Journal of African American Studies

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 95–114 | Cite as

“So My Family Can Survive:” Prisoner Re-Entry and the Risk and Resilience of Black Families



Given the thousands of African American men that are released from prison each year, a growing number of national, state and local programs have been established to facilitate easier transitions for these men into the workforce. However, very little is known about the relational risk and resilience factors of married and cohabiting African American men and their partners after their release from prison. More specifically, there is a lack of data that addresses the qualitative responses of married and cohabiting African Americans regarding the following seven dimensions: (a) factors associated with initial attraction; (b) feelings when they realized they were in a “coupled” relationship; (c) post-cohabitation adjustments; (d) the meaning of commitment; (e) perceptions regarding how being in a relationship changed their lives; (f) perceptions regarding how the relationship expanded the couple’s view of commitment; as well as (g) couple perceptions regarding the future of their relationship. To address this paucity, this paper will feature narratives provided by two previously incarcerated African American men (one married; one cohabiting) and their partners. Qualitative analyses of the data resulted in risk and resilience themes related to each of the aforementioned dimensions. Themes were related to the start of the relationship, perceptions regarding in a “coupled” relationship, psychological and behavioral changes after cohabitation, the definition and demonstration of commitment, how being in a relationship positively changed the lives of these couples, broadened how they think about commitment, as well as confidence regarding the future of their relationship. Supporting qualitative data are presented in connection with each theme. Using qualitative coding and analysis, implications and recommendations regarding how national, state, and local programs can identify the risks and further develop the strengths of these men are also provided.


African–American Black Prisoner re-entry Marriage Cohabitation 


  1. Administration for Children and Families—African–American Healthy Marriage Initiative. (2009). Retrieved March 2, 2009 from website:
  2. Administration for Children and Families—Fiscal Year. (2009). Logic Model. Retrieved Saturday, April 25, 2009 from website:
  3. Belenko, S. (2006). Assessing released inmates for substance-abuse-related service needs. Crime & Delinquency, 52(1), 94–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bogenschneider, K. (2006). Family policy matters: How policymaking affects families and what professionals can do (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, P. M. (1995). The death of intimacy: Barriers to meaningful interpersonal relationships. New York: Haworth.Google Scholar
  6. Bureau of Justice Statistics (Summary Findings). (2009). Retrieved on Thursday, April 15, 2009 from:
  7. Chaney, C. (2006). Emotional closeness and commitment among African–American couples: Implications for promoting relationship stability. Doctoral Dissertation: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  8. Cole, D. (2000). Why so severe? Tough on crime policies burden disempowered minority. L.P. Fulton County Daily Report.Google Scholar
  9. Cutrona, C. E. (1996). Social support in couples: Marriage as a resource in times of stress. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Davis, K. E. (1985). Near and dear: friendship and love compared. Psychology Today, 19, 22–30.Google Scholar
  11. Dorfman, L., & Schiraldi, V. (2001). Off balance: youth, race, and crime in the news. Justice Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  12. Feldman, L., Schiraldi, V., & Ziedenberg, J. (2001). Too little too late: President Clinton’s prison legacy. Justice Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  13. Frost, N. A. (2008). Alternative measures of punitiveness and their (substantial) consequences. Punishment & Society, 10(3), 277–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gangestad, S. W., Simpson, J. A., Cousins, A. J., Garver-Apgar, C. E., & Christensen, P. N. (2004). Women’s preferences for male behavioral displays change across the menstrual cycle. Psychological Science, 15(3), 203–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garmezy, N. (1990). A closing note: Reflections on the future. In J. Rolf, A. Masten, D. Cicchetti, K. Nuechterlein & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology (pp. 527–534). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gibson-Davis, C. M., Edin, K. E., & McLanahan, S. (2005). High hopes and even higher expectations: the retreat from marriage among low-income couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1301–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hairston, C. F. (2002). Prisoners and families: Parenting issues during incarceration. Retrieved on Saturday, April 11, 2009 from:
  18. Hairston, C. F., & Oliver, W. (2006). Domestic violence and prisoner reentry: Experiences of African American men and women. Retrieved on Saturday, April 11, 2009 from:
  19. Holmberg, D., Orbuch, T. L., & Veroff, J. (2004). Thrice told tales: Married couples tell their stories. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  21. Hopkins, K. (2007). My kids and wife have been my life. Doctoral Dissertation: Louisiana State University.Google Scholar
  22. Knepper, P. (2003). Explaining criminal conduct: Theories and systems in criminology. Durham: Carolina Academic.Google Scholar
  23. Luthar, S. S., & Zigler, E. (1991). Vulnerability and competence: A review of research on resilience in childhood. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61(1), 6–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Masten, A., Best, K., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: contributions from the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and Psychopathology, 2, 425–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mattis, J. S. (2000). African american women’s definitions of spirituality and religiosity. Journal of Black Psychology, 26(1), 101–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peele, S., & Brodsky, A. (1976). Love and addiction. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
  28. Petersilia, J. (2001). Prisoner reentry: Public safety and reintegration challenges. The Prison Journal, 81(3), 360–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pettus, C. A., & Severson, M. (2006). Paving the way for effective reentry practice. The Prison Journal, 86(2), 206–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reisig, M. D., Holtfreter, K., & Morash, M. (2002). Social capital among women offenders. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 18(2), 167–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reese, R. (2001). Criminal justice and social injustice: African American men in the U.S. Journal of Ethics and Justice, 1–8. September.Google Scholar
  32. Reese, R. (2004). Noble principles: Ignoble practices: Race and the U.S. criminal justice system. Perspectives, 1–8.Google Scholar
  33. Rempel, J., & Holmes, J. (1986). How do I love thee? Psychology Today, 30–31. February.Google Scholar
  34. Rutter, M. (1990). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. In J. Rolf, A. S. Masten, D. Cicchetti, K. H. Nuechterlein & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology (pp. 181–214). New York: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  35. Scott, S. M., Rhoades, G. K., & Markman, H. J. (2006). Sliding versus deciding: inertia and the premarital cohabitation effect. Family Relations, 55(4), 499–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Simmons, T., & O’Connell, M. (2003). Married-couple and unmarried-partner households: 2000. Washington: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  37. Simpson, J. A. (1987). The dissolution of romantic relationships: Factors involved in relationship stability and emotional distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(4), 683–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Smock, P. J., & Gupta, S. (2002). Cohabitation in contemporary North America. In A. Booth & A. J. Crouter (Eds.), Just living together: Implications of cohabitation on families, children, and social policy (pp. 53–84). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  39. Smock, P. J., & Manning, W. D. (2004). Living together unmarried in the United States: demographic perspectives and implications for family policy. Law and Policy, 26(1), 87–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  42. Taylor, R., Jackson, J. S., & Chatters, L. (1997). Family life in Black America. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Science, 3(12), 452–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Travis, J., Solomon, A. L., & Waul, M. (2001). From prison to home: The dimensions and consequences of prisoner reentry. Washington: The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  45. Travis, J., Cincotta McBride, E., & Solomon, A. L. (2005). Urban Institute—Justice Policy Center. Retrieved on April 14, 2009 from: June.
  46. U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). Retrieved on March 27, 2009 from
  47. Werner, E., & Smith, R. (1982). Vulnerable but invincible: A study of resilient children. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  48. Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Williams, O. J. (1999). African American men who batter: Treatment considerations and community response. In R. Staples (Ed.), The Black family: Essays and studies (pp. 265–279). Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Human Ecology, Division of Family, Child and Consumer SciencesLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA

Personalised recommendations