Rethinking preventing homelessness amongst prison leavers

Madoc-Jones, Iolo; Hughes, Caroline; Gorden, Caro; Dubberley, Sarah; Washington-Dyer, Karen; Ahmed, Anya; Lockwood, Kelly; Wilding, Mark

doi:10.1177/2066220318822245

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ideally, services should be individualised, and IPs should be linked with them as soon as they leave the correctional facilities (Visher, 2007). Madoc-Jones et al (2018), for instance, highlighted the importance of encouraging and empowering probation services to take on this role. Fontaine & Biess (2012) suggested a pathway model to provide housing support that is tailored to individual needs of IPs on their release.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From nowhere to nowhere. Homelessness and incarceration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Bashir

Moloney²,

Elzain³

et al. 2021

IJPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to review international literature systematically to estimate the prevalence of homelessness among incarcerated persons at the time of imprisonment and the time of discharge. Design/methodology/approach A systematic review methodology was used to identify quantitative observational studies that looked at the prevalence of homelessness at the time of imprisonment, or up to 30 days prior to that point (initial homelessness), and at the time of discharge from prisons. Studies reported in English from inception to 11 September 2019 were searched for using eight databases (PsycInfo, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycArticles, Scopus, Web of Science and the Campbell Collaboration), in addition to grey literature. Studies were screened independently by three researchers. Results of studies meeting inclusion criteria were meta-analysed using a random effects model to generate pooled prevalence data. Findings A total of 18 out of 2,131 studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies originated from the USA, Canada, UK, Ireland or Australia. The estimated prevalence of initial homelessness was 23.41% and at time of discharge was 29.94%. Substantial heterogeneity was observed among studies. Originality/value People in prisons are over twenty times more likely to be homeless than those in the general population. This is likely attributable to a range of health and social factors. Studies in this analysis suggest higher rates of homelessness in minority populations and among those with mental illnesses and neurodevelopmental disorders. While there was significant heterogeneity among studies, the results highlight the global burden of this issue and a clear necessity for targeted interventions to address homelessness in this population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From nowhere to nowhere. Homelessness and incarceration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Bashir

Moloney²,

Elzain³

et al. 2021

IJPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a comparable way, major life events such as transitions from mental health facilities, prisons or out‐of‐home care into “mainstream society” can place individuals at heightened risk of homelessness when adequate institutional support is not provided (Khan ; Madoc‐Jones et al. ).…”

Section: The Causes Of Homelessnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Institutional and policy failures are again implicated here-not only in leaving dangerous social norms unchallenged, but also in failing to provide adequate safeguards and supports for those fleeing violence (Spinney 2012). In a comparable way, major life events such as transitions from mental health facilities, prisons or out-of-home care into "mainstream society" can place individuals at heightened risk of homelessness when adequate institutional support is not provided (Khan 2010;Madoc-Jones et al 2019).…”

Section: The Causes Of Homelessnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compulsory income management: Combatting or compounding the underlying causes of homelessness?

Peterie

Bielefeld

Marston

et al. 2019

Aust J Social Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compulsory Income Management (CIM) is a form of conditional welfare that involves the mandatory quarantining of a portion of welfare recipients’ social security payments. Quarantined funds are accessible via a government‐issued debit card, with restrictions surrounding where and on what funds can be spent. Official justifications of CIM have framed these policies as attempts to combat substance abuse and gambling problems, and to thus secure better outcomes for welfare recipients and their families. Central to this narrative has been the argument that welfare quarantining will ensure more money is spent on ‘essentials’, including accommodation. No existing studies, however, have specifically interrogated the impacts of CIM on housing security. This article responds to this gap in the literature by reviewing existing research concerning CIM's impacts and locating this research within broader debates regarding the causes of homelessness and the efficacy of individualised policy interventions. In doing so, it highlights CIM's potential to exacerbate housing insecurity not only through technical issues such as rental transfer failures, but also by contributing to underlying stressors such as economic disadvantage; relationship difficulties, poor health and addiction; and social stigma. The article concludes that – far from addressing the structural causes of homelessness – CIM has enflamed them.

show abstract

“…Housing Solutions staff in our research referred to new prevention policies leading to greater joint working between agencies to address homelessness amongst prison leavers. However, whilst they often talked positively about new practices and levels of cooperation, they simultaneously understood themselves to be unable to meet the objectives of trying to address homelessness amongst prison leavers because: practical difficulties arise in working through the prison walls; prison leavers are not preferred as tenants; prison leavers rarely engage with housing services once they have left prison; and there is a shortage of social and affordable housing across Wales (for full details see Madoc-Jones et al, 2018;Madoc-Jones et al, 2019). So, for example, one respondent suggested:…”

Section: Imaginary Penalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaginary Homelessness Prevention with Prison Leavers in Wales

Madoc-Jones¹,

Ahmed²,

Hughes³

et al. 2019

Social Policy and Society

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we engage in a critical examination of how local authority Housing Solutions staff, newly placed centre stage in preventing homelessness amongst prison leavers in Wales, understand and go about their work. Drawing on Carlen’s concept of ‘imaginary penalities’ and Ugelvik’s notion of ‘legitimation work’ we suggest practice with this group can be ritualistic and underpinned by a focus on prison leavers’ responsibilities over their rights, and public protection over promoting resettlement. In response we advocate for less-punitive justice and housing policies, underpinned by the right to permanent housing for all prison leavers and wherein stable accommodation is understood as the starting point for resettlement. The analysis presented in this article provides insights to how homelessness policies could play out in jurisdictions where more joint working between housing and criminal justice agencies are being pursued and/or preventative approaches to managing homelessness are being considered.

show abstract

Rethinking preventing homelessness amongst prison leavers

Cited by 10 publications

References 10 publications

From nowhere to nowhere. Homelessness and incarceration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

From nowhere to nowhere. Homelessness and incarceration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Compulsory income management: Combatting or compounding the underlying causes of homelessness?

Imaginary Homelessness Prevention with Prison Leavers in Wales

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About