Resocialización de personas privadas de libertad a través de actividades con animales en Argentina: el programa «Huellas de Esperanza»

Abstract

One of the most traumatic events that a person can ever experience in their lifetime is being detained. The prison dog programmes are the most successful prison rehabilitation programmes in the United States of America and consist of detainees training service dogs for other people to assist with different types of disability. It is a typical win-win system: inmates win as they connect with their deepest feelings of affection and solidarity while acquiring a concrete skill for their future release; people with disabilities win because they receive a dog to support their day-to-day activities; the dogs win (especially adopted street dogs) because their lot in life is improved; institutions win because they are enabled to meet their objective more fully; and society wins because they gain a concrete tool to aid the social rehabilitation of detainees. This article describes the operation and achievements of Huellas de Esperanza (Traces of Hope), the Argentine prison dog programme, which has been implemented by the Federal Penitentiary Service since 2010 using State resources. A total of 85 inmates have participated in the programme, which has delivered more than a dozen assistance dogs to people with disabilities and many more dogs to elderly people to provide them with affection and companionship. The article also describes the programme methodology and the way it has decreased prison unrest and led to a low reoffending rate among programme participants.

Mental health intervention research in Latin American correctional settings: A scoping review

“…Thirteen studies were available in Spanish (Avendaño Castro et al, 2020; Barrientos-Low & Escaff-Silva, 2018; Baltodano Chacón & Márquez Cueva, 2014; Corchado-Vargas, 2016; Curay Banegas & Dávila Gómez, 2018; Olhaberry Huber et al, 2020; Cisternas Isla & Carreño Miranda, 2019; Livacic-Rajas et al, 2004; Mora-Arias et al, 2020; Palomino et al, 1991; Riega-Virú & Tataje-Véliz, 2020; Avello Saez et al, 2018; Vásquez Sosa & Sánchez Sosa, 2015), 11 in Portuguese (Amorim-Gaudêncio et al, 2017; Andretta & da Silva Oliveira, 2008, 2011; Billand & Molinier, 2017; Fortunato Costa et al, 2011; Machado das Neves et al, 2017; Figueiredo Falcomer Meneses et al, 2016; Da Silva Oliveira et al, 2010; Rodrigues, 2020; Pinheiro Said, 2019; Zambom et al, 2011) and 10 in English (Barrera-Valencia et al, 2017; Barcellos Café & do Nascimento, 2012; Capellan et al, 2022; Fortunato Costa et al, 2020; Noriega Gayol, 1995; Hutchinson et al, 2017; Mundt et al, 2019; Romero et al, 2018; Santos et al, 2010; Spence, 2019). In all, N = 24, 71% of the studies were only available in Spanish or Portuguese.…”

“…Three studies were from Colombia (Avendaño Castro et al, 2020;Barrera-Valencia et al, 2017;Palomino et al, 1991) andMexico, respectively (Corchado-Vargas, 2016;Noriega Gayol, 1995;Vásquez Sosa & Sánchez Sosa, 2015). Two studies were carried out in Costa Rica (Baltodano Chacón & Márquez Cueva, 2014;Mora-Arias et al, 2020) and Trinidad and Tobago (Hutchinson et al, 2017;Spence, 2019), and one was from each of Argentina (Romero et al, 2018), Ecuador (Curay Banegas & Dávila Gómez, 2018), Peru (Riega-Virú & Tataje-Véliz, 2020) and Honduras (Capellan et al, 2022). No studies were included from the other 22 LAC countries.…”

“…description of the intervention and the perceived changes (Amorim-Gaudêncio et al, 2017;Avendaño Castro et al, 2020;Barrientos-Low & Escaff-Silva, 2018;Billand & Facciolla Paiva, 2017;Barcellos Café & do Nascimento, 2012;Fortunato Costa et al, 2011, 2020Noriega Gayol, 1995;Curay Banegas & Dávila Gómez, 2018;Mundt et al, 2019;Palomino et al, 1991;Rodrigues, 2020;Romero et al, 2018). Seven studies were classified as expert opinion or consensus, because of their approach to interview different professional actors (psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, etc.)…”

“…Persons with sexual offense histories (Barrientos-Low & Escaff-Silva, 2018;Barcellos Café & do Nascimento, 2012;Fortunato Costa et al, 2011, 2020Figueiredo Falcomer Meneses et al, 2016;Pinheiro Said, 2019) were the intervention target in six studies (18%). Three interventions (9%) aimed to reduce criminal recidivism (Amorim-Gaudêncio et al, 2017;Capellan et al, 2022;Romero et al, 2018).…”

Paws for thought? Developing dog projects for older people in prison

“…In the USA, many correctional institutions have introduced dog-based programmes that involve people in prison in dog care and training, sometimes as service dogs (Jalongo, 2019; Charry-Sánchez et al , 2018). Over 50 US states have PDPs and such programmes have been developed in other countries including the UK (Mercer, 2015; Mercer et al , 2022), Australia (Humby and Barclay, 2018; Mulcahy and McLaughlin, 2013), Argentina (Romero et al , 2018) and Japan (Koda et al , 2015). Some of these programmes are full-time, relatively long-term schemes, where dogs live with and are cared for and trained by one individual.…”