A Call for a Transformative Public Health Training: The Necessity of Abolition

Abstract

The societal distrust of public health alongside the complex, intersecting, and large public health crises of today and our future requires a transformation of the education of the next generation of public health leaders. The field of public health’s goals of health equity for all cannot be advanced until our field interrogates and resists the prison industrial complex (PIC), which maintains White supremacy and (re)produces health inequities. As current and former public health students, we propose incorporating abolition of the PIC as a political vision, structural and power analysis, and organizing strategy into the public health curriculum. We highlight gaps in the public health curriculum and the existing similarities between stated goals of abolition and public health. We propose calls to action for individuals, faculty, and schools of public health to interrogate the carceral nature of public health and work toward contributing to the positive project of an abolitionist future.

Keywords

public health curriculum abolition pedagogy

Following the uprising against police violence after the state-sanctioned murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Walter Wallace, Tony McDade, and many others, public health departments, academic institutions, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2021) finally declared racism a public health threat and core driver of health inequities. If the public health field aims to truly confront racism and meet its goals of advancing health equity for all, we must recognize the prison industrial complex (PIC), which is defined as the “overlapping interests of government and industry that use surveillance, policing, and imprisonment as solutions to economic, social and political problems” (Critical Resistance, 1997), as a system that is deeply rooted in White supremacy and foundational to perpetuating health inequities. Despite increased scholarship around the public health harms of the carceral system and calls for abolition of the PIC as a public health strategy (American Public Health Association [APHA], 2020), public health training in the United States (U.S.) does not include a comprehensive examination of the PIC, its public health impacts, or the field’s complicity in the PIC.

We, the authors of this commentary, are current and former public health students across various U.S. universities who recognize that health equity cannot be advanced until our field actively and explicitly resists the PIC. We believe public health training needs to utilize disciplinary self-critique, a tenet of public health critical race praxis (PHCRP), to highlight how public health training norms reproduce injustices within public health and society at large (Ford & Airhihenbuwa, 2010; Hardeman & Karbeah, 2020). PHCRP applies principles from critical race theory to address the ways racism influences health inequities and the approaches used to study them (Ford & Airhihenbuwa, 2010). Guided by PHCRP, we outline the historical and contemporary public health harms of the PIC, the gaps in current public health training, and our collective vision for a public health education grounded in abolitionist theory and practice.

The History and Growth of the PIC

An examination of the PIC must begin with the history of policing and incarceration as systems of the carceral state built to protect racial capitalism and White supremacy while subjugating Black, Indigenous, migrant, and other marginalized communities. Racial capitalism describes the modern world system that combines racialized exploitation with capital accumulation; depends on slavery, colonialism, and genocide (Robinson, 1983); and is increasingly being interrogated as a fundamental cause of health inequities (Laster Pirtle, 2020; McClure et al., 2020). The maintenance of racial capitalism is woven into the fabric of policing from its origins in the 18th century of slave patrols that squashed uprisings of enslaved people and captured people seeking freedom (Reichel, 1992). Over time, slave patrols transformed into militia-style policing units in charge of enforcing the “Black Codes,” which regulated and restricted Black people’s ability to work, vote, own land, and live (Hassett-Walker, 2021). This was the first glimpse into the PIC as new models were created to uphold racialized hierarchies, such as the first prison boom and the proliferation of prison labor camps (Alexander, 2010). It also established social constructions of “crime” and who is deemed a criminal, effectively reproducing both anti-Black racism and classism (Muhammad, 2011, p. 79).

In later years, policing and incarceration adapted to the changing political and social climate to continue the maintenance of White supremacy. The ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, which granted all citizens (including formerly enslaved people) equal protection under the law, was quickly followed by Jim Crow laws that legalized racial segregation (Hassett-Walker, 2021). Police were key enforcers of these laws and actively undermined the Civil Rights Movement, its leaders, and supporters through surveillance and state-sanctioned violence (United States. Congress. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, 1976). Beginning in the 1970s, the “War on Drugs” marked another rapid expansion of both police and prisons with a tripling of drug-related arrests between 1980 and 1993 (Tonry, 1994, p. 70).

Today, the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world (Sawyer & Wagner, 2022). There are 2 million people currently incarcerated in the U.S., representing a 500% increase over the past four decades (The Sentencing Project, 2022). While home to less than 5% of the global population, the U.S. holds nearly 16% of the global incarcerated population (Vera Institute of Justice, 2022). Beyond these staggering absolute numbers, the racialized disparities of policing and incarceration are striking. Black men comprise only 13% of the population but 35% of those incarcerated, equivalent to an incarceration rate 3.6 times higher for Black people than White people (Hinton et al., 2018). Furthermore, people racialized as Black, Indigenous, Latinx, and Pacific Islander are disproportionately surveilled, stopped, and killed by police (Edwards et al., 2018; Gelman et al., 2007; Hyland et al., 2015; Kramer & Remster, 2018; Schwartz & Jahn, 2022).

The prominence of the PIC directly reflects the utilization of punitive strategies as a method of social control (Deivanayagam et al., 2021). More than 80% of all arrests are for low-level, nonviolent offenses related to poverty (Vera Institute of Justice, 2022). Carceral responses do not meet the needs of historically and structurally marginalized communities. Instead, these responses reproduce poverty, racism, and political disenfranchisement—the same factors that cause many people to turn to criminalized behaviors as a means of survival in the first place (Jahn, 2020).

Public Health and the PIC

Public health institutions, both academic and professional, perpetuate this cycle of criminalization by relying on the criminal legal system to address public health issues. This complicity has been referred to as the “carceral management of poverty” and includes relying on law enforcement to address gun violence, homelessness, substance use, and mental health crises (Wacquant, 1999, p. 349); engaging in surveillance, mandatory reporting, and family separation via the child welfare or “family policing” system (Roberts, 2022, p. 160); using criminalization and punishment via police to enforce COVID-19 mandates (Kajeepeta et al., 2022); sharing the results of drug, HIV, and other tests with law enforcement; and employing armed police in public health hospitals (Beyond Do No Harm, n.d.; Towards Abolition, n.d.). Beyond these harms, public health contributes to the nonprofit industrial complex that focuses on individual behavioral change rather than root causes of harm; reforms carceral systems rather than implementing noncarceral solutions; and provides short-term support for individuals rather than long-term structural changes (Davis et al., 2022).

Utilizing carceral responses as the predominant strategy for addressing public health issues has itself led to a public health crisis (Jahn, 2020). Much research demonstrates the health harms of involvement with the criminal legal system on individuals, families, and communities (APHA, 2020). The collateral damage of the PIC as a public health solution begs the question: who is actually included in the term “public”?

The extensive harms of the PIC are rarely, if ever, discussed within public health curricula (Rice, 2022). Current public health training paradigms have shifted away from the mid-19th century model that was rooted in progressive structural changes such as housing, economic, sanitation, and workplace reforms (Fairchild et al., 2010). Instead, our training often perpetuates healthism, the idea that an individual’s health and wellbeing lies solely in their personal responsibility (Crawford, 1980). Contemporary complex public health crises such as COVID-19, climate change, gun violence, abortion criminalization, voting restrictions, and anti-queer and trans violence all require multifaceted and structural strategies that address the mechanisms that (re)create the social, structural, political, and commercial determinants of health (Breilh & Krieger, 2021). Unfortunately, public health education is simply not teaching the content and skills necessary to facilitate these responses (Brownson et al., 2017). Instead, most public health research and training focuses on the proximate causes of disease, biology, individual behavior change, and medical solutions, with little emphasis on the sociopolitical roots of health inequities (Fleming et al., 2022). For example, the initial public health response to HIV identified social identities as risk factors (e.g., the CDC referring to the “Four Hs—homosexuals, heroin users, hemophiliacs, and Haitians”) rather than structural risk factors such as lack of housing and employment, or criminalization of homosexuality, sex work, and drug use (Alang & Blackstock, 2022). Similarly, the national COVID-19 response heavily focuses on individual behaviors and pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., vaccines, individual decisions on masks) rather than structural changes such as universal health care and paid sick leave.

Furthermore, the lack of public health education that is informed by social, political, and historical theory and praxis is a testament to the atheoretical paradigm that has long sustained the harms enacted by the field of public health (Petteway, 2023). When we are taught that the functions of public health are separate from our sociopolitical realities, we risk entrapping ourselves into a disembodied epistemology that separates not only knowledge from its context but also the learners from each other in their processes of knowing. We name this function as carceral.

Abolition of the PIC

Abolition is a political vision and a practical organizing tool for eliminating prisons, policing and surveillance that (re)create harm while building life-affirming institutions and lasting alternatives to punishment (Critical Resistance, 1997). Abolition of the PIC ultimately creates a world where people have what they need to live healthy and safe lives in their communities. As abolitionist scholar Dr. Ruth Wilson Gilmore states, abolition is a positive project about presence, not absence (Lambert, 2019). While many assume abolition is solely about dismantling, it is also about re-envisioning and co-creating a world where everyone’s needs are met and where harm is addressed without relying on structural forms of oppression (Davis et al., 2022; Kaba, 2021). It is about “abolishing the conditions under which prison became the solution to problems, rather than abolishing the buildings we call prisons” (Gilmore & Murakawa, 2020, 12:52).

Public Health and Abolition

Public health training must move beyond reductionist and deficit-focused models toward teaching actionable knowledge and skills grounded in strengths-based approaches that address root causes of inequity (Champine et al., 2022). As such, we propose abolition as a public health strategy and encourage training that better equips future generations of public health practitioners to truly promote the health of all people. Abolitionist public health approaches strongly align with primary prevention, a concept well known to all public health students, defined as the prevention of disease before onset, the promotion of optimal health and wellbeing, and the provision of access to resources needed to thrive (APHA, 2020).

These ideas are not novel. We can look to history to learn the ways communities have used abolitionist public health approaches to collectively mobilize and care for each other while simultaneously resisting oppressive systems. For example, the Black Panther Party opened free health clinics across the country (Nelson, 2013), implemented a free breakfast program that sought to break the connection between intergenerational hunger and economic marginalization by feeding children nationwide (Potorti, 2017), and started a national sickle cell anemia screening program (Bassett, 2016). Similarly, the Young Lords, a Puerto Rican activist organization, drew attention to health inequities and poverty by working with medical providers to offer door-to-door education and screening for poisoning and tuberculosis in New York and demanded better health care and improved conditions through direct action (Fernández, 2020). These historical health activism and abolitionist public health efforts highlight another important tenet of abolition generally lacking in current public health education: the importance of community. It is not enough to acknowledge the harms of the system, it is also necessary to actively work to undo the harms by engaging with, centering the priorities of, and creating space to be led by communities marginalized by systems of oppression, in both research and praxis (Fleming et al., 2022).

As students of public health, we see the urgency to include abolition in our curricula, and dually, we see the dangers of co-optation. Academia has long appropriated the radical history of terms associated with social and political movements. This erasure of political roots is an act of depoliticization, where meaning is removed from language to advance profit, capital, or maintain a social order. As students in academia, we have witnessed committees and task forces adopt “radical” language, claim to do the work of equity, all while draining student and staff volunteers of their time and resources, with no structural change ultimately produced. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion has become an industrial complex in itself—a machine motivated by profit, capital, and the maintenance of academic hierarchy (Lett et al., 2022). With this said, we do not wish to feed abolition to this machine. Our desire is to pursue abolition through education as a means of liberation—not academia as liberation.

In the current crisis of trust in public health (The Commonwealth Fund, 2022), there is a dire need to transform the public health curriculum to reshape the future of the field. A shift in curriculum also has larger implications for the broader struggle of abolition when the field of public health and academia at large recognize that education contributes to life as a whole, rather than simply operating within a vacuum. Abolition in our curriculum is how we harvest the classroom as a place of critical pedagogical growth, and, as Black feminist bell hooks (1994) names, re-envision the classroom as the most radical space of possibility in the academy.

Beyond addressing the deleterious impacts of the PIC on public health, a public health abolitionist training encourages an upstream, community-led focus that centers the margins (Ford & Airhihenbuwa, 2010) and examines the underlying causes of disease that move beyond the social determinants of health (SDOH). While there is growing focus on the SDOH, it is crucial to interrogate the sociopolitical forces, such as racial capitalism (Laster Pirtle, 2020), that underlie and create those social determinants. Indeed, many public health foundational principles (e.g., 10 Essential Public Health Services) can be used to build life-affirming structures and reduce the scope and scale of the PIC through primary prevention strategies, such as affordable housing and economic security (Human Impact Partners, 2022).

Current pedagogical examples of interrogating structural racism, including the PIC, are limited (Chandler et al., 2022; Rice, 2022). However, there are some examples of public health faculty who teach courses related to the public health impacts of criminalization and mass incarceration (Duarte et al., 2020; Fullilove et al., 2020; Heller & Galea, 2020; Nowotny et al., 2020; Rice, 2022) as well as efforts in social work (James, 2021) and medicine (Asmerom et al., 2022) that integrate abolition into the curriculum. Echoing other recent calls, there is a need for academic public health to generate scholarship and train professionals on the population health consequences of the PIC and develop community-led strategies to reduce incarceration (Heller & Galea, 2020). Faculty can utilize the rich body of literature developed outside of academia for teaching and discussing abolition (Kaba, 2021; Kaba & Ritchie, 2022; Towards Abolition, n.d.), and academic institutions can pay local abolitionist community organizers and leaders to bring their lived experiences, expertise, and knowledge to the classroom.

Call to Action and Invitation

We are neither the first nor will we be the last to call for public health training to address the harms of the PIC (APHA, 2020). We hope this call to action can be a catalyst for the field to join the growing coalition of people across identities, geographies, and politics working toward true public health and safety that does not involve policing or punishment. To pursue this, One Million Experiments (2022) helps guide the creativity, imagination, and experimentation necessary to create a world in which everyone can thrive. This means abolitionist public health can be pursued in a myriad of ways from the interpersonal to the systemic level. For example, we can integrate the public health consequences of the PIC into the curriculum (Heller & Galea, 2020); organize alongside existing student-led efforts such as the national abolitionist Cops off Campus Coalition (2022); contribute to public health education for those who are incarcerated (Fullilove et al., 2020); join local mutual aid efforts (Spade, 2020); examine the health inequities in the carceral system that have been illuminated by the COVID-19 pandemic to advocate for decarceration at local prison and jails (Beckett et al., 2021); and organize and build power with students (Little, 2020) and faculty (University of Michigan School of Public Health Faculty, 2020) to demand university’s investment in policing be redirected to mental health services, affordable housing, adequate pay, and other factors that create more equitable and just campuses. While we do not expect academic spaces to be a sole source of abolition, we see it as a site of struggle, collaboration, and learning on the way toward abolition. Grounded in this spirit of experimentation and imagination, the following includes additional invitations, ideas, and examples of actions for individuals, faculty, and public health programs to bring abolition into their lives and public health work.

Individuals

Practice reflexivity. Abolition requires continual unlearning and relearning. Reflexivity allows us to authentically engage in the processes of unlearning harmful ideas and actions and relearning caring ideas and actions to take their place (Ford & Airhihenbuwa, 2010). This practice is ongoing, but never linear or static.

Actively build and organize with community. As Kaba (2021) tells us, “everything worthwhile is done with other people.” Whether that be grounded in learning, organizing to end carceral practices and policies at your university and/or city, or simply fostering caring relationships with one another, we encourage individuals to begin to co-conspire and build a coalition in community, both in and outside of academia.

Resist disposability. A carceral framework presupposes that certain populations, particularly those that have been “othered,” are disposable. Disposability is a carceral solution to harm and conflict, but abolition means that no one is disposable. When we experience small instances of harm in our daily lives, rather than ignore or dispose, we must practice addressing these harms to prevent them from becoming larger and to build our collective capacity for transformative justice.

Leverage existing public health training for abolitionist goals. Those who have studied public health receive comprehensive training on implementing and evaluating interventions. With a cautious eye to co-optation and the harms of the nonprofit industrial complex that public health contributes to, we can leverage our existing public health skills in evaluation and qualitative research to contribute to noncarceral, preventive, community-based responses that address harm and foster accountability.

Professors and Teaching Faculty

Reject the myth of objectivity. Instructors of public health must reject the atheoretical history of public health and the idea that science can be objective or apolitical. Through embracing critical pedagogy and understanding that all research is influenced by researchers’ social, historical, and political contexts, students and instructors alike will be able to collectively embrace bridging theory to practice (Figure 1).

Embrace abolition as pedagogy. Abolition is both content and practice. It is not enough to simply offer abolitionist subject matter—it is also a pedagogical framing to how subject matter is taught. For example, instructors can create caring and restorative classroom environments as opposed to ones based on punishment (Love, 2019).

Be a champion. Academic environments inhibit work toward liberation through punitive measures against those who speak out. Professors, especially those who are tenured, can be advocates for racial justice, critical pedagogy, and abolitionist frameworks, in support of students, faculty who are not tenured, and community partners, and must be prepared to embrace the consequences that come with it.

Be a disruptor. Academia thrives on complicity. Do not be afraid to upset the status quo. Start to practice identifying power dynamics (including your own power) and then begin disrupting them.

Name structural oppressions. Faculty must upend the assumption that students receive foundational knowledge about structural racism elsewhere. Instead of skirting around the topic, address it head on with a critical pedagogical stance. Instead of dismissing classroom tensions by being silent on topics such as structural racism, lean into the discomfort and provide an inclusive environment to unlearn and relearn together. An abolitionist ethos understands that mistakes will be made and that collective efforts of creating accountability—without disposability or punishment—will move us toward justice.

Figure 1

Proposed Transformations of Public Health Training.

Public Health Programs

Revise curriculum. In core classes, include learning objectives about the public health harms of the PIC. Ensure that abolitionist concepts and pedagogy are integrated at all levels, particularly as part of the foundational teachings of public health. Furthermore, core disciplines of public health should identify unique aspects of how policing, incarceration, and abolition can integrate into their specific curricular focus (e.g., epidemiological approaches to measuring the population health harms of policing or environmental health frameworks that incorporate the interconnectedness of climate change and mass incarceration [Prins & Story, 2020]). This should include paid input or guest lectures from local organizers and people who have directly experienced the harms of policing and incarceration.

Experiment and evaluate. Evaluation, when used as a tool for critical inquiry and exploration, can help build a more transformative educational institution. Ongoing evaluation efforts can support the process of experimentation—whether it may be piloting new curriculum or instructional methods—and can also embody an abolitionist praxis.

Amplify student and community voices. Center student and community voices, especially the voices of abolitionists who are directly impacted by the criminal legal system, in all aspects of program planning, from design to implementation. Seek to host active, ongoing dialogue that empowers students to be a part of curriculum shifts toward abolition.

Speak up and speak out. As powerful and respected authorities, leadership of public health programs must use their platform to draw attention to the ways that the PIC harms health, including the deadly impact of COVID-19 spreading unabated in prisons and jails and the ongoing disproportionate police killings of Black and Brown people. To address these harms, leaders must draw on the growing body of evidence that explicitly names abolition as a public health strategy (APHA, 2020).

Examine institutional complicity. Many university endowments are invested in companies that exploit and benefit from the PIC. Universities also purchase furniture or other products made by people who are incarcerated and not adequately paid for their work, if paid at all. Administrators and department heads in academic institutions have power to challenge these unjust practices that are antithetical to their stated public health goals.

As an assembly of emerging public health students, we invite other public health students to build with us. We believe education to be a catalyst for liberation and a site of abolitionist learning and practice. While the academy is not liberation itself, academia is where many public health leaders receive their training. Because of this, we feel strongly that public health students can find unity in our efforts toward an abolitionist future. We invite readers to contact us so that we may collectively continue to build momentum in pursuit of a more just future.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Nishita Dsouza is now affiliated to Columbia University School of Social Work, New York, NY, USA.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: One author, Nishita Dsouza, is supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number T32DA037801. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

ORCID iD

Haley Lipo Zovic

References

Alang

Blackstock

(2022). Health justice: A framework for mitigating the impacts of HIV and COVID-19 on disproportionately affected communities. American Journal of Public Health, 113, 194–201. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307139

Alexander

(2010). The New Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press. https://newjimcrow.com/

American Public Health Association. (2020, October 24). Advancing Public Health Interventions to address the harms of the Carceral system [Policy Statements]. https://www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database////advancing-public-health-interventions-to-address-the-harms-of-the-carceral-system,20210114.

Asmerom

Legha

R. K.

Mabeza

R. M.

Nuñez

(2022). An abolitionist approach to antiracist medical education. AMA Journal of Ethics, 24(3), 194–200. https://doi.org/10.1001/amajethics.2022.194

Bassett

M. T.

(2016). Beyond Berets: The Black Panthers as health activists. American Journal of Public Health, 106(10), 1741–1743. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2016.303412

Beckett

Wispelwey

Kiran

Mukherjee

(2021). Decarceration: Seeking justice in the era of COVID-19. Partners In Health. https://www.pih.org/sites/default/files/lc/Decarceration%20White%20Paper%20Jan%202021.pdf

Beyond Do No Harm. (n.d.). Interrupting criminalization. https://www.interruptingcriminalization.com/bdnh

Breilh

Krieger

(2021). Critical epidemiology and the people’s health. In Critical epidemiology and the people’s health. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780190492786.001.0001

Brownson

R. C.

Samet

J. M.

Bensyl

D. M.

(2017). Applied epidemiology and public health: Are we training the future generations appropriately? Annals of Epidemiology, 27(2), 77–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2016.12.002

10.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, November 24). Racism and health. https://www.cdc.gov/healthequity/racism-disparities/index.html

11.

Champine

R. B.

McCullough

W. R.

El Reda

D. K.

(2022). Critical race theory for public health students to recognize and eliminate structural racism. American Journal of Public Health, 112(6), 850–852. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306846

12.

Chandler

C. E.

Williams

C. R.

Turner

M. W.

Shanahan

M. E.

(2022). Training public health students in racial justice and health equity: A systematic review. Public Health Reports, 137(2), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549211015665

13.

The Commonwealth Fund. (2022). Meeting America’s Public Health Challenge: Recommendations for building a national public health system that addresses ongoing and future health crises, advances equity, and earns trust (p. 30). https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2022/jun/meeting-americas-public-health-challenge

14.

Cops off Campus Coalition. (2022). Cops off campus. https://copsoffcampuscoalition.com/

15.

Crawford

(1980). Healthism and the medicalization of everyday life. International Journal of Health Services, 10(3), 365–388. https://doi.org/10.2190/3H2H-3XJN-3KAY-G9NY

16.

Crear-Perry

Correa-de-Araujo

Lewis Johnson

McLemore

M. R.

Neilson

Wallace

(2021). Social and structural determinants of health inequities in maternal health. Journal of Women’s Health, 2002(2), 30230–30235. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2020.8882

17.

Critical Resistance. (1997). What is the PIC? What is abolition? https://criticalresistance.org/mission-vision/not-so-common-language/

18.

Davis

A. Y.

Dent

Meiners

E. R.

Richie

B. E.

(2022). Abolition. Feminism. Now. Haymarket Books.

19.

Dawes

(2020). The political determinants of health (1st ed.). Johns Hopkins University Press.

20.

Deivanayagam

T. A.

Lasoye

Smith

Selvarajah

(2021). Policing is a threat to public health and human rights. BMJ Global Health, 6(2), e004582. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004582

21.

Duarte

dP Alson

J. G.

Garakani

O. B.

Mitchell

C. M.

(2020). Applications of the American Public Health Association’s statement on addressing law enforcement violence as a public health issue. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S1), S30–S32. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305447

22.

Edwards

Esposito

M. H.

Lee

(2018). Risk of police-involved death by race/ethnicity and place, United States, 2012–2018. American Journal of Public Health, 108(9), 1241–1248. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304559

23.

Fairchild

A. L.

Rosner

Colgrove

Bayer

Fried

L. P.

(2010). The EXODUS of public health what history can tell us about the future. American Journal of Public Health, 100(1), 54–63. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.163956

24.

Fernández

(2020). The young lords: A radical history. University of North Carolina Press. https://www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/10.5149/9781469653464_fernandez

25.

Fleming

P. J.

Stone

L. C.

Creary

M. S.

Greene-Moton

Israel

B. A.

Key

K. D.

Reyes

A. G.

Wallerstein

Schulz

A. J.

(2022). Antiracism and community-based participatory research: Synergies, challenges, and opportunities. American Journal of Public Health, 113(1), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307114

26.

Ford

C. L.

Airhihenbuwa

C. O.

(2010). Critical race theory, race equity, and public health: Toward antiracism Praxis. American Journal of Public Health, 100(Suppl. 1), S30–S35. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.171058

27.

Freire

(2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum. https://kinasevych.ca/2014/02/05/freire-2000-pedagogy-of-the-oppressed/

28.

Fullilove

R. E.

Cortes

Gamarra

Maxis

(2020). The Bard Prison initiative: Education, incarceration, and public health. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S1), S33–S34. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305457

29.

Gelman

Fagan

Kiss

(2007). An analysis of the New York City police department’s “stop-and-frisk” policy in the context of claims of racial bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102(479), 813–823. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214506000001040

30.

Gilmore

R. W.

Murakawa

(Directors). (2020, April). Covid 19, decarceration, and abolition. Haymarket Books.

31.

Giroux

(2007). Democracy, education, and the politics of critical pedagogy. In McLaren

Kincheloe

(Eds.), Critical pedagogy: Where are we now? (pp. 1–5). Peter Lang.

32.

Hardeman

R. R.

Karbeah

(2020). Examining racism in health services research: A disciplinary self-critique. Health Services Research, 55(S2), 777–780. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13558

33.

Hassett-Walker

(2021, January 11). How you start is how you finish? The slave patrol and Jim Crow origins of policing. Human Rights Magazine: Civil Rights Reimagining Policing, 46(2). https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/how-you-start-is-how-you-finish/

34.

Heller

Galea

(2020). The role of academic public health in reducing incarceration. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S1), S16–S17. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305265

35.

Hinton

Henderson

Reed

(2018). An unjust burden: The disparate treatment of Black Americans in the criminal justice system [Vera Evidence Brief]. Vera Institute of Justice. https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf

36.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching To transgress. Routledge; Taylor & Francis.

37.

Human Impact Partners. (2022, January). Liberation is essential: Leveraging governmental public health tools to address the harms of the criminal legal system. Human Impact Partners. https://humanimpact.org/hipprojects/liberation-is-essential-leveraging-governmental-public-health-tools-to-address-the-harms-of-the-criminal-legal-system/?strategy=browse-by-strategy

38.

Hyland

Langton

Davis

(2015, November). Police use of nonfatal force, 2002-11. Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/police-use-nonfatal-force-2002-11

39.

Jahn

J. L.

(2020). A multilevel approach to understanding mass incarceration and health: Key directions for research and practice. American Journal of Public Health, 110(Suppl. 1), S50–S51. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305432

40.

James

K. J.

(2021). Black lives, mass incarceration, and the perpetuity of trauma in the era of COVID-19: The road to abolition social work. In Tosone

(Ed.), Shared trauma, shared resilience during a pandemic: Social work in the time of COVID-19 (pp. 281–290). Springer.

41.

Kaba

(2021). We do this ’til we free us: Abolitionist organizing and transforming justice. Haymarket Books.

42.

Kaba

Ritchie

A. J.

(2022). No more police: A case for abolition. The New Press.

43.

Kajeepeta

Bruzelius

J. Z.

Prins

S. J.

(2022). Policing the pandemic: Estimating spatial and racialized inequities in New York City police enforcement of COVID-19 mandates. Critical Public Health, 32(1), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2021.1987387

44.

Klein

D. E.

Lima

J. M.

(2021). The prison industrial complex as a commercial determinant of health. American Journal of Public Health, 111(10), 1750–1752. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306467

45.

Kramer

Remster

(2018). Stop, frisk, and assault? Racial disparities in police use of force during investigatory stops. Law & Society Review, 52(4), 960–993. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12366

46.

Lambert

(2019, February). Making abolition geography in California’s Central Valley. The Funambulist-politics of Space and Bodies, 21, 14–19.

47.

Laster Pirtle

W. N

. (2020). Racial capitalism: A fundamental cause of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic inequities in the United States. Health Education & Behavior, 47(4), 504–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198120922942

48.

Lett

Adekunle

McMurray

Asabor

E. N.

Irie

Simon

M. A.

Hardeman

McLemore

M. R.

(2022). Health equity tourism: Ravaging the justice landscape. Journal of Medical Systems, 46(3), 17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-022-01803-5

49.

Little

(2020, September 17). GEO strike highlights relationship between policing and health. The Michigan Daily. http://www.michigandaily.com/news/academics/geo-strike-sparks-dialogue-about-relationship-between-policing-and-health/

50.

Love

B. L.

(2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press.

51.

McClure

E. S.

Vasudevan

Bailey

Patel

Robinson

W. R.

(2020). Racial capitalism within public health—How occupational settings drive COVID-19 disparities. American Journal of Epidemiology, 189(11), 1244–1253. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwaa126

52.

Muhammad

K. G.

(2011). The condemnation of blackness: Race, crime, and the making of modern urban America (1st ed.). Harvard University Press.

53.

Nelson

(2013). Body and soul—The Black Panther party and the fight against medical discrimination. University of Minnesota Press. https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/body-and-soul

54.

Nowotny

K. M.

Zielinski

M. J.

Stringer

K. L.

Pugh

Metsch

L. R.

El-Bassel

Nunn

A. S.

Beckwith

C. G.

(2020). Training the next generation of researchers dedicated to improving health outcomes for justice-involved populations. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S1), S18–S20. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305411

55.

One Million Experiments. (2022). https://millionexperiments.com

56.

Petteway

R. J.

(2023). PRESENCE//gifted: On poetry, antiracism, and epistemic violence in health promotion. Health Promotion Practice, 24(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399221129535

57.

Potorti

(2017). “Feeding the revolution”: The Black Panther party, hunger, and community survival. Journal of African American Studies, 21(1), 85–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-017-9345-9

58.

Prins

S. J.

Story

(2020). Connecting the dots between mass incarceration, health inequity, and climate change. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S1), S35–S36. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305470

59.

Reichel

P. L.

(1992). The misplaced emphasis on urbanization in police development. Policing and Society, 3(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.1992.9964653

60.

Rice

(2022, September 28). Abolition, incarceration and the public’s health—The charge for public health. https://www.bu.edu/sph/conversations/health-inequities/abolition-incarceration-and-the-publics-health/

61.

Roberts

(2022). Torn apart: How the child welfare system destroys black families–and how abolition can build a safer world. Basic Books.

62.

Robinson

C. J.

(1983). Black Marxism: The making of the Black radical tradition. University of North Carolina Press.

63.

Sawyer

Wagner

(2022). Mass incarceration: The Whole Pie 2022. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2022.html

64.

Schwartz

G. L.

Jahn

J. L.

(2022). Disaggregating Asian American and Pacific Islander risk of fatal police violence. PLOS ONE, 17(10), e0274745. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274745

65.

The Sentencing Project. (2022, September 8). Growth in mass incarceration. The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/research/

66.

Spade

(2020). Mutual aid: Building solidarity during this crisis (and the next) (p. 128). Verso Books.

67.

Tonry

(1994). Race and the war on drugs. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1994(1), 59.

68.

Towards Abolition. (n.d.). Towards abolition. https://www.towardsabolition.com/

69.

United States. Congress. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities. (1976). Final report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, United States Senate: Together with additional, supplemental, and separate views (Vol. 3). U.S. Govt. Print. Off. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015076851883&view=1up&seq=1

70.

University of Michigan School of Public Health Faculty. (2020, September 14). Op-Ed: Policing is a public health issue. The Michigan Daily. http://www.michigandaily.com/opinion/columns/op-ed-policing-public-health-issue/

71.

Vera Institute of Justice. (2022). Ending mass incarceration. https://www.vera.org/ending-mass-incarceration

72.

Wacquant

(1999). How penal common sense comes to Europeans. European Societies, 1(3), 319–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.1999.10749936