C., & Coyle, S. (2016). A meta-analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 142(10), 1017–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spjeldnes, S., Jung, H., Maguire, L., & Yamatani, H. (2012). Positive family social support: Counteracting negative effects of mental illness and substance abuse to reduce jail ex-inmate recidivism rates. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 22(2), 130–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strom, J. L., & Egede, L. E. (2012). The impact of social support on outcomes in adult patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review. Current Diabetes Reports, 12(6), 769–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, A., Greenwood, K. E., Williams, S., Wykes, T., & Rose, D. S. (2012). Hearing the voices of service user researchers in collaborative qualitative data analysis: The case for multiple coding. Health Expectations, 16, e89–e99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00810.x.

  • Taylor, C. J. (2016). The family’s role in the reintegration of formerly incarcerated individuals: The direct effects of emotional support. The Prison Journal, 96(3), 331–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thoits, P. A. (2011). Mechanisms linking social ties and support to physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visher, C. A. (2006). Effective reentry programs. Criminology & Public Policy, 5(2), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00379.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visher, C. A., & Courtney, S. M. (2007). One year out: Experiences of prisoners returning to Cleveland. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visher, C. A., Kachnowski, V., La Vigne, N. G., & Travis, J. (2004). Baltimore prisoners' experiences returning home. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Visher, C. A., Knight, C. R., Chalfin, A., & Roman, J. K. (2009). The impact of marital and relationship status on social outcomes for returning prisoners. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Walmsley, Roy (2018). World prison population list: 12th. Institute for Criminal Policy Research. http://www.prisonstudies.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/wppl_12.pdf.

  • Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of interview studies. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Support for this project was provided by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant No. 2015-CY-BX-0019 and the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission. We would like to express our appreciation to Sponsors, Inc., especially the administrators and staff of the Mentoring Program. We are thankful to the participants for their willingness to share their time and perspectives. Finally, we are grateful for the coding assistance and feedback from University of Oregon doctoral students, Arriell Jackson and Jordan Matulis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Prevention Science Institute, Counseling Psychology and Human Services/Prevention Science, College of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 97403, USA

    Jean Kjellstrand, Miriam Clark & Celia Caffery

  2. School of Learning, Development and Professional Practice, Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92109, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Joanna Smith

  3. Family Translational Research Group, College of Dentistry, New York University,137 East 25th Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY, 10010, USA

    J. Mark Eddy

  4. Texas Center for Equity Promotion, College of Education, University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway, Stop D5000, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    J. Mark Eddy

Authors
  1. Jean Kjellstrand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miriam Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Celia Caffery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joanna Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. Mark Eddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean Kjellstrand.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1: Interview Questions

Appendix 1: Interview Questions

Reentry

In this domain, the interviewer will ask participants questions about their experience reentering a community after incarceration and how they view success in reentry- what needs to be focused on and who to connect with to succeed.

  • 1. When you think about yourself and the idea of you succeeding — of you doing well in the coming years — how do you define success?

  • 2. What do incarcerated individuals need to know and be able to do to be successful once they reenter their communities?

  • 3. What have been the 1 or 2 biggest challenges you have faced over the past six months? (find out what they have done to deal with/overcome each challenge)

  • 4. When you returned to the community, who were the most important people to help you to succeed (not the names of specific people, but the roles that those people play, like “myself”, or “my case manager” or “the mother of my children”)?

  • 5. What did these people do that was helpful? Can you give me an example of a challenge that this person helped you work through?

  • 6. What other types of people could have been helpful for you? Why?

  • 7. What else has been helpful as you’ve reentered? Why?

  • 8. What else could have been helpful? Why?

  • 9. *parents* Ask this last question to just those who are parents to children 18 years or younger. In your role as a parent, what was helpful to you as you reentered? What else could have been helpful?

  • 10. *control* If you were to have a mentor, what type of person would be helpful?

Mentor Program Effects

In this domain of the conversation, the interviewer will those participants who had a mentor to describe their experience participating in the Mentorship Program.

  • 9. Overall, what do you think of the Mentorship program?

  • 10. How would you describe your relationship with your mentor?

  • 11. In what ways was the program helpful? What is good about this program that should be continued in the future?

  • 12. In what ways do you feel that the Mentorship program fell short? What needs to be improved about this program so that it is more helpful to participants? What pieces are missing from this program?

  • 13. How many people do you plan to stay in touch and do things with after the Mentorship Program ends?

  1. a.

    If they mention at least one person ask “Who are they and what do you hope to do with them?

  2. b.

    If they mention no one, ask “Why is that?”

  • 14. What do you think is the most important thing about the Mentorship Program?

Closing Summary Comments

Lastly, the interviewer will ask some closing questions to all participants.

  • 14. Is there anything else we haven’t discussed that you think is important to know about reentry? Or the mentoring program? (only ask those who had a mentor the last sub-question)

Thank you so much for all your time today and for sharing your experience. I greatly appreciate it.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kjellstrand, J., Clark, M., Caffery, C. et al. Reentering the Community after Prison: Perspectives on the Role and Importance of Social Support. Am J Crim Just 47, 176–201 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09596-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09596-4

Keywords

  • Incarcerated individuals
  • Reentry
  • Social support
  • Qualitative methods