By Marcelo F. Aebi, Léa Berger-Kolopp, Christine Burkhardt, Mélanie M. Tiago

How many inmates are held in European prisons? Among them, how many are women? How many are foreign citizens? How many are not serving a final sentence? How many people enter prison every year, and how long do they remain there? Are there enough places for all of them? What is the ratio of inmates per member of prison staff? How much do prisons cost? If you are looking for the data necessary to provide answers to these and many other similar questions, this is the book for you. The Sourcebook of prison statistics compiles absolute numbers for 30 prison-related measures and computes another 30 indicators which can be used for comparative purposes. The sourcebook should be used together with Volume 1 of the Prisons in Europe 2005-2015 collection, which provides the context and methodology used to produce the data presented here. 

Strasburg: Council of Europe, 2019. 217p

By  Marcelo F. Aebi Léa Berger-Kolopp Christine Burkhardt Mélanie M. Tiago;  The European Union and the Council of Europe

  Country-based information on penal institutions and prison populations was collected through questionnaires sent to the prison administrations of the member states of the Council of Europe. The information collected was analysed by the authors of the study. This publication is divided into four parts across two volumes. Parts 1 to 3 are presented in this volume. Part 4 (volume 2) presents the data received from the prison administrations of the 47 member states of the Council of Europe, as well as the rates, ratios and percentages computed by the authors of this study, which were used to produce the figures included in the present volume. 

Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2019. 366p.

By Heino Stöver, Anna Tarján, Gergely Horváth & Linda Montanari 

People who inject drugs are often imprisoned, which is associated with increased levels of health risks including overdose and infectious diseases transmission, affecting not only people in prison but also the communities to which they return. This paper aims to give an up-to-date overview on availability, coverage and policy framework of prison-based harm reduction interventions in Europe. Available data on selected harm reduction responses in prisons were compiled from international standardised data sources and combined with a questionnaire survey among 30 National Focal Points of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction to determine the level of availability, estimated coverage and policy framework of the interventions. …. While 21 countries address harm reduction in prison in national strategic documents, upon-release interventions appear only in 12.

Conclusions. Availability and coverage of harm reduction interventions in European prisons are limited, compared to the community. There is a gap between international recommendations and ‘on-paper’ availability of interventions and their actual implementation. Scaling up harm reduction in prison and throughcare can achieve important individual and public-health benefits.

Harm Reduction Journal volume 18, Article number: 67 (2021) 

By Gabriel Tarde. Translated by Rapelje Howell

From the Introduction by Piers Beirne. ”…. Tarde's interventions in criminology are among the most elusive in the discipline. One among several reasons for this is that he was an insular and often bitter antagonist who cultivated neither the allies nor the disciples required of a systematic intellectual legacy. Indeed, almost to the end of his life, Tarde was unique among French academics in that, despising the intellectual domination of the metropolis, he had no secure position within the all-powerful French university system. Tarde's self-imposed isolation has doubtless contributed to the unfortunate fact that his many intellectual, political, and organizational interventions in the formative years of criminology tend nowadays to be relegated to the status of little more than a footnote in intellectual history….”

New Brunswick. Transaction. 2001. 606p. CONTAINS MARK-UP

By Róisín Mulgrew  

The State duty to prevent preventable prisoner deaths is easy to state and substantiate. Yet prisoner death rates are increasing around the world and are often much higher than those in the community. To understand why this is happening, the findings and recommendations of the country reports of international oversight bodies and thematic reports from international rapporteurs are synthesised with contemporary rights-informed penal standards, multi-disciplinary scholarship, non-governmental organization reports and media extracts. On the basis of this knowledge, this reform-oriented article explores the impact of structural, societal and environmental factors on natural and violent prisoner deaths and how these factors operate cumulatively to create dangerous and life-threatening custodial environments. The paper makes recommendations to reaffirm and enumerate the positive obligation to protect prisoners’ lives, develop specialist standards, adopt a broader approach to prison oversight and create a specific United Nations mandate on prisoner rights.

Human Rights Law Review, 2023, 23, 1–25 

By Justice Policy Institute

The Maryland Parole Commission (MPC) suffers from a series of systemic problems that result in the parole system’s inability to conduct its duties effectively. Safe at Home assesses how well parole practices in Maryland are aligned with other states, identifies inefficiencies in release decision-making, and provides options for changes to policy and practice informed by best practices in the field.

JPI conducted a comprehensive analysis of national parole practices and identified several policy options grounded in best practices in parole decision-making and supervision. JPI identified these policies by conducting interviews with system and field experts, attorneys, community members, and those with lived experience. These policy options are a mere blueprint that can help guide legislative and administrative actions better align the MPC with best practices across the country. Maryland decision-makers must now solicit input from a broad range of stakeholders, including community members, to operationalize these options into policy.

1. The MPC should adopt a structured decision-making tool that incorporates a validated needs assessment tool.

2. The MPC should operate under the presumption that the goals of punishment have been met at the time of initial parole eligibility. Parole release decision-making should be based solely on objective factors related to an individual’s future risk to public safety.

3. Supervision should be imposed selectively, with the length and conditions of supervision linked to risk. Conditions should be the least restrictive necessary to meet the goals of reentry and public safety. Resources should be frontloaded, and people should have the opportunity to shorten their parole term through good behavior.

4. The MPC should work closely with other criminal justice agencies and support agencies to develop a parole release plan that supports a successful reentry.

5. The MPC should employ transparency in parole release decision-making protocol and practices. The applicant and victim should be fully informed of the process and be allowed to participate actively.

6. Reasons for denial of parole must be made public, documented in writing, and appealable.

7. An applicant should have access to counsel and be provided all materials that the MPC will use to make its decision in advance of a hearing.

8. Establish standards for parole board member eligibility, including education and work/life experience.

9. The parole board must have transparent rules and procedures that reflect the input of all interested parties.

10. The parole board should adopt a robust set of performance measures that are publicly reported regularly.

JPI works with state leaders and community stakeholders to advance comprehensive policy options for consideration by the Maryland General Assembly, the Maryland Parole Commission, and other state decision-makers. Our work in Maryland is part of our broader efforts, in places like the District of Columbia, to draw attention to the harms of mass incarceration and long prison terms and support evidence-based reforms that provide options to earn release and safely return home.

Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2023. 59p.

By Gretta L. Goodwin; et al.

Approximately 45 percent of people released from a federal prison are rearrested or return within 3 years of their release. The First Step Act included certain requirements for DOJ and BOP aimed to reduce recidivism, including requiring the development of a system to assess the recidivism risk and needs of incarcerated people. It also required BOP to provide incarcerated people with programs and activities to address their needs and if eligible, earn time credits. The First Step Act required GAO to assess the DOJ and BOP’s implementation of certain requirements. This report addresses the extent to which DOJ and BOP implemented certain First Step Act requirements related to the (1) risk and needs assessment system, (2) identification and evaluation of programs and activities, and (3) application of time credits. GAO reviewed legislation and DOJ and BOP documents; analyzed 2022 BOP data; and interviewed DOJ and BOP headquarters officials and BOP’s employee union. GAO also conducted non-generalizable interviews with officials from four BOP regional office facilities, selected to ensure a mix of different facility characteristics. What GAO Recommends GAO is making eight recommendations for BOP to improve its implementation of the First Step Act, including collecting data, ensuring its evaluation plan has goals and milestones, having monitoring mechanisms, and tracking unstructured productive activities. BOP concurred with six recommendations,   

Washington, DC: United States Government Accountability Office , 2023. 110p. 

By Francis T. Cullen Karen E. Gilbert

From the Foreword by Donald Cressey: “'This is more than a book about punishment versus rehabilitation of criminals. It is, to be sure, the first book to defend the notion that Americans acted unwisely and too hastily when they recently exorcised rehabilitation programs from prisons. But it also is an essay on how social movements go awry - on the unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. Further, it documents aproposition which humanitarian policy makers established centuries ago, namely that "government by law" always will, in the absence of "government by men,"' have gross injustice as its consequence. More generally, it pinpoints the tragic irony involved as humanitarians, bent on reducing pain and suffering in the world, have recently convinced Amer icans to inflict more pain and suffering on criminals, even if doing so allows criminals to inflict more pain and suffering on the rest of us.”

Cincinnati, Ohio. Anderson Publishing Co. 1982. 339p. Book contains mark-up

By Nils Christie

Inflicting pain is a serious matter, often at variance with cherished values such as kindness and forgiveness. Attempts might therefore be made to hide the basic character of the activity, or to give various "scientific" reasons for inflicting pain. Such attempts are systematically described in this book, and related to social conditions. None of these attempts to cope with pain seem to be quite satisfactory. It is as if societies in their struggle with penal theories oscillate between attempts to solve an insoluble dilemma. Punishment is used less in some systems than in others. On the basis of examples from systems where pain is rarely inflicted, some general conditions for a low level of pain infliction are formulated. The standpoint is that if pain is to be applied, this should be done without a manipulative purpose and in a social form resembling that which is normal when people are in deep sorrow. Most of the material is from Scandinavia, but the book draws extensively on the crime control debate in the United Kingdom and USA.

Oxford. Martin Robertson. 1982. 117p.

By Theodor Reik

"What is the origin of the sense of collective guilt that plagues Western man? What is the crime for which man suffers an need for punishment? Dr. Theodor Reik, one of the world's leading psychoanalysts, became absorbed in this problem from many discussions with Freud. Over the years he has examined what he considers the basic myth of our civilization: the story of Adam's Fall culminating in the Passion of Christ. With the suspense of a detective story, he untangles the myth in its many expressions, tracing clues in the Bible, using the findings of psychologists and anthropologists as explanatory evidence for a startling conclusion: Man's crime, committed in prehistory, lingering in his motives and haunting him with inevitable remorse, is the sin of pride, of hybris: the killing of God, the ambition to be God.

MYTH AND GUILT opens new and suggestive avenues for understanding the religious and social motives of man and their expression in the human community."

NY. Grosset & Dunlap. 1970. 434p.

By Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Translated from the Russian by Ralph Parker.

One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is an undisputed classic of contemporary literature. First published (in censored form) in the Soviet journal Novy Mir in 1962, it is the story of labor-camp inmate Ivan Denisovich Shukhov as he struggles to maintain his dignity in the face of communist oppression. On every page of this graphic depiction of Ivan Denisovich's struggles, the pain of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's own decade-long experience in the gulag is apparent—which makes its ultimate tribute to one man's will to triumph over relentless dehumanization all the more moving.

An unforgettable portrait of the entire world of Stalin's forced-work camps, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is one of the most extraordinary literary works to have emerged from the Soviet Union. The first of Solzhenitsyn's novels to be published, it forced both the Soviet Union and the West to confront the Soviet's human rights record, and the novel was specifically mentioned in the presentation speech when Solzhenitsyn was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1970. Above all, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich establishes Solzhenitsyn's stature as "a literary genius whose talent matches that of Dostoevsky, Turgenev, Tolstoy" (Harrison Salisbury, The New York Times).

This unexpurgated, widely acclaimed translation by H. T. Willetts is the only translation authorized by Solzhenitsyn himself.

NY. E.P. Dutton. Signet. 1963. 155p.

By David J. Rothman

From the cover: This book makes a unique and significant Contribution to American social history and so­cial policy. It explores, as no other work has done, the origins and consequences of the pro­grams that have dominated criminal justice, juvenile justice, and mental health in the twen­tieth century. David Rothman combines his skills as a historian with his knowledge of con­temporary social problems to interpret the practices of probation, parole, and indetermi- late sentences; the juvenile courts; the outpa­tient clinics; and the contemporary design of the penitentiary, the reformatory, and the men­tal hospital. Conscience and Convenience is a worthy suc- jessor to David Rothman’s prizewinning and uglily influential book. The Discovery of the \syhnn. Just as that volume analyzed the ori­gins of institutions for* the deviant and the de­pendent, so this study casts new light on the modern effort to reform the asylum and devise ilternatives for it. And once again, his appraisal urthers our understanding of the fundamental character of social order and disorder in the Jnited States.

The title points to the dynamic that is at the core of the book. Progressive-Era men and ,vomen of good conscience introduced the mea­sures mentioned above with the intention of iroviding individualized cure and treatment or the deviants and thereby solving the prob- ems of crime and mental illness. But to appre­ciate the fate of these reforms, one must reckon .vith convenience. Administrators, from war- lens to judges to mental hospital superin- endents, turned these procedures to their pwn advantage. The result was a hybrid pro­gram whose flaws we are only beginning to Imderstand.

Boston. Little, Brown and Co. 1980. 459p.

By Meghan McCormick, Bright Sarfo and Emily Brennan

Over 5 million American children under the age of 18 years, a disproportionate number of whom are Black or Latino, have had a residential parent jailed or incarcerated. While a number of existing studies identify parental incarceration as a key risk factor for poor child and family outcomes, there is more limited information describing programs that aim to promote positive outcomes for children with parents involved in the criminal justice system. This literature review analyzes published studies about family strengthening programs that seek to maintain and build healthy relationships between parents who are incarcerated and their children. The review is organized by six key areas of programmatic focus that the research team identified based on an initial scan of the literature, consultations with experts and programs in the field, and guidance from the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2021. 61p.

By Jessica Meyerson and Christa Otteson

To incorporate the broad and diverse range of research that speaks to families affected by incarceration, the remainder of this literature review is organized into three sections:  A brief review of the service needs of families affected by incarceration  A review of the most widely agreed upon research-based “practices” related to families affected by incarceration  An inventory of specific evidence-based programs, service models, and curricula that have been used to provide supportive services to incarcerated parents, their children, and their children’s caregivers

Stt. Paul, MN: Wilder Research, 2009. 40p.

By The Council on Crime and Justice

In 2003 the Council on Crime and Justice (CCJ) received funding from the U.S. Department of Justice to study racial disparities in the Minnesota criminal justice system. Seven studies were conducted in total. Some of these studies were aimed at defining racial disparities within the criminal justice system, while others examined the collateral effects of such disparities. The following study fell into the latter category. The purpose of this study was twofold: first to examine the effects of imprisonment on the family relationship from the perspective of the fathers, along with these men’s strengths and struggles during incarceration and reentry into the community; and second to examine the community dynamics and resources within a neighborhood experiencing a high concentration of prison mobility (i.e. residents either leaving for or returning from prison). The Hawthorne neighborhood in North Minneapolis was chosen for our study because of its racial diversity and high prisoner mobility. An analysis of the neighborhood was conducted from the resident’s perspective in order to better understand the physical and social environment to which many previously incarcerated fathers return.

Minneapolis: Council on Crime and Justice, 2006. 81p.

By Amy Dworsky, et al.

This brief describes the results of a project undertaken by a team of researchers from the University of Chicago’s School of Social Service Administration and Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago. The purpose of the project was to inform the development and implementation of gender responsive policies and practices that will address the needs of incarcerated mothers in the Illinois Department of Corrections and reduce the impact of incarceration on their children.

Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago and the University of Chicago’s School of Social Service Administration, 2020. 38p.

Edited by Julie Poehlmann-Tynan and Danielle H. Dallaire

This Brief focuses on mothers in the U.S. criminal justice system and their children. After decades of mass incarceration, the United States now incarcerates more women than any other country in the world, and the vast majority of incarcerated women are mothers of minor children. The growing involvement of mothers in all forms of the criminal justice system, including arrest, incarceration, reentry, and community supervision, requires a better understanding of how such involvement impacts children and families. This Brief presents six new empirical studies, most of them longitudinal, designed to address gaps in our knowledge base about maternal criminal justice involvement and maternal and child well-being. We apply an intergenerational lifespan developmental perspective and discuss the attachment-related themes of separation, loss, and reunion in the introductory chapter and throughout the volume. In addition, issues related to prevention and intervention, gender-responsive programs, and themes of trauma, addiction, child welfare involvement, low resource environments, and resilience are integrated throughout and highlighted in the concluding chapter. The Brief closes by presenting policy and practice implications of the research for mothers involved in the criminal justice system and their children and families.

Cham: Springer Nature, 2021 167p.

By Sarah Schirmer, Ashley Nellis and Marc Mauer

Mass incarceration has had significant and long-lasting impacts on American society, and particularly on communities of color. There is now a growing awareness that parents who go to prison do not suffer the consequences alone; the children of incarcerated parents often lose contact with their parent and visits are sometimes rare. Children of incarcerated parents are more likely to drop out of school, engage in delinquency, and subsequently be incarcerated themselves.1 In 2007 there were 1.7 million children in America with a parent in prison, more than 70% of whom were children of color. Children of incarcerated parents live in a variety of circumstances. Some were previously in homes of two-parent families, where the non-incarcerated parent can assume primary responsibility for the children. Many children, especially in cases of women’s incarceration, were in single-parent homes and are then cared for by a grandparent or other relative, if not in foster care. And in some cases, due to substance abuse and other factors, incarcerated parents had either not lived with their children or not provided a secure environment for them. Following release from prison both parents and children face challenges in reuniting their families. Parents have to cope with the difficulty of finding employment and stable housing while also reestablishing a relationship with their children.

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2009. 14p.

By Creasie Finney Hairston

What is it like to grow up with a parent in prison? What are the immediate and long-term effects of parental incarceration on children? How can we best serve the needs of these children and ensure that they receive the support they need to thrive under challenging circumstances? These are questions that still need to be answered. Research that focuses on children whose parents are incarcerated has been quite limited, despite the growing numbers of children who are affected by the imprisonment of their mother or father. Over 1.5 million children in the United States have a parent who is in prison. Several million more have grown up with a parent in prison during some part of their formative years. The children of incarcerated parents have long been an almost invisible population, but in recent years, they have begun to receive attention from public policymakers, traditional social service providers and academic researchers. Some, concerned about the rapidly growing correctional population of more than two million people, fear that these children are at a higher risk to become incarcerated themselves as adults. Others are motivated by a desire to better understand and promote the well-being of children living in challenging life circumstances. This overview is based primarily on research published during the last 20 years, though some earlier works are included. It also draws on several years of consultation on programs and research involving prisoners and their families.

Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2007. 44p.

By Ivan G. Goldman

In America, 2.3 million people—a population about the size of Houston’s, the country’s fourth-largest city—live behind bars. Sick Justice explores the economic, social, and political forces that hijacked the criminal justice system to create this bizarre situation. Presenting frightening true stories of (sometimes wrongfully) incarcerated individuals, Ivan G. Goldman exposes the inept bureaucracies of America’s prisons and shows the real reasons that disproportionate numbers of minorities, the poor, and the mentally ill end up there. Goldman dissects the widespread phenomenon of jailing for profit, the outsized power of prison guards’ unions, California’s exceptionally rigid three-strikes law, the ineffective and never-ending war on drugs, the closing of mental health institutions across the country, and other blunders and avaricious practices that have brought us to this point. Sick Justice tells a big, gripping story that’s long overdue. By illuminating the system’s brutality and greed and the prisoners’ gratuitous suffering, the book aims to be a catalyst for reform, complementing the work of the Innocence Project and mirroring the effects of Michael Harrington’s The Other America: Poverty in the United States (1962), which became the driving force behind the war on poverty.

Washington, DC: Potomac Books, 2013. 256p.