“It’s Not a Conversation Starter.” Or is it?: Stigma Management Strategies of the Formerly Incarcerated in Personal and Occupational Settings

Abstract

Mass incarceration and its ill effects remains a major social problem in the United States. Those exiting the criminal justice system reenter society with the label of exconvict, a label that is permanent, highly stigmatized in American society, and has serious potential ramifications for successful reintegration, including: access to employment, higher education, and housing; acceptance in their communities; and successful personal relationships. The purpose of this study was to explore (1) anticipated stigma, (2) actual experienced stigma, and (3) the stigma management strategies that formerly incarcerated individuals employed in their personal and occupational lives. Drawing from a modified labeling theory (MLT) approach, we conducted in-depth interviews with 17 men and women who had been formerly incarcerated for felony offenses. Our findings revealed that the formerly incarcerated continue to experience stigma, often expected that they would, and utilized tactics (e.g. preventative telling, secrecy, and withdraw) consistent with MLT. Additionally, our findings revealed that these strategies are not static and participants altered their strategies throughout their life course and based upon social and economic contexts.

Living as Socially Marked Individuals: Two Stories on Stigma and Its Consequences

“…Importantly, selection is also situational. Although prior research indicates that stigmatized individuals often select their stigma management strategy based on situational context (e.g., Catoe 2021; Park and Teitjen 2021) and our narratives echo these findings, our stories also point out other important considerations: that the selection is particularly contingent on time and changing systems of social support.…”

“…Precise in its hypotheses, MLT posits 3 distinct forms of stigma management strategies: secrecy, withdrawal, and preventative (or educational) telling (Link, et al 1989). Although MLT was originally established to investigate stigma management among those with a mental health diagnosis, it has since been applied in a variety of contexts, including those with histories of criminal conviction and incarceration (e.g., Park and Tietjen 2021; Ray and Dollar 2014).…”

“…Since its inception, MLT has been used to assess populations with various stigmatized health diagnoses (Fee and Nusbaumer 2012; Fife and Wright 2000; Hunger and Tomiyama 2018; Lee and Craft 2002; Mustillo, Hendrix, and Schafer 2012) and persons with incarceration or criminal histories (LeBel 2012; Murphy et al 2011; Park and Tietjen 2021; Ray and Dollar 2014; Tangney, Stuewig, and Hafez 2011; Tewksbury 2012). In this paper, we demonstrate the applicatory potential of MLT propositions using a unique methodological approach.…”

“Not for the Weak”: The Lived Experience of Women in Romantic Relationships With Incarcerated Individuals

“…In previous studies, it was found that stigma impacts families and individuals facing incarceration, to the point that some participants felt compelled to lie and conceal their brother’s incarceration (Tadros et al, 2020). Stigma may put a strain on personal relationships, frequently putting people affected in uncomfortable situations that need cautious navigating around sensitive subjects (Park & Tietjen, 2021). This shame may lead to feelings of isolation and loneliness, as relationships are often negatively impacted by the stigma surrounding incarceration.…”

Citizenship on probation: Understanding the labour market exclusion of criminalized people in Scotland

“…Anazodo et al, 2019; Cherney and Fitzgerald, 2016; Goodman, 2020; Park and Tietjen, 2021; Winnick and Bodkin, 2008) with implications for employment outcomes – either by design (self-deselection) or default (what is accessible). These strategies may change over time, as Harding (2003) found that most jobseekers began their search by honestly reporting their background but, after a series of negative experiences, changed to a strategy of non-disclosure, which in turn has adverse consequences for the quality of the employment they were able to access, in relation to legitimate work, job type, job stability, and income levels (see also Park and Tietjen, 2021; Ricciardelli and Mooney, 2018). Perhaps unsurprisingly, many people with criminal records have limited expectations or aspirations when it comes to employment prospects, reflecting the kinds of work typically available to them (Goodman, 2020).…”