Attitudes towards prisoners, as reported by prison inmates, prison employees and college students

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Positive attitudes towards prisoners are important in securing the effectiveness of various correctional rehabilitation programs and the successful reintegration of prisoners after release. We wanted to investigate the attitudes towards prisoners among prison inmates, prison employees and college students.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Attitudes Toward Prisoners scale was completed by 298 inmates in 4 Norwegian prisons, 387 employees working in the same prisons, and 183 college students. In addition, all respondents were asked a number of general questions about prisoners, crime and punishment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The study groups differed significantly in their attitudes towards prisoners, as measured by the Attitudes Toward Prisoners scale, with prison inmates holding the most positive attitudes. Prison officers held more negative attitudes than other prison employees. Prison employees working in female-only facilities held more positive attitudes than those working in male-only facilities. Students differed significantly in their attitudes, with those studying business economics holding more negative attitudes than those studying nursing. A number of strong correlations emerged between negative attitudes towards prisoners and more pessimistic and punitive answers on general questions about prisoners, crime and punishment.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The attitudes towards prisoners differed markedly among the groups investigated. The findings could have important implications, particularly for the preventive work carried out in our prisons. Whether attitudes toward prisoners can be influenced by educational programs and the dispersion of factual information needs to be investigated.</p

Mental health consultations in a prison population: a descriptive study

BACKGROUND: The psychiatric morbidity among prison inmates is substantially higher than in the general population. We do, however, have insufficient knowledge about the extent of psychiatric treatment provided in our prisons. The aim of the present study was to give a comprehensive description of all non-pharmacological interventions provided by the psychiatric health services to a stratified sample of prison inmates. METHODS: Six medium/large prisons (n = 928) representing 1/3 of the Norwegian prison population and with female and preventive detention inmates over-sampled, were investigated cross-sectionally. All non-pharmacological psychiatric interventions, excluding pure correctional programs, were recorded. Those receiving interventions were investigated further and compared to the remaining prison population. RESULTS: A total of 230 of the 928 inmates (25 %) had some form of psychiatric intervention: 184 (20 %) were in individual psychotherapy, in addition 40 (4 %) received ad hoc interventions during the registration week. Group therapy was infrequent (1 %). The psychotherapies were most often of a supportive (62 %) or behavioural-cognitive (26 %) nature. Dynamic, insight-oriented psychotherapies were infrequent (8 %). Concurrent psychopharmacological treatment was prevalent (52 %). Gender and age did not correlate with psychiatric interventions, whereas prisoner category (remanded, sentenced, or preventive detention) did (p < 0.001). Most inmates had a number of defined problem areas, with substance use, depression, anxiety, and personality disorders most prevalent. Three percent of all inmates were treated for a psychotic disorder. Remand prisoners averaged 14 sessions per week per 100 inmates, while sentenced inmates and those on preventive detention averaged 22 and 25 sessions per week per 100 inmates, respectively. Five out of six psychiatric health services estimated the inmates' psychiatric therapy needs as adequately met, both overall and in the majority of individual cases. CONCLUSION: Our results pertain only to prisons with adequate primary and mental health services and effective diversion from prison of individuals with serious mental disorders. Given these important limitations, we do propose that the service estimates found may serve as a rough guideline to the minimum number of sessions a prison's psychiatric health services should be able to fulfil in order to serve the inmates psychiatric needs. The results rely on the specialist services' own estimates only. Future studies should take other important informants, including the inmates themselves, into consideration