Adapting Animal‐Assisted Therapy Trials to Prison‐Based Animal Programs

Abstract

Prison-based animal programs have shown promise when it comes to increased sociability, responsibility, and levels of patience for inmates who participate in these programs. Yet there remains a dearth of scientific research that demonstrates the impact of prison-based animal programs on inmates' physical and mental health. Trials of animal-assisted therapy interventions, a form of human-animal interaction therapy most often used with populations affected by depression/anxiety, mental illness, and trauma, may provide models of how prison-based animal program research can have widespread implementation in jail and prison settings, whose populations have high rates of mental health problems. This paper reviews the components of prison-based animal programs most commonly practiced in prisons today, presents five animal-assisted therapy case studies, evaluates them based on their adaptability to prison-based animal programs, and discusses the institutional constraints that act as barriers for rigorous prison-based animal program research implementation. This paper can serve to inform the development of a research approach to animal-assisted therapy that nurses and other public health researchers can use in working with correctional populations.

The Efficacy of Dog Assisted Therapy in Detained Drug Users: A Pilot Study in an Italian Attenuated Custody Institute

“…In particular, animals appear to be increasingly incorporated into correctional programs in prison as part of vocational and social skills training [ 20 ] and in the treatment of substance dependence [ 21 , 22 ]. Several studies have reported positive psychological and physiological effects of prison-based animal programs and animal assisted interventions with inmates, which confirm the general idea that human–animal interactions contribute to human health and well-being [ 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ]. However, even if they have shown promising results, only Japerson (2010) and Burger (2011) went through health outcomes of animal assisted therapy with drug addicted inmates [ 29 , 30 ].…”

“You Think You’re Helping Them, But They’re Helping You Too”: Experiences of Scottish Male Young Offenders Participating in a Dog Training Program

“…However, participants were not randomly allocated to the program, and those who choose to participate in DTPs may differ from those who do not engage with such programs [ 9 , 11 ]. It was not feasible to conduct comparable qualitative evaluations for an appropriate control group; this is a key limitation of qualitative DTP evaluations which will need to be addressed despite the challenges of conducting research in a custodial context [ 7 , 11 , 24 , 47 ]. Nonetheless, the program appeared to be effective in engaging those with low levels of prior engagement with education or training opportunities, for example, as indicated by participant characteristics and program records.…”

“…Offenders have multiple needs and interventions tackling a range of problems are considered the most effective [ 32 , 33 ]. A range of positive outcomes across several domains have been identified for DTPs, using both qualitative and quantitative methods of evaluation [ 7 , 9 , 11 ], which suggests that DTPs may be particularly effective in addressing the multiple needs of offenders [ 34 , 35 , 47 ]. However, the evaluation of prison animal programs is challenging because of the constraints imposed by an applied context, in which multiple individual and program variables potentially confound results [ 20 , 21 ].…”

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

“…A substantial body of work on the human‐dog relationship has developed since the 1980s, chiefly in the health field, leading to findings that dogs can improve physical health (e.g., myocardial infarction, asthma), mental health (e.g., anxiety, depression) and social integration (Alison & Ramaswamy, ; Friedmann, Katcher, Lynch, & Thomas, ; McNicholas et al, ; Morrison, ; Ownby, Johnson, & Peterson, ). Unfortunately, when these studies were replicated many of these findings appeared contradictory and inconclusive (McNicholas et al, ).…”