|
Family & Corrections Network |
|
|
|
|
|
Incarcerated Mothers and The Foster Care System in Massachusetts: A Literature Review The number of women in United States prisons and jails has been increasing for the past decade. At the end of 1993, there were more than 55,000 women incarcerated in federal and state prisons (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). These women accounted for 5.8 percent of the total state and federal prison population and 9.3 percent of the county jail population (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). Between 1980 and 1993, the growth rate for the female prison population increased by approximately 313 percent for women compared to 182 percent for men (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). Massachusetts has seen a growth in the number of women in their correctional facilities as well. In 1990, there were 511 incarcerated women in Massachusetts correctional facilities; by 1995, this number had grown 596 women (Department of Correction, 1996). These women represented six percent of the total offender population in Massachusetts (Department of Correction, 1996). Because of this national increase, the United States has had to build many new correctional facilities for both men and women (Chesney-Lind and Immarigeon, 1994). To respond to the growing population of female offenders, there needs to be an understanding of the makeup of this population in order to identify their needs. Nationally, women prisoners are ethnically diverse. African-American women make up about 46 percent of women in prison and 43 percent of women in jail (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). Caucasian women comprise 36 percent of women in prison and 38 percent of women in jail whereas Hispanic women comprise 14 percent of women in prison and 16 percent of women in jail (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). At the Massachusetts Correctional Institution at Framingham (MCI-Framingham), the only state facility for women, Caucasian women make up 66 percent of the offender population with African-American women comprising 19 percent and Hispanic women comprising 14 percent (Department of Correction, 1994). Family demands on women prisoners differ greatly than that of men prisoners. Over 75 percent of incarcerated women are mothers, most of which have two or more children (Breaking the Cycle, 1995, p. 1). It has been estimated that, on average each day, 165,000 children are affected by their mother’s incarceration (Breaking the Cycle, 1995, p. 1). Most of these women are single parents (Women in Prison, 1995, p. 2). Over seventy percent of incarcerated mothers had custody of their dependent children before they were incarcerated (Bloom, 1994, p. 25). However, only 50 percent of incarcerated fathers had custody of their children prior to incarceration (Women in Prison, 1995, p. 2). Furthermore, between 8 and 10 percent of women are pregnant when they enter prison (Bloom, 1994, p. 23). These children usually reside with their grandparents, other relatives, or friends (“Women in Prison,” 1995). It has been found that 74 percent of children of incarcerated mothers are cared for by their relatives or friends, and of this number, only 25 percent of the fathers assume responsibility for them (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 2). Similarly, in Massachusetts, 75 percent of children of incarcerated parents live with relatives and 25 percent are in the care of the state, either in foster care or group care (May, 1997). In addition, the majority of women incarcerated in Massachusetts are between the ages of 30 and 39 (Department of Correction, 1994). What is interesting is that, nationally, 89 percent of children of incarcerated fathers are cared for by the child’s mother (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 2). What appears to be a determinant to the incarceration of women is poverty. The majority of incarcerated women are poor; prior to the mother’s arrest, the family typically survived on less than $500 per month (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 1). Fifty-three percent of women prisoners and 74 percent of women in jail were unemployed prior to their incarceration (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). Thus, women are more likely than men to be serving sentences for drug offenses and other nonviolent crimes with economic motives. In 1991, in comparison to one in six males, one in four women reported committing their offense in order to acquire money to buy drugs (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 2). In the same year, thirty-two percent of women incarcerated in state prisons were serving sentences for drug-related offenses (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). An additional 29 percent of these women were serving sentences for property offenses such as larceny, theft, bribery, or fraud (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). Similarly, in federal prisons, almost 64 percent of incarcerated women were serving sentences for drug-related offenses (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). Like women in state prisons, the next most common offenses were property offenses such as larceny or theft. The latter making up 6.3% and extortion, bribery, or fraud making up 6.2% (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 2). 1994, the Department of Correction in Massachusetts reported that 24 percent of incarcerated women were serving sentences for drug-related offenses, 32 percent were serving time for property offenses, and 32 percent were serving sentences for “other offenses” (Department of Correction, 1994). Another determinant of incarceration is a history of childhood or adult abuse. Prior to their incarceration, more than 40 percent of women in state prisons and 44 percent of women in jail had either been physically or sexually abused at some point during their lifetime (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 2). In addition, domestic violence is a common tragedy that many incarcerated women have survived. More than 30 percent of incarcerated women serving sentences for murder were convicted of killing a husband, ex-husband, or boyfriend (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 2). Moreover, 17.2 percent of incarcerated women lived in a foster home or group home during their childhood (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 9). The Foster Care System in Massachusetts This paper on incarcerated mothers and their children serves the purpose of identifying the effect visitation and overall continued contact with family members has on incarcerated mothers. Conclusions will be drawn about the involvement of the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS), or other public social service agencies, from findings in previous research on the relationship between family contact and family reunification, in addition to family contact and recidivism. DSS was created in 1978, and began operation as a department under the Executive Office of Health and Human Services in 1980. It serves as the state department responsible for “strengthening and encouraging family life so that every family can care for and protect its children” (Reilly, 1992, p. 150). Although DSS makes every effort to keep the family unit intact, if a family is not providing the necessary amount of care for a child, DSS will intervene (Reilly, 1992). This intervention is necessary due to the department’s mandate to protect the rights of a child to develop normally both physically and emotionally (Reilly, 1992). Here, DSS has the difficult task of meeting this mandate while simultaneously respecting the right of families to “be free from unwarranted state intervention” (Reilly, 1992, p. 150). In addition, the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 called for social workers to make every effort to either achieve family reunification, or provide children with alternatives which will establish permanence (Beckerman, 1994). In Massachusetts, parental incarceration does not serve as a reason for the loss of parental rights (Reilly, 1992). In determining whether an incarcerated mother’s parental rights will be terminated, courts now investigate two standards: the parental fitness of the mother and the best interest of the child (Reilly, 1992). A determination that a mother is unfit must be established at the current time (Reilly, 1992); in other words, a mother’s current situation as an incarcerated person cannot deem her unfit to parent. Nonetheless, if women do not maintain contact with their children while in prison, they may lose the right to parent their children (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 6). In addition, the average amount of time served in United States prisons is 16 months for females and 66 months for males; this forces most prisoners with children in foster care to face the federally mandated deadline for permanency planning of their children before, or immediately after their release (Norman, 1994, p. 132). Although there has been a recent increase in women in jails and prisons nationwide, little attention has focused on the concerns of women in the criminal justice system (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 1). Prior to the increase in the population of incarcerated women, these women were often ignored due to their small size and the short sentences they received in comparison to their male counterparts (“Women in Prison,” 1995). Thus far, this paper has focused on incarcerated mothers. Consequently, attention needs to be focused on the children of incarcerated mothers. Children of Incarcerated Mothers Children with mothers in prison are a high-risk population. The average age of children when their mother is incarcerated is between seven and 12 years old (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 3). When a parent is involved with the criminal justice system, the family is usually in crisis; for some families, incarceration of a mother triggers this crisis (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). However, for most families, criminal deviance represents one more manifestation of the effects of substance abuse, poverty, and domestic violence (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). When a mother is incarcerated, children usually experience a period of instability and uncertainty; without her children, a mother often loses her drive to rebuild her life (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). As a result of their mother’s incarceration, these children can experience tremendous amounts of trauma, anxiety, guilt, shame, and fear (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). Kampfner (1994) conducted a study on children of incarcerated mothers. In this study, it was found that children of incarcerated mothers were traumatized by their experiences of maternal crime, arrest, and incarceration. As a result, they showed several symptoms associated with acute Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (Kampfner, 1994). Although their caregivers made efforts to protect them from trauma-related cues, their circumstances, including the social stigma attached to maternal incarceration and their lack of emotional supports, combined in ways that made it difficult for them to overcome the effects of trauma (Kampfner, 1994). The author further noted that the relationship between mother and child is important and necessary, does not disappear with maternal incarceration, and must be fostered (Kampfner, 1994). When these children enter adolescence, this suffering is often manifested in poor academic achievement, juvenile delinquency, gang involvement, and violence; in addition, adult criminal behavior is often a result (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). This criminal behavior represents the “final link in an intergenerational cycle of criminal justice involvement” (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 3). Foster Care Reviews/Permanency Planning Incarcerated women who had custody of their children prior to their imprisonment must make child care arrangements with relatives or friends (Reilly, 1992). If a woman is unable to make these arrangements, a mother may voluntarily place her child with DSS, or DSS may seek custody of the child (Reilly, 1992). One of the greatest concerns of incarcerated women is being separated from their children and having to make child care arrangements (Reilly, 1992). DSS recognizes the unique difficulties faced by incarcerated mothers of children in foster care (Reilly, 1992). When a child is placed in the custody of DSS, an ongoing caseworker is assigned to the family. Ongoing casework involves the establishment of a service plan. The service plan for families usually requires that a parent maintains contact with their child (Reilly, 1992). In addition, a parent is required to assist in establishing and implementing the service plan (Reilly, 1992). These tasks become quite difficult for an incarcerated mother. It has been estimated that more than 80 percent of incarcerated mothers plan on living with their children when they are released (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 6). For many mothers, regaining custody of their children is a motivation to stay sober and rebuild their lives (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 6). As the nature of incarceration poses greater risks to permanent separation, regulations provide for additional efforts to be made by DSS for the encouragement and promotion of a continuing relationship between mother and child (Reilly, 1992). These efforts include regular visitation and conducting foster care reviews and other conferences at the correctional facility (Reilly, 1992). The purpose of foster care reviews is to identify whether the family situation has changed, ensure that DSS and the parent(s) are accomplishing their tasks outlined in the service plan, determine if the goals for the family are still appropriate and necessary, and if not, set new goals, and review the reasons why the child is in the care of DSS (Reilly, 1992). The foster care review panel can recommend additions and changes in the service plan (Reilly, 1992). The panel’s determinations of a goal change may be appealed by the parent(s) of the child, or the child (through his or her attorney, if necessary) (Reilly, 1992). In a study of incarcerated mothers who had children in foster care in New York State prisons, prerequisite activities between mothers and caseworkers were identified as incidence of correspondence, telephone contact, and notification of court hearings. Out of a sample of 53 women, 68 percent did not receive telephone calls and about 49 percent received no correspondence from caseworkers (Beckerman, 1994, p. 11). In addition, less than 50 percent of the women were familiar with the procedures that would enable them to appear for court hearings (Beckerman, 1994, p. 12). Failure to become involved in such activities threatens the parental status of the incarcerated mother (Beckerman, 1994). Visitation Visitation between mother and child is needed in order to preserve the parent-child relationship. Hairston (1991) explained that imprisonment is detrimental to parent-child relationships, but that the impact of separation can be lessened by efforts taken to strengthen communication between parents and children. Furthermore, ongoing communication is vital in maintaining parent-child attachment and in allowing parents to maintain their role and carry out parental responsibilities (Hairston, 1991). As a result, visitation is an important aspect of casework with incarcerated mothers whose children are in the care of DSS (Reilly, 1992). Visits allow children to discuss their emotional reactions to their mother’s criminal justice involvement. Due to the fact that children can feel too ashamed to confide in their friends or classmates, this is an area which they may not be able to discuss with other people (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). Being honest with children about their mother’s whereabouts and allowing frequent visits can alleviate a child’s fear about their mother’s well-being (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). It has also been found that the frequency of visits is the most important factor in determining whether the family will be reunited once the mother is released (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 6). This is due to the fact that frequent contact allows both the mother and the child to view each other realistically; seeing each other often also enables them to heal the damage to their relationship caused by the mother’s criminal justice involvement (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). In addition, Bloom (1994) explained that inconsistent contact between mother and child, as well as between the mother and the caregivers of these children, was associated with problems during reunification with their children. Although prisons usually offer contact visits for families, most jails have visiting rooms where children must sit across a table from their parent where they are often separated by a glass partition (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). Very few jails offer play areas for children in the waiting room or the visiting area (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). This is in addition to the fact that the proximity of the jail from home is usually very far (Fuller, 1993). Because there are fewer prison facilities for women, women are usually placed in facilities much farther from their homes than men (“Women in Prison,” 1995). This distance can cause transportation problems for the children of prisoners; as a result, this distance can deprive incarcerated women of frequent contact, or any contact with their children (Fuller, 1993). There are other obstacles to children visiting their mothers. These obstacles include the restrictive rules governing visitation, as well as caretaker concerns about the effect visiting a prison may have on the children (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). These obstacles often prevent children from having regular contact with their mother. It was found that only 9 percent of women have weekly visits from their children, 18 percent have monthly visits, 21 percent have less than monthly visits, and 52 percent have no visits at all (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 7). This was further supported in a study that found that 54 percent of children of incarcerated mothers never visited their mothers (Bloom, 1994, p. 25). Family Reunification As the aforementioned explains the importance of visitation and how it can lead to family reunification, it is important to note that the struggle is not over for the mother or her children when she is released from jail or prison. Once a woman is released, her ability to reconnect with her children can be impaired due to being separated from her children for years; this is compounded by the difficulty of reintegrating into society (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). There are many pressures on women exiting the correctional system; often, these pressures become obstacles to reintegration into society. Because women receive little pre- or post-release planning, or support to help them reunite with their family, women often find themselves homeless, penniless, and struggling to remain clean and sober (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). In Massachusetts, providers at several homeless shelters reported an increase in the number of formerly incarcerated men and women who seek shelter (Dowdy, 1997). “Somewhere between 5 and 10 percent [of former inmates] now come directly out of corrections and into the shelter system … five years ago it might have been 1 percent,” explained Philip Mangrano, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Housing and Shelter Alliance (Dowdy, 1997, p. B2). Shelter administrators explained that this increase may be due to new stringent policies of the Department of Correction which make it more difficult for inmates to get into pre-release programs; in addition, four halfway houses were closed down which eliminated at least 250 beds for inmates who would work in the community (Dowdy, 1997). Furthermore, on the national level, there are not many educational or vocational services which can be accessed while in prison, leaving newly released women at risk for alcohol and drug abuse, in addition to criminal behavior (“Women in Prison,” 1995). For those parents who gave formal custody to a caregiver, or whose children are in foster care, regaining legal custody can be a long and difficult struggle. The decisions are not easy, especially when the mother and child have not have contact for a long period of time (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). Here, the courts must balance a child’s need for permanence and stability against a parent’s desire to raise her child and the benefit to the child of living with his or her biological parent (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995). Although it has been found that prior incarcerations reduce the likelihood that mother and child will be reunited after the mother’s current jail or prison term (Norman, 1994), incarcerated women in Massachusetts whose children are in the care of DSS, are more likely to experience post-release success. These women have met regularly with their social worker, established a service plan, attended foster care reviews and other necessary meetings, and have had regular visitation with their children. Therefore, it would seem that these women are more likely to reunite with their family and less likely to return to crime. Massachusetts Programs for Incarcerated Women As explained earlier, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has one state correctional facility specifically designed for women. This facility is located in Framingham. MCI-Framingham offers substance abuse counseling; educational classes including GED classes, AIDS education, and college-level courses; mental health programs; visiting rooms specifically designed for women and their children; and a reintegration program which prepares women for release into the community (“MCI-Framingham Treatment,” 1995). In addition, for the last 10 years, MCI-Framingham has offered Hodder House, a 35-bed an alternative-to-incarceration facility for pre-release or minimum status offenders (minimum status is usually granted when a prisoner has three or less years remaining of their sentence). It is important to note that 90 percent of the women at Hodder House enter the program with substance abuse issues, according to Maureen Marr, Unit Administrator (Marr, 1997). For these prisoners, there is in-house programming including a 60-day substance abuse course, pre-General Equivalency Diploma (GED) classes, parenting classes, and Parents Anonymous, as well as access to family visits and DSS supervised visits (Marr, 1997). Women who have pre-release status can participate in the above programs, in addition to community work assignments (Marr, 1997). In addition to Hodder House, there are two other alternative-to-incarceration facilities in Massachusetts for incarcerated women. Charlotte House is 15-bed pre-release center and Houston House is a 15-bed facility for pregnant women which allows pre-release prisoners to have their baby stay with them while they serve the remainder of their sentence (Marr, 1997). But, with an average of 600 women incarcerated in Massachusetts at any one time (Marr, 1997), it appears that more facilities are needed. Moreover, Aid to Incarcerated Mothers (AIM) is a program which provides services to incarcerated mothers and their children. AIM is a community-based organization which was created by incarcerated mothers and concerned community women who wanted to help keep families together (Aid to Incarcerated Mothers). The objective of AIM is to help the inmate mother meet her parental responsibilities with the long range goal of reuniting her family (Aid to Incarcerated Mothers). AIM's support can include working with the mother in developing a service plan for her children and advocating on her part with DSS to prevent permanent separation (Aid to Incarcerated Mothers). In addition, AIM works to enhance women’s parenting skills by providing role models, support groups, and individual counseling which build the self-esteem and independence of mothers in prison; these programs are also a part of follow-up upon release (Aid to Incarcerated Mothers). Furthermore, AIM provides transportation for children’s visits, as well as counseling and recreational programming to support children regarding issues around visits, home situations, caretakers, and school (Aid to Incarcerated Mothers). “AIM is like an open doorway in a hallway of locked doors,” said an incarcerated mother (Aid to Incarcerated Mothers). Policy Issues and Recommendations Family Law Upon incarceration, many women face losing custody of their children. Although most women have family members who will care for their children while they are incarcerated, as this paper has pointed out, some children will be in the care and protection of the state (“Women in Prison,” 1995). As mentioned earlier, approximately 75 percent of children of incarcerated parents in Massachusetts live with relatives and 25 percent are in the care of the state, whether that is foster or residential care (May, 1997). Incarcerated mothers with children in the care of the state, need continual support advocacy from DSS in order to ensure a healthy reunification with her family. It is of utmost importance that local, state, and federal governments support the incarcerated mother’s relationship with her children as family ties during imprisonment can decrease the recidivism of the offender (Hairston, 1988). This support can include family visitation, or alternative-to-incarceration programs. However, these initiatives can only be successful when the parent-child relationship is preserved. By creating more alternative facilities and by adjusting sentencing guidelines and imprisonment statutes to allow more qualified women to be placed in alternative-to-incarceration programs, incarcerated mothers would be able to both serve their sentences and continue their relationships with their children (“Women in Prison,” 1995). In response to the growing population of incarcerated women in Massachusetts, the Commissioner of the Department of Correction requested the Research Division to investigate programs in other states that allow children to remain with their mother during all or some period of their sentence (Knight, 1993). In 1992, there were twelve states that had programming for women that allowed some infants and children to stay with their mothers; seven more states had plans for initiating such programs, and three other states had previously had such programs, but had abandoned them due to financial concerns (Knight, 1993). At this time, it is unknown if the results of this study have provided any additional opportunities for incarcerated women in Massachusetts. Drug Treatment and Education The increase in the female correctional population has occurred simultaneously with the increase in alcohol and other drug addictions by women prisoners (“Women in Prison,” 1995). It has been found that 70 percent of incarcerated women have alcohol or drug problems (“Women in Prison,” 1995, p. 2). As a result, there has been an installment of mandatory minimum sentences for most drug offenses (“Women in Prison,” 1995). Unfortunately, the quantity and quality of drug treatment in prisons is generally poor (“Women in Prison,” 1995). Drug treatment should be available to all addicted incarcerated women. Because drug use is a primary risk factor for HIV/AIDS, prison officials and administrators must collaborate with public health specialists to develop drug treatment programs which emphasize AIDS education and family planning (“Women in Prison,” 1995). Pre-Release Planning One of the largest concerns of the correctional system, both for male and female prisoners, is the lack of discharge planning. As a result, many released prisoners either find themselves homeless, or find themselves in an environment where maintaining sobriety and abstinence, and avoiding future criminal behavior is not possible (“Women in Prison,” 1995). Incarcerated women need access to family planning to prevent unplanned pregnancies, HIV-infection, or other sexually transmitted diseases (“Women in Prison,” 1995). Family planning services are very poor in prison and access to pregnancy termination services is limited, or nonexistent (“Women in Prison,” 1995). The incarcerated mother, whose children are in the care of the state, needs continual support and advocacy in order to ensure a healthy family reunification and to ensure that she will not return to the criminal justice system. However, this can only occur when she has access to services and to her children, as well as ongoing pre-release planning during incarceration. Implications for Social Work Practice and Research Services for incarcerated women, such as family visitation, drug counseling, and pre-release planning have thus far been substandard. But, this growing number of incarcerated women greatly increases the need to respond. Social workers will continue to be called on to provide clinical services to this population. It has been hypothesized that DSS involvement may reduce recidivism and increase the chances for family reunification for incarcerated mothers, this advocacy should be recognized as a model for all incarcerated persons. If the United States spends over three million dollars a day to imprison all women inmates (“Breaking the Cycle,” 1995, p. 1), changes are needed to ensure success upon release from correctional facilities in order to reduce the effect of the “revolving prison door.” There must be a response to the growing population of women prisoners in the United States. This problem is not going to disappear unless there is a response by the correctional system. Incarcerated women need to be viewed from both within and outside of the prison system. There needs to be a collaboration between organizations that provide services to incarcerated mothers. During their incarceration, women must receive the educational and vocational skills necessary to obtain meaningful employment after their release. Finally, policymakers and social workers must work with community organizations to initiate the creation of more post-release programs that provide women, who have a criminal history, continued access to alcohol and drug treatment, educational and vocational training, and emotional support. Future research should identify how many incarcerated women in Massachusetts are parents, including the ages of their children, the frequency of contact, and the community service needs of the children. It is also important to identify how many incarcerated women are involved with DSS, as well as how many are pregnant upon entering the criminal justice system. Without this knowledge, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts cannot appropriately respond to the growing needs of women in prison and the children who are left behind. References Aid to Incarcerated Mothers. [Brochure]. Beckerman, A. (1994). Mothers in prison: Meeting the prerequisite conditions for permanency planning. Social Work, 39, pp. 9-14. Bloom, B. (1994). Imprisoned mothers. In Gabel, K. & Johnson, D. (eds.). Children of Incarcerated Parents. Boston, MA: Lexington Books. Breaking the cycle of despair: Children of incarcerated mothers.” (1995). New York, NY: Women’s Prison Association, pp. 1-12. Chesney-Lind, M., & Immarigeon, R. (1994). Alternatives to women’s incarceration. In Gabel, K. & Johnston, D. (eds.). Children of Incarcerated Parents. Boston, MA: Lexington Books. Department of Correction (1996). “A statistical description of the sentenced population of Massachusetts Correctional Institutions.” Department of Correction (1994). “1994 Dowdy, Z. R. (1997, February 3). From prison cot to shelter cot. The Boston Globe, pp. B1, B12. Fuller, L. G. (1993). Visitors to women’s prisons in California: An exploratory study. Federal Probation, 57(4): 41-47. Hairston, C. F. (1991). Family ties during imprisonment: Important to whom and for what? Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, pp. 87-102. Hairston, C. F. (1988). Family ties during imprisonment: Do they influence future criminal activity? Federal Probation, pp. 48-52. Kampfner, C. J. (1994). Post-traumatic stress reactions in children of imprisoned mothers. In Gabel, K. & Johnston, D. (eds.). Children of Incarcerated Parents. Boston, MA: Lexington Books. Knight, J. W. (1993). “Incarcerated women with their children: A national survey of boarding-in programs.” [unpublished study by the Massachusetts Department of Correction]. Marr, M. (February 25, 1997). Interview with Maureen Marr, Unit Administrator of Hodder House. May, K. (March 25, 1997). Interview with Katherine May, DSS Director of the Foster Care Review Unit. MCI-Framingham treatment and program department.” (1995). [unpublished document by the Massachusetts Department of Correction]. Norman, J. (1994). Children of prisoners in foster care. In Gabel, K. & Johnson, D. (eds.). Children of Incarcerated Parents. Boston, MA: Lexington Books. Reilly, S. A. (1992). Incarcerated mothers and the foster care system in Massachusetts: Working together to preserve parental rights. New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement, 18, pp. 147-181. Women in prison.” (1995). Washington, DC: National Women’s Law Center, pp. 1-7. ~ |
|
Reading Room