A qualitative assessment of a dog program for youth offenders in an adult prison

Abstract

Objective Dog programs occurring in prison tend to generate positive public opinion and media portrayals, yet they often lack empirical validation. This is the first study to examine the key themes that drive a dog program aimed at incarcerated youth serving time in an adult prison. Design and Sample A sample of male youth (n = 31) were provided survey questions on a rescue dog program. A grounded qualitative approach was employed with open‐ended responses. Results The following themes emerged: the symbolism of the dog its role in therapy, perceptions of positive behaviors and rehabilitation, a sense of normality, and universal support by inmates. Conclusion This study supports the potential for utilizing rescue dogs in therapeutic interventions in which the vulnerable inmate can discuss early trauma, interpersonal dysfunction and histories of deviance. The dog symbolized the potential for incarcerated youth to engage in discussion of sensitive topics in a safe manner. Policy implications also include the function of dogs in creating a normalizing effect on the prison unit itself, one that can promote rehabilitation. There was universal support for the program which is rare in the prison milieu. Theoretically, positive outcomes occurred in an indirect manner, though more research is needed.

A Quasi-Experimental Study on the Effectiveness of Dutch Cell Dogs in Incarcerated Youth

“…For incarcerated adolescents in particular, positive rehabilitating effects have been reported in studies with a qualitative design (e.g., Leonardi et al, 2017; Smith & Smith, 2019), suggesting DTPs may be promising for youth offenders. However, controlled studies focusing on DTPs for this group are scarce: the recent meta-analysis (Duindam et al, 2020) included only three studies that were conducted on incarcerated youth (e.g., Chianese, 2009; Grommon et al, 2018; Seivert et al, 2016) and these reported mixed findings about the DTP’s effectiveness.…”

Effects of Dog-Based Animal-Assisted Interventions in Prison Population: A Systematic Review

“…In addition, four articles [ 18 , 32 , 56 , 57 ] (20% of the total) evaluated both female and male inmates; one of them [ 18 ] was developed in a psychiatric prison. Additionally, four articles [ 45 , 46 , 58 , 59 ] (20% of the total) investigated young inmates.…”

“…Table 2 displays the study design in each for the selected articles. A total of 14 (70% of the total) articles were classified as observational studies (an experimental group that was only assessed once at the end of the intervention) [ 14 , 18 , 39 , 44 , 48 , 49 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. Of them, seven (50%) followed a quantitative [ 18 , 39 , 48 , 49 , 54 , 56 , 57 ] and seven (50%) a qualitative methodology [ 14 , 44 , 52 , 53 , 55 , 58 , 59 ].…”

“…Table 2 shows the control group protocols for each article. Fourteen of them [ 14 , 18 , 39 , 44 , 48 , 49 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ] did not include a control group, while the design of remaining six studies [ 32 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 50 , 51 ] did. In this regard, treatment as usual or activities without dog presence were the most usual protocols for control groups.…”

“…Furthermore, Table 5 shows the instruments and outcomes for the qualitative studies. One article was classified as a randomized controlled trial [51] and seven as observational studies [14,44,52,53,55,58,59]. Anxiety, depression, symbolism of the rescue dog, universal support, and psychological and emotional health were the most common outcomes among the qualitative studies.…”