Overview of the Us Criminal Justice System Peer Reviewed Articles
Am J Public Health. 2020 January; 110(Suppl ane): S116–S122.
Exposure to the U.s. Criminal Legal System and Well-Being: A 2018 Cross-Sectional Report
Ram Sundaresh, MS, 
Youngmin Yi, MA, Brita Roy, Doc, MPH, Carley Riley, MD, MPP, Christopher Wildeman, PhD, and Emily A. Wang, Medico, MAS
Accepted September 30, 2019.
Abstract
Objectives. To assess the association betwixt exposure to the US criminal legal organisation and well-being.
Methods. We used data from the 2018 Family unit History of Incarceration Survey, a nationally representative cross-exclusive report of family incarceration feel (n = 2815), which includes measures of participants' ain criminal legal arrangement exposure, including police stops, arrests, and incarceration. We measured well-being beyond 5 domains—concrete, mental, social, spiritual, and overall life evaluation—and analyzed trends in well-beingness by criminal legal system exposure using logistic regression.
Results. Exposure to police stops, arrests, and incarceration were each associated with lower well-beingness in every domain compared with those non exposed. Longer durations of incarceration and multiple incarcerations were associated with progressively lower well-beingness. Those who were stopped and frisked by the police had low well-existence similar to that of those who had been incarcerated multiple times.
Conclusions. Any exposure to law contact or incarceration is associated with lower well-being in every domain. More than involved exposure is associated with even lower well-existence.
Public Health Implications. Jail diversion and broader criminal justice reform may ameliorate population-level well-being by reducing police contact and incarceration.
The United States has a massive criminal legal organisation.ane–vii Contact with this organization ranges from police stops to incarceration in jail and prison, all of which have expanded in recent decades.1–4 The U.s.a. prison population has more than than tripled since the 1970s, with a system that now incarcerates most 2.three million individuals—the largest incarcerated population in the world.5 An additional 4.5 million individuals are supervised in the community on parole and probation,6 with a big customs law that has grown steadily since the passage of the 1994 Violent Law-breaking Command and Law Enforcement Human action.2,iv,seven
Incarceration has been substantively linked to negative mental health outcomes during imprisonment, and having a history of incarceration has been linked to a worsening of chronic medical weather, substance use disorders, mental wellness disorders, and even preventable deaths following release.5,viii,9 However, even transient exposure to the criminal legal system may have negative implications for our nation's wellness and well-being.
There is a growing torso of research that highlights how contact with the police or living in a highly policed neighborhood is associated with worse mental health and psychological distress. A survey of 1261 young men in New York City revealed that individuals who reported more police contact besides reported more than trauma and anxiety symptoms.ten Other studies take as well shown similar associations between aggressive policing or use of force and poor mental wellness.11–13 Farther studies have shown that having a criminal tape, even in the absence of being incarcerated, is associated with poor health outcomes.14 For example, those on probation have a college historic period-standardized mortality than does the general population.15 One plausible reason is the collateral consequences of a criminal confidence, such as legal restrictions that limit or prohibit people with criminal records from accessing employment, housing, education, voting, and other opportunities.
Exposure to the criminal legal organization likely affects broader well-being, which is a person'southward holistic status encompassing physical health too equally emotional, social, and spiritual components. Well-being is a critically important indicator of individual- and population-level social welfare, and recently developed measures of well-existence based on self-reported life evaluation have been establish not only to be informative as valid measures of well-being but also to be strongly associated with central indicators of population wellness, such as life expectancy.16
Although there is some evidence that exposure to the criminal legal system affects well-existence, the human relationship has not been as closely studied in national population-based studies, leaving important questions on the full range of possible police enforcement and criminal justice organization interactions and their consequences for well-existence.
Nosotros examined the association betwixt one's exposure to the criminal legal system—including law stops, arrests, and incarceration—and his or her well-being. We hypothesized that exposure to police stops, arrests, and incarceration would exist associated with lower levels of well-being, with those who have been incarcerated multiple times having the lowest levels of well-beingness. We likewise hypothesized that social support and financial well-being would moderate the trajectories of recovery of well-being after incarceration.
METHODS
We used data from the Family History of Incarceration Survey (FamHIS), a nationally representative cross-exclusive study originally designed to measure out the national prevalence of family unit incarceration.17 FamHIS investigators worked with the National Opinion Inquiry Center (NORC) to recruit a baseline sample of 4041 adults. Participants completed a brief screening tool that assessed incarceration experience in the firsthand family. From this baseline sample, NORC recruited 1806 respondents with immediate family incarceration feel and 1009 respondents without immediate family incarceration to participate in the full FamHIS questionnaire, which includes items on one'southward own incarceration, police contact, and well-beingness. This set of 2815 respondents constitutes the total sample used for this study and yielded a survey response rate of 69.7%.
The FamHIS data include a set of sampling weights, WEIGHT2, that adjusts the full-survey sample of 2815 to be representative of the Usa household adult population. WEIGHT2 accounts for the recruitment sampling into the baseline sample of 4041, and the stratified subsampling into the last FamHIS sample on the ground of family incarceration experience. This benchmarks the total-survey sample of 2815—including the items on 1's own criminal legal system involvement—to the United states household adult population. Total details on sampling and weighting methods are detailed in Appendix Department A (available every bit a supplement to the online version of this commodity at http://world wide web.ajph.org).
Independent Variable
The master predictor of interest is respondents' exposure to the criminal legal system, with 3 types of exposure that capture a range in the intensity of contact: stops past the police, arrests, and incarcerations for at to the lowest degree ane nighttime. Respondents who reported existence stopped by police were asked whether they were also searched or physically "frisked" as role of the law finish. Those who reported being incarcerated for at to the lowest degree i dark were surveyed for additional details near their incarceration feel, including when they were last released from incarceration (< one year ago, 1–5 years ago, 6–10 years ago, or > 10 years ago), how many times they had been incarcerated (one time or more than than once), and the duration of their only or near contempo incarceration spell (1 day, 2 days to 1 month, betwixt 1 month and i year, i–5 years, 6–10 years, or > 10 years). We used a dichotomous summary measure of any criminal legal system exposure to tabulate respondents who reported having experienced any police terminate, arrest, or incarceration.
Dependent Variables
The outcome of interest was cocky-reported life evaluation, a measure out of overall well-beingness that originated in the 100 Meg Healthier Lives (100MLives) initiative.eighteen This broader initiative evaluated and designed the 100MLives Adult Well-Beingness Assessment,eighteen a prepare of reliable and validated quantitative tools included in the FamHIS questionnaire that measures well-being overall and by specific domains.19–22 Self-reported life evaluation was measured using the Cantril self-anchoring striving calibration,19 which was used in the 100MLives initiative and has been used extensively in other enquiry on national well-being in the U.s.a. and other countries.23 Participants were asked to rank their current life satisfaction and future life prospects on scales from 0 to ten, using an image of a ladder to help visualize and anticipate the scale (Effigy B, bachelor every bit a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org). Responses of current life satisfaction greater than or equal to 7 and future life prospects greater than or equal to 8 were classified every bit a "thriving" life evaluation,24 the main issue of interest in these analyses. An increase of 1 SD in the current life satisfaction score is estimated to be associated with a 1.five-twelvemonth longer life expectancy.16
The measured domains of well-beingness were physical health, mental health, social back up, spiritual well-being, and fiscal well-being. Physical wellness, mental wellness, and social support were cocky-rated on 5-signal Likert scales. Spiritual well-being was measured using a seven-point Likert scale that evaluated respondents' sense of purpose and life meaning. Fiscal well-existence was measured using an xi-rung ladder similar to the Cantril self-anchoring scale.
Responses were categorized as "thriving," "surviving," or "suffering" in life evaluation and in each domain of well-being using the 100MLives scoring arrangement (Table A, available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org). For analyses of factors shaping postincarceration life evaluation, scales of social support and fiscal well-being were dichotomized into "high" and "low" categories corresponding, respectively, with "thriving" (social support scale ≥ 4; financial well-being scale ≥ vii) and "not thriving" for those measures.
Covariates
FamHIS included the post-obit covariates, which were included in these analyses: respondent age, gender, race/ethnicity, didactics level, income, housing type, employment status, marital status, and history of drug or alcohol addiction.
Statistical Analyses
The analysis of our cross-sectional data began with a comparison of unadjusted patterns of well-being and criminal legal arrangement exposure. We kickoff compared proportions of respondents scored as thriving, surviving, or suffering on each well-being measure by criminal legal system exposure. We used the Kruskal–Wallis test to appraise trends in well-beingness across types of criminal legal system exposure. To explore the possibility of these associations existence driven by other covariates, nosotros used 3 nested multivariate logistic regression models to estimate adjusted associations between criminal legal organization exposure and the odds of a thriving life evaluation. First, we deemed for the key sociodemographic characteristics of age, gender, race/ethnicity, and education level. Next, we adjusted for social and economic factors: employment condition, housing type, marital status, and household income. Finally, we adjusted for respondents' addiction history. We estimated this ready of models for each of the 3 types of criminal legal system exposure. We determined concluding model specifications using tests for collinearity, using a variance inflation gene cutoff of 2.0.
We too explored the potential dose dependence of these associations with time in 2 dimensions: elapsing of incarceration and time since last incarceration. First, we estimated age-adapted trends in life evaluation across categories of duration of incarceration and across fourth dimension points since release from incarceration. Nosotros then stratified the trends across time points since release past dichotomized levels of financial well-existence and social support.
All statistical tests were two-sided, with an α level of 0.05. We conducted all analyses in R version iii.5.i (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Republic of austria)25 and weighted them using FamHIS-specified weights to accommodate the analytic sample to the US household adult population.
RESULTS
Nigh 57% of men and 31% of women had any criminal legal organization exposure. Individuals with any criminal legal system exposure were more probable to exist Black (P < .001), to alive in lower-income households (P < .001), and to have had a history of drug or alcohol addiction (P < .001) compared with those without exposure to the criminal legal system (Table 1).
TABLE ane—
Report Demographics by Exposure to the Criminal Legal System (CLS): Family unit History of Incarceration Survey (FamHIS): United states of america, 2018
| Variable | No CLS Exposure (due north = 1584), No (%) | Any CLS Exposure (n = 1229), No (%) | Overall (n = 2815), No (%) | P |
| Historic period, y | < .001 | |||
| xviii–24 | 101 (10.eight) | 81 (12.0) | 182 (11.2) | |
| 25–34 | 340 (18.1) | 310 (22.0) | 651 (19.6) | |
| 35–54 | 431 (29.v) | 436 (34.5) | 868 (31.5) | |
| 55–64 | 298 (16.5) | 232 (xviii.iii) | 530 (17.2) | |
| 65–74 | 262 (xv.8) | 135 (10.6) | 397 (13.8) | |
| ≥ 75 | 152 (9.3) | 35 (2.6) | 187 (6.vii) | |
| Gender | < .001 | |||
| Women | 1013 (61.9) | 457 (35.ix) | 1472 (51.7) | |
| Men | 571 (38.1) | 772 (64.i) | 1343 (48.3) | |
| Race/ethnicity | .006 | |||
| Not-Hispanic Blackness | 171 (9.8) | 226 (15.1) | 397 (11.nine) | |
| Hispanic | 246 (17.6) | 165 (14.2) | 411 (sixteen.2) | |
| Non-Hispanic White | 1046 (63.ane) | 717 (62.4) | 1765 (62.8) | |
| Non-Hispanic Native American | vii (0.five) | 19 (1.i) | 26 (0.7) | |
| Non-Hispanic other | 114 (eight.9) | 102 (7.2) | 216 (eight.3) | |
| Household income, $ | < .001 | |||
| ≤ 24 999 | 292 (xviii.viii) | 366 (30.3) | 659 (23.four) | |
| 25 000–49 999 | 436 (25.9) | 346 (26.9) | 782 (26.ii) | |
| 50 000–74 999 | 299 (xviii.4) | 203 (15.8) | 503 (17.4) | |
| 75 000–99 999 | 233 (14.nine) | 134 (eleven.0) | 367 (xiii.iii) | |
| ≥ 100 000 | 324 (22.0) | 180 (sixteen.0) | 504 (19.half-dozen) | |
| Housing type | .004 | |||
| Unmarried-family unit habitation | 1154 (75.1) | 792 (66.two) | 1946 (71.half-dozen) | |
| Apartment | 372 (21.0) | 368 (27.5) | 742 (23.six) | |
| Mobile dwelling house/trailer/boat/RV/van | 58 (iii.8) | 69 (6.three) | 127 (4.eight) | |
| Employment condition | .09 | |||
| Working | 931 (57.7) | 748 (59.1) | 1680 (58.2) | |
| Not working, seeking job | 82 (6.six) | 102 (x.0) | 184 (vii.9) | |
| Not working, non seeking job | 446 (27.5) | 304 (24.1) | 751 (26.ii) | |
| Not working, other | 125 (eight.2) | 75 (6.8) | 200 (7.half-dozen) | |
| Education | < .001 | |||
| No HS diploma | 81 (viii.2) | 107 (14.5) | 188 (10.seven) | |
| HS graduate or GED | 303 (27.8) | 262 (xxx.0) | 566 (28.7) | |
| Some college | 650 (26.1) | 579 (30.3) | 1229 (27.7) | |
| Bachelor's degree or above | 550 (38.0) | 281 (25.3) | 832 (33.0) | |
| Marital status | .002 | |||
| Never married | 328 (23.2) | 329 (28.1) | 658 (25.one) | |
| Married or living with partner | 933 (58.0) | 604 (48.7) | 1538 (54.iii) | |
| Widowed, divorced, or separated | 323 (18.9) | 296 (23.2) | 619 (20.6) | |
| History of addiction | < .001 | |||
| Yes | 113 (7.0) | 384 (29.iii) | 497 (xv.half dozen) | |
| No | 1425 (93.0) | 791 (lxx.seven) | 2216 (84.4) |
Constabulary Stops
Twenty-nine percent of respondents had ever been stopped past the police and xvi% had always been stopped and frisked by the law (Tabular array i). In unadjusted trends (Tables 2 and iii) compared with respondents non stopped by the police, those who had ever been stopped by the constabulary had 0.59 (95% conviction interval [CI] = 0.44, 0.80) times the odds of a thriving life evaluation, and those who were stopped and frisked by the police had 0.45 (95% CI = 0.34, 0.62) times the odds of thriving, with a dose–response association (P for trend < .001). Those who were stopped and frisked past the police had low rates of thriving similar to the rates of individuals who had been incarcerated multiple times (Table 2). The fully adjusted models reverberate a slight attenuation in these associations, although they remain statistically pregnant (Table 3).
Table 2—
Trends in Life Evaluation by Criminal Legal System (CLS) Exposure: Family History of Incarceration Survey, United States, 2018
| Life Evaluation | |||||
| CLS Exposure | Thriving, % | Surviving, % | Suffering, % | No. | P for trend |
| Overall | 63.3 | 34.1 | 2.7 | 2813 | |
| Missing all CLS data | 2 | ||||
| Police stops | < .001 | ||||
| Not stopped | 67.5 | 30.2 | 2.three | 1987 | |
| Stopped only | 55.i | twoscore.one | 4.9 | 384 | |
| Stopped and frisked | 48.5 | 48.7 | two.8 | 440 | |
| Missing data | 4 | ||||
| Arrests | < .001 | ||||
| Non arrested | 66.7 | 30.8 | 2.four | 1929 | |
| Arrested | 54.1 | 42.6 | 3.three | 877 | |
| Missing | 9 | ||||
| Incarceration | < .001 | ||||
| Not incarcerated | 65.7 | 31.6 | 2.7 | 2163 | |
| Incarcerated one time | 56.three | 41.5 | 2.3 | 311 | |
| Incarcerated multiple times | 49.0 | 48.0 | 3.0 | 331 | |
| Missing information | 10 | ||||
Tabular array 3—
Adapted Associations Between Criminal Legal System (CLS) Exposure and Life Evaluation: Family History of Incarceration Survey, United States, 2018
| CLS Exposure | Thriving, No. | Non Thriving, No. | Model 1,a OR (95% CI) or P for Trend | Model 2,b OR (95% CI) or P for Trend | Model iii,c OR (95% CI) or P for Trend | Model 4,d OR (95% CI) or P for Tendency |
| Police force stops | < .001 | < .001 | < .001 | .006 | ||
| Never stopped | 1247 | 695 | i (Ref) | 1 (Ref) | ane (Ref) | 1 (Ref) |
| Stopped | 209 | 169 | 0.59 (0.44, 0.eighty) | 0.threescore (0.44, 0.83) | 0.63 (0.46, 0.87) | 0.65 (0.46, 0.xc) |
| Stopped and frisked | 204 | 229 | 0.45 (0.34, 0.62) | 0.49 (0.35, 0.67) | 0.54 (0.39, 0.76) | 0.60 (0.42, 0.86) |
| Arrests | ||||||
| Never arrested | 1204 | 682 | 1 (Ref) | 1 (Ref) | ane (Ref) | i (Ref) |
| Arrested | 453 | 411 | 0.59 (0.47, 0.74) | 0.68 (0.54, 0.87) | 0.76 (0.59, 0.97) | 0.81 (0.62, 1.07) |
| Incarceration | < .001 | .008 | .11 | .4 | ||
| Never incarcerated | 1333 | 785 | 1 (Ref) | ane (Ref) | 1 (Ref) | 1 (Ref) |
| Incarcerated once | 164 | 140 | 0.67 (0.48, 0.93) | 0.77 (0.56, 1.07) | 0.84 (0.6, 1.xviii) | 0.85 (0.6, i.21) |
| Incarcerated multiple times | 160 | 167 | 0.5 (0.37, 0.69) | 0.61 (0.44, 0.89) | 0.73 (0.l, 1.07) | 0.84 (0.56, i.26) |
Arrests
Xxx-ane percent of respondents had always been arrested, which is a more than intense type of criminal legal organization exposure than are police stops. In unadjusted trends (Tables ii and three), individuals who had been arrested had 0.59 (95% CI = 0.47, 0.74) times the odds of thriving compared with those with no prior arrests. This clan was somewhat attenuated in magnitude with covariate adjustment just remained statistically significant with the inclusion of social, demographic, and economic characteristics in the multivariate models; however, it was no longer statistically meaning afterwards adjusting for respondents' history of addiction (Tabular array 3).
Incarceration
Twenty-3 per centum of individuals had e'er been incarcerated for at to the lowest degree i night. In unadjusted trends (Tables two and 3), history of a single incarceration (odds ratio [OR] = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.48, 0.93) or multiple incarcerations (OR = 0.l; 95% CI = 0.37, 0.69) were each associated with a dose-dependent lower odds of thriving (P for trend < .001) compared with those without incarceration experience, an association that remained statistically significant after adjusting for demographic characteristics. Still, these associations were no longer statistically significant with the add-on to the model of economic and social contextual factors or history of addiction (Table 3).
Longer incarceration spells were associated with roughly progressively lower proportions of age-adjusted thriving life evaluation (Figure 1a) and well-being across all domains (Figure A, available every bit a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org). However, those with the longest incarceration spells (> 1 year) were more probable to exist thriving than were those with the 2d longest duration of incarceration (1 calendar month to 1 year) on all measures.
Well-Existence by (a) Elapsing of Incarceration and (b) Time Since Release From Incarceration Stratified by Levels of Social Support and Fiscal Well-Being: Family unit History of Incarceration Survey, United States, 2018
Annotation. Well-beingness was measured by the proportion of respondents with a thriving life evaluation. Proportions are age-adjusted. Levels of social support and financial well-being are defined past the 100 Million Healthier Lives scoring system.18
Greater fourth dimension since release was associated with progressively college proportions of age-adjusted thriving life evaluation (Effigy 1b). When stratified by levels of social support (Effigy 1b), respondents sampled less than 1 year since release had similar proportions of age-adjusted thriving, regardless of level of social support. However, in comparisons across groups sampled temporally further from their last incarceration, those with high social support were progressively more likely to be thriving, whereas proportions thriving among those with depression social support remained statistically stable. For respondents who had been released for more 10 years, 85% were thriving among those with loftier levels of social support, only only 19% among those with low levels of social support. When stratified by fiscal well-being (Effigy 1b), in that location were persistent differences in probabilities of age-adjusted thriving between those with high versus low levels of financial well-existence, only there was no statistically significant trend beyond categories of time since release within the same strata of fiscal well-existence.
In addition to the life evaluation measure of overall well-being, criminal legal organization exposure was associated with a progressively lower proportion of thriving in every domain of well-being (Table Ba–c). Concrete wellness and social well-being were specially low among those with exposures to the organization. In sensitivity analyses, the progressive drop across life evaluation and each domain with exposures to police stops or arrests persisted later selecting for individuals with no incarceration history.
DISCUSSION
In the get-go, to our knowledge, nationally representative study of its kind, we found that each of the three types of criminal legal system exposure is associated with lower proportions of thriving in overall life evaluation and in every domain of well-beingness. There is some evidence of dose-dependent well-existence associations with variation in criminal legal system exposure intensity, for case, in associations with police stops with and without searches or with unmarried versus multiple incarcerations. Taken together, these findings provide additional evidence supporting the negative associations between one's exposure to the criminal legal system and a holistic measure of well-beingness.
Contrary to our initial hypothesis, the negative association between exposure to police stops with searches and odds of a thriving life evaluation was similar in magnitude to the association estimated for those who experienced multiple incarcerations, illustrating the extent to which even lower-level contact with the criminal legal arrangement is negatively associated with quality of life. These associations betwixt police contact and well-being persisted in our sensitivity analyses that excluded formerly incarcerated individuals, suggesting that this association is driven by factors independent of incarceration.
Our results highlight the connected need for improved agreement of other types of criminal legal system exposure—such as police stops—which may be less severe simply potentially harmful to health.10–13,26–28 At that place are more than than 2.5 one thousand thousand street stops by the police each year in the Usa, with about nine% involving searches and 3% involving use of force, even though at least 85% of stops do not outcome in either a ticket or an arrest.28 Aggressive policing practices such as cease and frisk are associated with worse health outcomes, with increased risks of exposure to physical, psychological, and sexual violence,26 and are associated with higher levels of feet and trauma.x Our report is the first, to our cognition, to bear witness associations with a more holistic measure of well-being that includes physical health. Time to come studies can meliorate characterize how exposure to police stops is associated with decreased well-existence and identify potential mechanisms that promote the recovery of well-existence, especially in overpoliced communities.
Finally, our findings underscore the importance of financial well-being and social support every bit of import factors that are likely important in the recovery of well-existence subsequently incarceration. Our multivariate analyses evidence that the association between prior incarceration and well-being is attenuated afterwards decision-making for economical and social factors such as household income, marital condition, and addiction history. Although our cantankerous-exclusive information cannot disentangle the temporality of the interplay betwixt addiction, incarceration, and well-existence, when seen together with our analyses of trends in well-being across time points amid formerly incarcerated individuals, our data propose that broader social and fiscal factors may be of import mediators or modifiers of this clan. This is consistent with previous studies on the function of social support for postrelease mental wellness and the role of fiscal security in facilitating successful reentry.29 Future studies tin meliorate characterize the office of addiction in the relationship between incarceration and well-being and can explore interventions that meliorate social support and financial well-beingness amidst formerly incarcerated individuals.
Limitations and Strengths
These findings are primarily limited by the self-reported and cross-sectional nature of the information. FamHIS study measures are vulnerable to recall bias and social desirability bias, which are challenges faced by many key data sources on incarceration and its relation to health.xxx Additionally, considering this was a cross-exclusive report, the findings cannot address the temporality of criminal legal arrangement exposures and well-being, much less causal effects.
Furthermore, community-level spatial factors are likely important drivers of well-beingness and were not included in the FamHIS. Finally, although the FamHIS draws on the nationally representative NORC panel, which allows inference to the broad population of all U.s.a. noninstitutionalized adults, this accost-based panel excludes individuals who were homeless or institutionalized at the time of data collection. Although the lack of currently incarcerated individuals in the study sample should not affect inferences about formerly incarcerated individuals, the lack of individuals experiencing homelessness or otherwise institutionalized individuals in the FamHIS may skew these data. This is a shared challenge of research on the consequences of criminal legal organisation exposure, every bit no nationally representative data capturing well-being and including these groups are currently bachelor.31
Some limitations of these analyses point to potentially important avenues for future research. The FamHIS data do not allow distinguishing jail and prison house contexts and too practice not let longitudinal ascertainment over time with respect to elapsing or frequency of incarceration. Future exploration of variation in well-beingness across incarceration contexts and longitudinally over time is therefore of import, specially for elucidating the function of addiction in our observed associations.
Nonetheless, our written report design is strengthened by our use of a big, nationally representative written report sample with high-quality sampling methods and low levels of missing data to ensure representative distributions of age, gender, race/ethnicity, and income. Our findings are compelling with their strong associations, dose gradients with degree of criminal legal arrangement exposure, and consistency across all measures of well-being. Lastly, nosotros used a robust measure of well-being to provide novel insight into the effects of the criminal legal system.
Public Health Implications
These analyses point to some cardinal implications for public health and policy reform. Beginning, this study corroborates the previously documented office of incarceration equally a strong social and structural determinant of well-existence in a nationally representative sample, further highlighting the importance of interventions that forestall incarceration. Second, our findings suggest the importance of social support and financial well-existence in promoting well-being and the demand for policy reforms that support the social, financial, and health outcomes of this vulnerable population.8,32,33 Finally, our findings on the potent human relationship betwixt lower-level law contact and well-being highlight the need for more than inquiry on the individual- and community- level effects of constabulary contact on health and well-being. Empirically measuring well-being and lived feel can provide novel insights for health policy decisions and criminal justice reform efforts, with an aim to fostering thriving in every domain of life.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The FamHIS was funded by FWD.us. R. Sundaresh was supported for this study by the Moser Research Fellowship Honour.
Annotation. The opinions expressed hither are those of the authors and practise not necessarily reflect or endorse the views of FWD.united states of america.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
C. Riley and B. Roy receive funding from the Constitute for Wellness Intendance Comeback and from Heluna Health to support their efforts in developing and implementing the measurement framework for the 100 Million Healthier Lives initiative. The measure of well-beingness used in this written report was originally developed for 100 Million Healthier Lives. The remaining authors take no conflicts of involvement to report.
Human being PARTICIPANT PROTECTION
The Yale Schoolhouse of Medicine institutional review board classified this report as exempt from further review considering nosotros used preexisting de-identified data.
REFERENCES
1. Dumont DM, Brockmann B, Dickman S, Alexander N, Rich JD. Public health and the epidemic of incarceration. Annu Rev Public Wellness. 2012;33:325–339. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Brame R, Turner MG, Paternoster R, Bushway SD. Cumulative prevalence of arrest from ages 8 to 23 in a national sample. Pediatrics. 2012;129(1):21–27. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Wildeman C, Wang EA. Mass incarceration, public wellness, and widening inequality in the U.s.a.. Lancet. 2017;389(10077):1464–1474. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Freudenberg N, Heller D. A review of opportunities to improve the wellness of people involved in the criminal justice system in the Us. Annu Rev Public Wellness. 2016;37:313–333. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Binswanger IA, Stern MF, Deyo RA et al. Release from prison—a high run a risk of death for former inmates. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(ii):157–165. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Geller A, Fagan J, Tyler T, Link BG. Aggressive policing and the mental wellness of immature urban men. Am J Public Wellness. 2014;104(12):2321–2327. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. DeVylder JE, Jun HJ, Fedina L et al. Association of exposure to police violence with prevalence of mental health symptoms among urban residents in the United States. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(7):e184945. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Sewell AA, Jefferson KA, Lee H. Living under surveillance: gender, psychological distress, and cease-question-and-frisk policing in New York City. Soc Sci Med. 2016;159:one–xiii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Bor J, Venkataramani Equally, Williams DR, Tsai AC. Law killings and their spillover effects on the mental wellness of black Americans: a population-based, quasi-experimental study. Lancet. 2018;392(10144):302–310. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Fobian AD, Froelich One thousand, Sellers A, Cropsey K, Redmond Northward. Assessment of cardiovascular health amidst community-dwelling men with incarceration history. J Urban Wellness. 2018;95(iv):556–563. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xv. Wildeman C, Goldman AW, Wang EA. Age-standardized mortality of persons on probation, in jail, or in country prison house and the general population, 2001–2012. Public Health Rep. 2019;134(6):660–666. [PMC gratuitous commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Arora A, Spatz E, Herrin J et al. Population well-beingness measures help explain geographic disparities in life expectancy at the county level. Health Aff (Millwood) 2016;35(11):2075–2082. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Enns PK, Yi Y, Comfort M et al. What percentage of Americans have ever had a family unit member incarcerated? Evidence from the Family History of Incarceration Survey (FamHIS) Socius. 2019;5:ane–45. [Google Scholar]
19. Cantril H. The Pattern of Homo Concerns. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Printing; 1965. [Google Scholar]
20. Hays RD, Schalet BD, Spritzer KL, Cella D. 2-item PROMIS(R) global physical and mental health scales. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2017;1(1):two. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Porter NM, Garman ET. Money as part of a measure of fiscal well-being. Am Behav Sci. 1992;35(six):820–826. [Google Scholar]
22. Diener E, Wirtz D, Tov W et al. New well-being measures: short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Soc Indic Res. 2010;97(two):143–156. [Google Scholar]
25. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. R: a language and surround for statistical calculating. Version 3.5.1. 2013. Available at: http://www.R-project.org. Accessed August 20, 2018.
26. Cooper H, Moore L, Gruskin South, Krieger North. Characterizing perceived police violence: implications for public health. Am J Public Wellness. 2004;94(7):1109–1118. [PMC gratis article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. Edwards F, Lee H, Esposito One thousand. Risk of beingness killed by police use of force in the Usa past age, race-ethnicity, and sex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U Due south A. 2019;116(34):16793–16798. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. Forest LN, Lanza Equally, Dyson W, Gordon DM. The role of prevention in promoting continuity of health intendance in prisoner reentry initiatives. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(v):830–838. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Geller A, Jaeger K, Pace GT. Surveys, records, and the study of incarceration in families. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci. 2016;665(ane):22–43. [Google Scholar]
31. Wang EA, Macmadu A, Rich JD. Examining the impact of criminal justice involvement on wellness through federally funded, national population-based surveys in the United States. Public Health Rep. 2019;134(1 suppl):22S–33S. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Cloud D. On Life Support: Public Health in the Age of Mass Incarceration. New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice; 2014. [Google Scholar]
33. Norris RJ. Assessing compensation statutes for the wrongly convicted. Crim Justice Policy Rev. 2012;23(three):352–374. [Google Scholar]
Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association
joneswillearrimay.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6987921/
0 Response to "Overview of the Us Criminal Justice System Peer Reviewed Articles"
Post a Comment