Understanding family support needs of people in prison custody: literature review

8 - Barriers to building and maintaining family relationships

Introduction

Family relationships are crucial for the emotional and psychological wellbeing of individuals, both within and outside the criminal justice system. However, imprisonment presents significant challenges to maintaining these relationships.

This chapter explores the barriers to building and sustaining family relationships when a family member is in custody. Drawing from various studies and reports, the chapter highlights logistical, emotional and systemic obstacles that impede familial bonds.

When a Family Member is in Custody

When a family member is in custody, families often face logistical, emotional and systemic barriers that make maintaining contact difficult. Geographic distance, restrictive visiting policies and unwelcoming prison environments create significant challenges, particularly for children and caregivers. The literature points to a critical need for child-friendly and family-oriented practices to foster connections during imprisonment. However, despite some examples of good practices internationally, the literature reviewed highlighted research on effective interventions remains limited. This section explores the logistical barriers families encounter, the impact of prison environments, and lack of information on visitation rules.

Logistical Barriers

Families Outside (2017) identifies restrictive visiting hours and the geographical distance from prisons as significant barriers. For many families, especially those in rural areas, the cost and time associated with travel are prohibitive (Families Outside, 2024a; Condry and Minson, 2021).

Women in Prison (2013) highlights that women prisoners were often housed an average of 60 miles from their homes, exacerbating the difficulty of maintaining contact. Scottish research in 2012 indicated that children of imprisoned parents were particularly disadvantaged due to geographic remoteness and limited public transport options (Loucks, 2012).

Prison Aesthetics and Environment

Prisons are often uninviting and not child-friendly, acting as a deterrent to visits (Mowen and Visher, 2016). Issues such as lack of privacy, rigid rules and negative atmospheres contribute to the reluctance to visit (Smith, 2014). However, child-friendly visiting environments can foster positive outcomes (Schlafer and Poehlmann, 2010; Sharratt, 2014).

Across the literature reviewed (e.g. Diffley Partnership, 2023), several common features make prisons uninviting environments for family visits. These include a lack of privacy and the inability to have open, free conversations (Smith, 2014), as well as the perception of children as security risks who require careful supervision. Strict visitation rules often hinder the creation of a relaxed atmosphere (Smith, 2014), while tensions between prisoners and the outside carers who bring children to visit can further complicate interactions. Additionally, both prisoners and their families often feel a lack of control over visits, contributing to a less welcoming and supportive environment.

Robertson et al. (2012) and Robertson (2016) also report that examples of good practice exist in such countries as Norway, where ‘private’ visits without guards are permissible for families, and in Italy and Belgium where opportunities for play and creativity (such as puppet shows and painting) are provided.

Lack of Information and Understanding

Ryan and Ryan (2024) highlight that visitors often lack information about visitation rules, particularly those with literacy or technological challenges. This lack of understanding can discourage families from visiting and maintaining contact. A general lack of information about prison processes and visiting policies further complicates family interactions.

This was emphasised in research conducted on behalf of SPS, which found that the varied visitation rules and inconsistent provision of services across Scotland created a barrier and confusion for families (Diffley Partnership, 2023).

Emotional and Social Barriers

The evidence reviewed shows that families of imprisoned individuals face complex emotional and social barriers that can strain relationships and hinder contact. Stigma associated with imprisonment often leads to feelings of shame and embarrassment, deterring families from visiting. Negative interactions with prison staff, including perceptions of judgment or dismissiveness, further discourage visits and can create lasting negative impressions, particularly for children. In contrast, positive staff interactions and family-focussed practices have been shown to enhance the visiting experience, helping to alleviate emotional strain. This section explores these barriers and the role of supportive practices in improving outcomes for families with a family member in custody.

Stigma and Psychological Strain

Stigma associated with imprisonment significantly impacts families, leading to feelings of shame (Families Outside, 2022). This emotional strain can deter families from visiting and maintaining contact. Dzierzyńska-Breś (2017) notes that children of imprisoned parents often suffer from post-traumatic stress and may glorify the imprisoned parent, complicating their emotional responses and needs.

Negative Interactions with Prison Staff

Negative interactions with prison staff can also act as a barrier, including perceptions of being stigmatised by staff and talked to in demeaning or derogatory ways. Negative stereotyping as a consequence of being related to the offender has been referred to as ‘legally sanctioned stigma’ by Hutton (2018), and may be experienced by families as staff discriminating against them.

Robertson et al. (2012) also reports that simple gestures such as staff smiling can determine how children perceive the visiting experience (with unsmiling prison staff being off-putting to children). Actions of prison staff and lack of flexibility/understanding in families’ requests can also exacerbate families’ negative experiences of the prison visit, and act as a barrier to further visits (Condry et al. 2016).

In contrast, work has shown that independent facilitators, such as staff running voluntary prison-based services, can often help to relax families, especially children. As Yarwood et al. (2017) report staff who were friendly and helpful and demonstrated good interaction skills, such as listening and chatting with families during visits, resulted in positive experiences for families overall.

Dixey and Woodall (2012) suggest, at the time of their research, that prison visits in an English category-B prison had declined in recent years despite prison numbers increasing. They argued that this was because families feel stigmatised and because of the logistical problems in getting to, from and moving within, the prison. Interestingly, these authors also asked prison staff about visits and logistical challenges (operationally and security-wise) were their main concern. As one prison staff member commented, a prison can be ‘bigger than a theme park’, with thousands of visitors entering them each year.

Hart-Johnson and Johnson’s (2020) UK study took a similar qualitative approach to understanding prison staffs’ views of their role in overseeing visits, and found a broad difference between those who viewed their role as one of encouraging/facilitating family-oriented practices and visiting protocols, and those who viewed themselves in a more traditional police-officer mentality. The authors noted that shifting staff attitudes and practices towards family-focussed visiting can play a positive role in contributing to the health and psychological wellbeing of families and inmates in visiting settings.

Primary research conducted by Diffley Partnership on behalf of SPS also found that visitors and families reported negative interactions with prison staff as a barrier to visiting. Examples included feelings of being judged, invasive search procedures and bureaucracy which felt over the top, such as having to show identification on each and every visit and being denied access, despite being a frequent visitor (Diffley Partnership, 2023).

Cross-Cutting Barriers

The evidence reviewed demonstrates that families of imprisoned individuals face cross-cutting barriers that compound the emotional and financial strains of maintaining connections and providing support. Guilt and shame often weigh heavily on families, adding to the pressures of their financial responsibilities. Visiting a loved one in prison and supporting them post-release comes with substantial costs, often consuming a significant portion of household income and leading to sacrifices in quality of life. These challenges disproportionately affect women, who frequently manage the financial and logistical burdens, sometimes relying on food banks or cutting back on essentials to cope. This section further discusses these barriers, particulalry through research by Nugent (2022) for Families Outside, and highlights the importance of emotional and practical support in alleviating the strain on families.

Feelings of Guilt and Shame

Guilt and shame have been highlighted as pervasive barriers that affect family relationships both during imprisonment and after release (Condry and Smith, 2019). These feelings are often linked to the financial and emotional burdens placed on families, leading to further strain and distancing (Smith, 2014).

Financial Costs

Nugent (2022) highlights that supporting a loved one serving a prison sentence incurs substantial costs. With an average prison term of six years, families typically visit twice a month, covering 106 miles per trip and spend around £180 per month – around a third of the household income - on travel, snacks and other expenses. This amounts to £2,160 annually. Additionally, families dedicate a day and a half each week to calls and visits (Nugent, 2022).

Families experience significant financial strain during the remand period, marked by uncertainty and stress. In Scotland, on average, families travel 74 miles per visit, dedicating five hours and spending approximately £300 monthly on travel, snacks, personal account deposits and other costs. For many, these expenses consume all or half of their income, making it a particularly challenging time (Nugent, 2022).

Post-release support is financially demanding, with families in Scotland spending between £30 to £1,000 monthly, averaging £300. The initial months post-release are particularly costly and stressful, with families bearing the burden of replacing lost belongings and facilitating social work appointments. Home leave expenses can be substantial, consuming a significant portion of the family income (Nugent, 2022).

Families, particularly women, manage these costs through meticulous budgeting, self-sacrifice and often silent suffering. Many rely on food banks, endure fuel poverty and forgo social activities, which impacts their mental health and quality of life. A diminished lifestyle and loss of social connections are common, with some unable to afford activities for their children. Support from organisations like Families Outside and SACRO is crucial, providing both emotional and practical assistance, although peer support, when available, is highly valued (Nugent, 2022).

Summary

This chapter explores the significant barriers families face when maintaining relationships with a family member in custody. It identifies logistical, emotional, and systemic challenges that hinder family connections, particularly for children and caregivers. Geographic distance, restrictive visitation policies, and unwelcoming prison environments create substantial obstacles, while a lack of information about visitation rules further complicates the process. Emotional barriers, including stigma and negative interactions with prison staff, discourage visits and contribute to psychological strain. Additionally, financial burdens, especially for women who often manage the logistics and costs of supporting incarcerated loved ones, exacerbate the difficulties. Despite some examples of good practice internationally, research on effective interventions remains limited. The chapter highlights the need for family-friendly policies, improved prison environments, and supportive staff interactions to foster and maintain familial bonds during imprisonment.