Abstract
The police killing of George Floyd drew greater attention to the life-threatening effects of law enforcement on men of color. Media coverage of Floyd’s killing has since focused on near-death calls for his “Mama” and the devastating loss of a beloved father for his 6-year-old daughter, Gianna. By highlighting Floyd’s role as a family member, these accounts humanize a man who, like so many others, got caught up in our country’s system of mass policing and incarceration.
Holding On seeks to do the same for men in “justice-involved families”—a sizeable population, given that over half of the 2.2 million people in U.S. jails and prisons are parents, many fathers who are married or in committed relationships. The authors describe the findings of the Multi-site Family Study on Incarceration, Parenting, and Partnering, a decade-long research project designed to understand experiences of men’s incarceration and reentry among heterosexual couples. A sophisticated mixed-methods design explored father–child and co-parenting relationships during and after incarceration, following many up to three years post-release.
Each chapter begins with an in-depth look at one focal father and his family as they navigated common incarceration challenges. Integrating quantitative survey data with that from in-depth qualitative interviews with both fathers and mothers, the authors show how more contact with children, parental responsibility during incarceration, and family support predicted successful post-prison reintegration. That is, men did better the more they identified and received support as fathers during and after incarceration. Unfortunately, fathers received almost no help from correctional facilities for maintaining family ties: exorbitant fees for phone calls, restrictions on mail and contact during in-person visits, and prison assignments that pulled fathers out of easy geographic reach of their families undermined fathering. These findings call into question traditional metrics of successful reentry, namely, finding and keeping jobs and avoiding subsequent arrests and incarceration. A broader focus on incarceration’s effects on families suggests that the ability to maintain parental and partnership connections should also be prioritized in how we operationalize post-release “success.”
Holding On makes a convincing case that, although job and education programs are crucial, they are more effectively paired with practices that support and strengthen family relationships during men’s time in prison and after their release. The study’s evaluation of relationship skills programs for fathers and partners was particularly telling. The program with the most positive results, a one-time weekend relationship retreat, allowed couples to achieve new levels of intimacy and connection. Couples talked about being able to eat non “jail food” side-by-side at the same table. One partner shared, “We was together and there was no shackles, no nothing. You get to give him a kiss and a hug.” That this remarkably low-dose intervention had effects on later relationship quality suggests how deprived justice-involved couples are of meaningful opportunities to bond. In-prison contact had similar impacts, suggesting that the content of relationship classes mattered less than giving partners a context for acting as couples and co-parents inside and outside the prison environment.
This sheds light on why the reentry period presents unique challenges for intimate and parenting relationships. Women are worn down from years of solo parenting, paid work, and stretched finances, and the economic and emotional demands of supporting a prisoner. Intimate partner violence is also common. Men and their partners were reluctant to disclose anything that could risk fathers’ reincarceration, making it difficult for researchers to assess the true incidence of relationship problems. The authors offer a thoughtful discussion of researcher positionality and how those who study punitive systems may not always be trusted as neutral observers.
The book’s focus on measurement, with less attention paid to men’s and partners’ narratives, renders the book better suited for an audience of advanced undergraduates, graduate students, and scholars of incarceration and fatherhood. Significant attention to how race and views of masculinity shaped fathers’ experiences was outside the scope of the book’s analysis. Still, the study’s findings point to necessary future research on how racialized and gendered meanings around partnering and parenting shape fathers’ perspectives while in prison.
Overall, Holding On is a hopeful and empathic book that packs significant policy-relevant analysis into a slim volume. It accomplishes its main goal to understand incarcerated men as they navigate the divides of home, work, community, and state surveillance. The authors implore readers to consider the devastating effects of how family support services rarely intersect with institutions tasked with adjudicating and punishing “criminals.” This siloed system denies incarcerated men’s embeddedness in family life and works against efforts to reduce recidivism. Holding On provides a blueprint for how we can envision a more just criminal justice system that works to sustain and support, rather than undermine, men’s family ties.