Creating a Benevolent World: Exploration of a Music-Based Rehabilitation Program for Formerly Incarcerated Individuals

Research Approach

The methodology employed in this research was based on the phenomenological approach. This approach focuses on how an experience relates to the individual and his or her narrative regarding that experience (Moustakas, 1994). Phenomenological studies focus on exploring the meaning and interpretations that research participants ascribe to a given phenomenon (Van Manen, 2014). This method is particularly suitable for the purpose of the present research which explores characteristics of a music-based reentry program by analyzing its meaning for the participants.

Participants: The Sounding Out Program for Formerly Incarcerated Individuals

The participants of this study took part in a music intervention program called The Sounding Out Program (SOP) of the Irene Taylor Trust (ITT), UK. The Trust’s basic assumption is that music can break down barriers and help incarcerated individuals and FIIs who have lived on the fringes of society to become valued members of the community (for further information see: https://irenetaylortrust.com). The SOP began in 2012, in response to a need and a desire to support formerly incarcerated men and women. Candidates are invited to an interview in which they receive information about the SOP and its requirements, and then they become part of the project. The dropout rate at this point is very low as relationships have already been forged in prison and both sides are committed to make it work.

The SOP consists of intensive week-long creative projects and performances, acoustic projects, training opportunities, and regular meet up and play sessions. One part of the program is a 5-day intensive music making workshop. In the workshop, they form a band together with professional musicians who serve as staff members and create original and innovative music. At the end of the workshop, FIIs and staff members get together and perform their music in front of an audience. The ITT remunerates the SOP participants with the understanding that they have work commitments, and that monetary compensation may help make the program feel like a professional engagement. The ITT staff maintains regular contact with participants during and after their time in the SOP to make them aware of projects and opportunities as they arise and support them through the program.

In this study, five of the participants were FIIs (hereinafter referred to as “participants”)—four males and one female, their age ranging from mid-twenties to mid-fifties. The offending histories of the participants were varied. However, all the participants were on license and had served custodial sentences of a minimum of three years. Two of the five had spent the previous 20 years periodically offending and returning to prison at regular and frequent intervals. At the time of participation in the SOP, none of the participants was employed or in the process of training or studying a profession, and all five were receiving state benefits. Three other participants (two males and one female) were ITT staff members (hereinafter referred to as “staff-participants”), their age ranging from mid-forties to fifties. Two of the staff-participants were male and served as professional musicians in the core project team. The third staff-participant was a female who served as the artistic director of the ITT. She has worked using music in criminal justice settings since 1984 and founded the ITT in 1995.

Procedure

The researcher contacted potential participants, requesting their cooperation. Details of the potential participants were received from the ITT. All the participants were interviewed five years after participating in the SOP. All interviews were audio-recorded and later transcribed. All the participants signed an informed consent form, which included their permission to be interviewed. The researcher assured the participants that their personal information would be safeguarded and that the final report would not include names or any other identifying details. Prior to the interviews, an ethics approval was received from the Ethics Review Board of Bar-Ilan University.

Data Collection and Analysis

Information was collected from both participants and staff-participants via semi-structured open-ended interviews (Cunningham et al., 2011). The interviews were based on the guided interview technique and included questions such as: What was the atmosphere like during the program?; Please describe the relationship between the FIIs and the staff members; What made the program a success, if at all?; How did you cope with challenges during the program, if there were any? The thematic analysis examined the data sentence-by-sentence, and often word-by-word, in order to identify main categories and subcategories emerging from the interviews (Guba & Lincoln, 1981).

Previous Acquaintance

The participants and staff-participants knew each other from a previous ITT program in which they had all partook, the Music in Prisons program. The purpose of that program was to have prisoners and musicians collaborate in writing original songs, forming a band, performing live, and recording an album (for further information see https://irenetaylortrust.com/what-we-do/our-projects). The participants’ positive experience with the previous program and its staff contributed to their sense of security and their willingness to join the SOP:

The big plus was that they were coming to a setup that was familiar to them. It was not just me they knew. They knew other musicians as well. So, when they came to work with us [upon release], they were very excited to get together again. [. . .] They were coming to participate in a process which was similar to one they had done before. They had been with us for five days [during the Music in Prisons project], writing five or six new songs, so it wasn’t like we were inviting them to do something completely new. There were aspects of the SOP program which were familiar to them and made them feel comfortable. (The Artistic Director of the ITT)

The participants were aware of the great advantage of the former acquaintance with the staff and the program and mentioned it as a factor that encouraged them to overcome their hesitation and participate in the SOP upon release:

I think it was a great idea to keep in touch with us after our release from prison, because – ok, you can work with people while they’re inside [prison] and you can help them get away from it all for five days. But what about after [release from prison]? The fact that I had already got to know the whole team during my time in prison made it very easy for me to join this project. (A, participant)

The previous acquaintance with the ITT activities gave participants a sense of familiarity and security, and promoted trust:

When I got out of prison, I was happy to contact the ITT. And so, I was excited to meet people I already knew and trusted. And I also knew more or less how the program worked so all that gave me a sense of security. (B, participant)

The findings also showed that the participants were not the only ones who were enthusiastic about the opportunity to meet again. The staff-participants were also happy and excited about the reunion:

I was really happy. I could now see those guys again [outside the prison] and work with them again. I knew their strengths. I knew they were very focused people. So all that really excited me. I was very eager to start the project. (C, staff-participant)

Genuineness and Authenticity

The staff-participants described the participants as sensitive to dishonesty and pretense, and emphasized the importance of a genuineness for the success of the program:

And if you’re genuine and open, people sense that. And that’s a really important thing when you work with people in prisons, you know, they know within seconds if you’re genuine or not. Once people realize that you’re who you are, that you’re being genuine and there’s no pretense – it’s fine. (D, staff-participant)

The participants, on their part, mentioned the SOP’s open and authentic atmosphere as contributing to their ability to connect with their inner self during the creative process:

We always learnt something about ourselves through the music that we hadn’t known before. It was because of the special atmosphere of the project. It was an open and authentic atmosphere of simply creating music together, and it was delightful. It was one of those moments when you can just sit and be who you are. (E, participant)

Understanding and Lack of Judgment

Understanding the participants’ hardships upon release enabled staff-participants to put up with problematic behaviors such as lateness to rehearsals:

As a rehabilitation organization, it was important to be understanding when they [the FIIs] had to sort out an issue with their family, their job or their living premises. That meant we had to be tolerant when they sometimes turned up late for a rehearsal. (The Artistic Director of the ITT).

Due to this non-judgmental approach, participants could occasionally behave inappropriately without feeling guilty about it. “E,” a participant in the program, was so impressed that she adopted the same attitude toward people that she herself supports:

It didn’t matter if I did right or wrong – I’ve never ever felt I did wrong – you know, because we were always told that there was no right and wrong. [. . .] If we were late or called to say we’d be late, X [The Artistic Director of the ITT] would say: ‘Okay, let’s get on with it, they are running late – but they can join us when they come’. At some point, they would come in and X would just say ‘Okay, join in’ and we would go on. [. . .] You never felt like – ‘Oh my God, I’m gonna be reprimanded’ – we never felt that. [. . .] And I think the kindness and understanding that we experienced gave me the strength to support other people and treat them the same way I was treated. (E, participant)

The non-judgmental approach also seemed to provide participants with an unrestricted mental space where they could freely explore their rehabilitation path:

We weren’t judged. There was no judgmental talk and it kind of allowed me to be more open with myself about future possibilities in life. It opened my eyes. (A, participant)

Eye-Level Approach

This category reflects the way the staff-participants’ viewed their status in relation to the participants. They described an eye-level approach, whereby all those who participated in the program could learn from and be supported by one another, staff-participants and participants alike. The artistic director described the experience as follows:

I don’t feel that we [staff-participants] are more important than others in this project. I mean, we give them [the participants] opportunities and they take them, so that’s probably the only imbalance here. [. . .] We don’t teach them. Once we get to work, it’s like doing something with someone rather than doing it for someone. [. . .] Although we are professional musicians, there are times when our brain tires, we make mistakes or encounter difficulties, and then we need help and support. So for me, each member of the group can be someone who supports or someone who needs support, and that’s how we get through the process. (The Artistic Director of the ITT).

Staff-participants explicitly mentioned the non-hierarchic, eye-level approach as the catalyst for realizing the participants’ superior proficiency at playing certain musical genres and instruments. The staff-participants learnt to appreciate the participants’ musical expertise and even asked to learn from them new musical genres and techniques:

We strive to create an eye-level, non-hierarchic dynamic among all members of the band. I think that a major achievement of the process was that everyone participated in creating the musical feel, the sound and the texture. [. . .] I don’t have much experience with genres like reggae, funk, hip-hop, whatever. But these guys are so with it, and they have much better awareness and skill to determine what feels right and what sounds good, much faster than I can. So, I’m constantly learning from them about these things. [. . .] They’re much more, I mean a hundred times more, proficient in playing this kind of music than I am, because musically, I don’t come from that world. When [participant] ‘B’ plays the drums, and the other guy plays the bass, it’s just incredible. It’s just – it’s so powerful and just amazing. (D, staff-participant)

Although staff-participants joined the project as professional musicians who were supposed to guide the participants, by the end of the process, they felt like they had joined the project to learn and not just instruct. They felt they had learnt about the participants’ music, about themselves and about life:

Being in that room with those people, I think we were all kind of learning. ‘D’ [a staff-participant] was learning; and X [The Artistic Director of the ITT] was learning; and I was learning – we all learnt about each other, about the music. I learnt about them, learnt about myself through them, learnt about how to make things work, how to focus. [. . .] Working with those people has taught me so much about life – not just music, just life. (C, staff-participant)

Bridging Cultural Differences

Staff-participants experienced cultural differences between them and the participants, for example in working habits, language and use of music terminology. The staff-participants had to change their mindset and exercise humility, openness, and good will, so they could truly know the participants, bridge the gap and forge a bond:

From the beginning of the program, the diverse backgrounds were a massive challenge. We – me and most of the staff – you know, white, middle-class ‘snowflakes’ as they call us, we work with folks who are from very different backgrounds, and that’s just the way it is, you know. So, I’ve had to learn a lot along the way about just staying humble, and hopefully creating an atmosphere of humility and openness, and – yeah, telling them: ‘I’m not sure I understand everything you’re s saying or where you’re coming from’ – and being open about that. Like saying: ‘It’s not like where I’m from mate, you know, but tell me and we’ll find a way through it’, and usually it’s okay. (D, staff-participant)

The cultural differences created situations in which staff-participants had to find the fine line between encouraging participants to meet musical challenges and pushing them beyond their ability. “D” described his difficulty in determining the participants’ limits of ability:

I try to challenge people in a professional musical way, just to move them forward, not too hard, but you know, finding a way to do that. I try to be aware of people’s limitations and not push them too hard. [. . .] There can be technical limitations, emotional limitations, you know. And it did happen that I pushed someone a bit too hard and I kind of lost her for a while, and I felt horrible. You must develop the knack to know when enough is enough. (D, staff-participant)

For staff-participants, bridging the cultural gap also meant dropping professional jargon and finding alternative ways of communication to build a close relationship with the participants:

We just had to find ways of conveying technical music terminology. You don’t necessarily have to talk about bars and notes. [. . .] In one case, a singer had problems finding the right pitch and singing in tune. So, we couldn’t say things like: ‘Oh, it’s a bit flat, it’s a bit sharp..’. We had to find a different way to say it. So, we said: ‘It’s a bit low’. We had to find a certain way which would correct the singing, or we would demonstrate how the song should be sung. (C, staff-participant)

One of the common frustrating situations for the participants was finding the exact key of the song or keeping in tempo. It often required hard work. Despite the frustration, staff-participants found creative ways to help participants overcome their difficulties, as noted by participant “E”:

I think frustration probably kicked in at times when you honestly couldn’t get the key, and everybody was playing in key and you are like: ‘I didn’t get it! I can’t get it! Play it again.’ And they played it over and over and over again until finally the penny dropped and you got it and you like shout ‘Yay!’ And then we move on! (E, participant)

Enjoyment and Excitement

Staff-participants described the creative process as embarking on an adventure and feeling the enjoyment and excitement of the unknown:

It was simply a great project with great people. It was a real joy. I really enjoyed those moments. There was so much to be excited about, and so many things were moving forward. We didn’t quite know what was gonna happen, but we knew it was gonna be exciting. It was gonna be good. So, we had lots to be excited about. (C, staff-participant)

It was not only the final musical product that delighted the staff-participants, but also, and perhaps most importantly, it was the creative interpersonal process that gave them a thrill:

It could be a new song, just a line, just her [the participant] singing one line, and we had to turn it into a composition. But look, we’ve spent many years doing that kind of thing. So, we find a fitting harmony, usually on the piano, decide on a key, create a harmonic progression, figure out the chords, and then ‘F’ [a participant] finds the chords on the guitar, and the bass player – he’ll find the bass line. Yeah, it just builds up one step at a time. It’s the heart of the process that’s so exciting. (D, staff-participant)

Similarly, participants described the creative process as getting into an amazing and exciting musical groove:

Creating music means catching the vibration, like a surfer on a wave – you know what I mean? Just like a surfer catches a wave – a musician catches a vibration and rides it. And it feels good, man, it does, especially if you are the one creating and writing good stuff. (F, participant)

Those were five days of excitement, five days of really dedicating ourselves to the project. (E, participant)

Continuity

Most incarcerated individuals return to the community. For example, Travis (2005) found that 95% of inmates in the US eventually reintegrate into society. Successful reentry requires ensuring their well-being and establishing continuous care and services from prison to community. This includes physical, mental, and emotional health (Woods et al., 2013), as well as education if needed (Erisman, 2015). The present study shows how maintaining continuity through music can provide social and emotional support. The prior positive acquaintance of participants with the ITT activities and staff while still in prison, through the Music in Prisons project, created familiarity and trust in the ITT upon release. The knowledge that familiar people were waiting excitedly to meet and continue creating music together helped the participants achieve a much quicker and easier reentry. These findings are significant for achieving successful reintegration. FIIs accrue many community responsibilities upon release such as employment and family. These responsibilities may deter them from attending programs that may facilitate their social reintegration. Therefore, achieving continuity through prior acquaintance may convince FIIs to voluntarily participate in rehabilitation programs once they are released (Wolfer, 2019).

According to Erikson (1968), individuals must acquire a stable set of norms, values, and commitments to guide them in their day-to-day activities. The repeated experiences resulting from such stability eventually form a person’s identity. Erikson claimed that in order to form a strong and cohesive identity, an individual must develop a subjective sense of sameness in a world of constant change and a sense of continuity within the self, whereby different “selves” are synthesized into one continuous self. Since sameness and continuity are crucial for developing a strong and cohesive identity, reentry into the community after being incarcerated for a length of time may negatively affect FIIs’ subjective sense of sameness and continuity. This is in line with findings showing that many FIIs are forced to deal with a variety of existential challenges that may develop into an identity crisis (McKendy & Ricciardelli, 2021). In light of Erikson’s theory, we may assume that the participants’ experience of continuity, from participating in the Music in Prisons program to participating in the SOP, may have helped them maintain a subjective sense of sameness and continuity while struggling with reentry challenges.

Egalitarian Approach

FIIs frequently contend with social stigmas, as their criminal record often follows them long after release (Mulch, 2009). Coping with stigmas is frustrating and often, the efforts that FIIs invest in fighting them are sometimes so great that they feel as if they are serving an additional sentence every time they are required to disclose their past (such as on job applications; Wehrman, 2011). Inadequate education is common among FIIs and is often associated with stigmas such as trust issues and laziness (Meyer, 2011). The judicial and welfare policies regarding FIIs place an irredeemable mark on their lives, limit their opportunities for rehabilitation, and impede full reintegration into society (Kennington, 2013). Thus, FIIs suffer a form of structural stigma, in which social standards, cultural norms, and institutional policies limit their opportunities and resources, and have a negative impact on their well-being (Hatzenbuehler et al., 2013).

In light of the above research, using an egalitarian approach with FIIs may offer them a better prospect for successful reintegration. The current findings indicate that this approach was implemented in the SOP: the staff-participants showed non-judgmental understanding, tolerance, and acceptance toward the participants, thus providing them with an inner mental space to freely explore their rehabilitation path. In addition, as professional musicians, staff-participants adopted an eye-level approach by greatly appreciating the FIIs’ musical abilities and expressing desire to learn from them new genres. The positive impact of taking an egalitarian approach with prisoners was also shown in a qualitative meta-synthesis, indicating that such an approach is characteristic of music instructors who create socially safe spaces within music groups, promote autonomy, and the encourage conceptualization of an agentic self (Kougiali et al., 2018).

Cultural Sensitivity

Zhu (2011) defined cultural sensitivity as “the quality of being aware of and accepting of other cultures.” (p. 118). Cultural awareness is important as differences between cultures can affect relationships and communication. Cultural sensitivity was found lacking in prison interventions (Jones et al., 2013), since they are manual-based and do not take into account individual differences (Coates, 2016). Cultural sensitivity is critical for interventions with prisoners and FIIs since ethnic minorities are often over-represented in these settings (Allen & Dempsey, 2016). Therefore, understanding an individual’s cultural background can help provide better insight into his or her personality (Garratt, 2004).

The current findings support the literature and stress the importance of a culturally sensitive approach. Staff-participants exercised humility, openness, and good will to learn about the participants and their music, bridge the cultural gap, and form a connection. They used non-professional music terminology that reflected their efforts to genuinely know the participants. The ability of a music intervention to bridge cultural differences and connect individuals from both sides of social, political, and ethnic conflicts has already been shown. It could occur during intense moment of protest (Bensimon, 2009) or in a musical-communal project for enhancing communication among students of multi-cultural origin (Gilboa et al., 2009). Music is a non-verbal way of communication, so it is often used as a symbol of culture (Garratt, 2004). Therefore, it is not surprising that music serves as a non-threatening medium that can promote cultural sensitivity, thereby enhancing therapeutic alliance and potentially improving the efficacy of intervention programs in prison (Dickie-Johnson & Meek, 2020).

Playfulness

Prison can be extremely stressful for inmates due to the numerous pains of imprisonment (Crewe, 2011) and the little control they have over their environment (Hulley et al., 2011). Noise, which is the presence of unwanted sound (Devlin & Arneill, 2003), is not just an annoyance. It is also potentially harmful to health (Andringa & Lanser, 2013). The prison environment is full of constant harsh, annoying, and startling sounds such as beeps and alarms, banging, and shouting. Such sounds set the mind in a stressful “fight-or-flight” mode which forces constant alertness and attentiveness (Moran, 2019). Stress in prison is present also due to the makeup of the inmate population who, for the most part, have already suffered traumatic experiences prior to incarceration (Goff et al., 2007). Living in prison is a matter of physical, mental, and emotional survival and was thus found to elevate levels of anxiety (López-Pérez et al., 2018) and anger (Unver et al., 2013).

Living in a constant survival mode and facing stressful challenges, incarcerated individuals both in and out of prison need a counter measure to help them move forward toward rehabilitation. According to the present findings, the SOP created a secure space for the FIIs to exercise playfulness. Both FIIs and staff members participating in the SOP stated that getting into a musical groove gave them a great feeling of enjoyment and excitement. Playfulness is described as a state of mind (Guitard et al., 2005) that typically occurs in secure, stress-free environments (Bateson, 2015). It is defined as an internal predisposition characterized by creativity, curiosity, pleasure, sense of humor, spontaneity, and tolerance for unexpected events. It is important for good health since it contributes to joy, satisfaction, happiness, and well-being, and is associated with the absence of stress and tension (Guitard et al., 2005; Milteer et al., 2012). When we play music, compose songs or improvise, we experience a state of playfulness (Bensimon, 2020) because it is “inventive, spontaneous, extemporaneous, resourceful, and involves creating and playing simultaneously” (Bruscia, 1987, p. 5).