Are Prisons’ Effective in Dealing With Crime?

90 seconds and another person is locked behind bars in the United States, amounting to almost 420,000 per year. The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world. As per US department of justice, incarceration is the long-term confinement of convicted and sentenced offenders. Similarly, incarceration rates refer to the number of people in custody, per 100,000 citizens. The local situation in Pakistan is no different. Reports produced by institute for crime and justice policy research highlight that the prison population rate in Pakistan in 2018 was 40% with a prison population of around 83,000. These figures were enough to captivate my attention and urged me to research further on this issue. Prisons have been an integral part of the Criminal Justice System. According to the Economic Theory of Crime, developed by Becker, offenders are different and each of them offends due to different reasons. The basic idea is that crime is not due to a fault in the offender but due to the way society is organized and structured. It needs to be seen whether the system of punishment is able to cut out the root cause of crime. There has been a lot of debate on whether prisons are effective in making criminals law-abiding citizens.

Studies have revealed that high incarceration has led to low crimes in countries like Australia, England, New Zealand, and the United States. They mainly credit the deterrence effect of prisons, reparation and rehabilitation programs for this drop in crime rates. Reparation is also known as ‘restorative justice’ which an article by Northwestern university, published in the journal of criminal law and criminology, describes as “payment made by the criminal offender to his victim as indemnification for the harm or injury caused by the crime, reparation being a broader term which seems to include the concept of restitution”. Similarly, deterrence also remains an important idea which is described by a 21st-century definition. However; critics have argued that high incarceration rates have resulted in high crime rates in England and the United States and prisons have proven to be ineffective to a great extent. Their major arguments surround the huge impact on mental and psychological health that comes with a huge economic cost from prisons. 

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The word prison is well known in society with a certain stigma attached to it which restricts people from thinking beyond it. In order to explore the diverse impacts that prisons have on offenders, I would look into the economic, socio-psychological, and political perspectives. While the economic perspective will investigate the cost-effectiveness of prisons and their direct relation with crime curtailment, the socio-psychological perspective will explore the extent to which the type of prison environment has an impact on the thinking patterns, mental health, and the social lives of the offender and if these factors have any effect on the capacity of prisons in crime reduction. In addition, the political perspective will explore the political nature of sentences, the extent to which judicial systems are fair in sending people to prison and the impact this might have on the overall reduction in crime.

This report relies on secondary data in order to form informed judgments on the issue. Regardless of the fact that I wanted to carry out some primary research by visiting a prison and experiencing the actual conditions and the way prisoners are treated, this could not happen due to a range of personal and pragmatic reasons. The shortage of time, the unsafe prison environment, and the covid restrictions prevented the field research and I had to rely on secondary sources. Due to the fact that people were not normally aware of this issue and did not have a sound understanding of the prison system, I could also not conduct any surveys to gather data for first-hand research. The ultimate way forward was to carry out detailed literature reviews of reliable sources which mostly included research articles, journals, government websites, and books. Therefore, utilizing the existing research conducted by credible sources, this report aims to conduct a thorough study of the effectiveness of the prison system in curtailing crime.

ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE

The first argument from the economic perspective surrounds the huge economic cost of incarceration which mostly comes from the salaries to staff, rehabilitative programs, food, and the provision of legal representation to defendants. According to research conducted by the prison policy initiative, expenses originating from prisons cost around $80 billion to the US government. This research stands very valid due to its strong research methodology. It is a result of collaboration between multiple authors with expertise in different areas, who carried out in-depth investigations to collect data and eliminate any possible errors. Prison Policy Initiative is a non-profit think tank and has had an impact on government policies concerning prisons. This highlights the effectiveness of their work. Therefore, the cost of incarceration is extremely high. In addition to this, the cost of crimes occurring inside the prison also needs to be considered to get a true picture of the effectiveness of prisons. National Inmate Survey, conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics highlights that 3% to 4% of inmates reported experiencing incidents of sexual victimization in the past 12 months. This evidence is very strong as it comes from an article published by Stanford University in 2019. All of their information is extracted from reliable sources which mostly include journals and reports from recognized authors. Though they have not carried out first-hand research, they have provided citations for all of the evidence presented in the report which shows that thorough secondary research has been conducted. Hence, it can be said that a prison is a place that is supposed to be the centre for crime reduction rather than an origin. Criminal activities going on inside the prisons are a menace that puts the purpose of prisons in doubt. Through a cost-benefit analysis, a comparison can be drawn between the cost of prisons and the value of crime that is curtailed by putting these people into prisons. It provides a powerful framework to evaluate the economic effectiveness of incarceration centres.

This figure, extracted from a report published recently by the Vera Institute of Justice, indicates the huge part of the budget being utilized in dealing with crime and the costs incurred by the government annually. Huge amounts can be saved annually by cutting down the spending on prisons and can be spent on providing affordable housing, better access to healthcare, and invested into development projects. In 2019, 57 countries collectively spent an additional $1.3 billion on staff and maintaining their jails. In 2019, Covid had an adverse impact on the economy when the unemployment rate fell to 12.6% in New York. The claim that spending on prisons needs to be cut down is further justified if we look at the crime rates which have remained significantly high even after huge investments in prisons. However, this report was produced with the help of Vera, a government organization; there can be a potential risk of bias. Since the study was funded by the government, it can be said that they might have manipulated the figures to show a different picture. However, the authors of this report did not rely exclusively on information provided by the Vera Institute of Justice, but also collaborated with multiple other organizations e.g legal action group, fiscal policy institute, etc, working in this regard and verified the information to eliminate the risk of any possible bias or false data. This particularly enhances the reliability of this evidence. Hence, it can be said that the burden of prisons on governments’ annual budgets does not justify the impact that prisons have on crime reduction. This is very evident from the fact that crime rates have remained high throughout the years with ever-increasing incarceration rates.

However, it can also be argued that prisons bring along various other benefits. One of them is the provision of cheap labour that contributes to economic development. Inmates can get hired for jobs such as sweeping the floor, making food, or performing repairs for national defence equipment. Countries like the US and Canada have increased their reliance on prison labour for various jobs. While this might be seen as unethical by some, it can be argued that some countries such as Canada also pay the inmates for doing a particular job. They can expect between $5.25 and $6.90 per day. This enables prisoners to utilize their time and energy in doing something productive while remaining inside the prison. The government’s expense of hiring labour for their projects is also cut down by making use of those serving in prisons.

Another argument in favour of prisons is that they have contributed to a drop in many violent and property crimes. Most repeated offences under these crimes include murder, robbery, sexual assault, and burglary. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports, in 1980, when the number of inmates was less than a quarter of where it stands today, there were around 600 reported cases of violent crime per 100,000 inhabitants. In 2014, this number had reduced to 376. These figures come directly from the records maintained by the government in their national database. This reduces the chances of miscalculation as they have access to the data required to collect this information. Therefore, this dip in crime curves is an indication of the effectiveness of prisons. Empirical researchers significantly credited incapacitation and the deterrence effect of prisons for this fall in crime rate. This helps us drive to the conclusion that prisons have been able to benefit the economy by saving the costs that would arise from high crime rates.  However, this argument can be rebutted as economists and scholars have suggested a number of alternatives contributing to this drop in crime which includes economic growth, an increase in police forces, and demographic changes.  The co-author of “Freakonomics” explicitly suggested that legalizing abortion in roe v wade and reductions in ambient lead levels are major causes of this dip in crime curves. While some may argue that this reasoning is very opinion-based, this can be proved through verification with other studies that also discuss the drop in crimes in a similar light. A research article published by Stanford attests to this reasoning. It states that legalizing abortions has led to a drop of 47% in violent crime and 33% in property crime. This study is very valid due to the nature of its research which relies heavily on evidence provided by the department of justice. It is a journal article by the Stanford law school which has published many other research-based studies on a range of topics. Additionally, it has an expert and skilled faculty to ensure the authenticity of its work. This makes the evidence more convincing and reliable. Therefore, it emphasizes that high incarcerations are not the actual reason for the decrease in crime rates over the years. It stresses the fact that the enormous budget dedicated to incarcerations is not producing the desired results and renders it economically ineffective.

Hence, it can be concluded that crimes that are avoided within this index do not bring any huge monetary benefits and prisons continue to cost huge amounts to the government without making any major improvements in crime reduction. 

PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

Moving on, the pain and suffering resulting from incarceration extends beyond the walls of prisons and leads to multiple short and long-term psychological consequences. Not only the mental health of prisoners is affected but their families also suffer and research suggests that the impact lasts for years and may even be ‘irreversible’. The term ‘Institutionalization’ describes the transformation process which incorporates the norms of prison life into the behaviour and thinking patterns of prisoners. These factors leading to the transformation process are investigated in volume 5 of the International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory. According to that, the prison environment causes the inmates to go through various psychiatric changes and most of them are targets of personality disorders, and experience anxiety, depression, and psychosis. It further mentions a study conducted by the world health organization which suggests that overcrowding, prison violence, and a general lack of privacy build a high-pressure environment that most prisoners are not able to endure and suffer from these mental disorders. Many prisoners experience eating disorders and anxiety attacks due to the broken connection with families and the stress of their well-being. The  Department of  Health  (2009)  reported that imprisonment increases vulnerabilities and the risk of suicide. Between 1999 and 2003 a total of 434 people committed suicide in prison Almost 90% of the prison population has a mental health issue which is fairly high in comparison to the general population.   This evidence is very relevant to the argument presented here which makes it strong. It comes from the International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory(IJCST), published in 2012. IJCST publishes articles on conventional topics from around the world and across all areas of criminology and sociology. Its pieces of evidence are a result of independent studies conducted in multiple countries which also diversify the scope of evidence. This article in volume 5 of the journal provides evidence after a detailed review of multiple books and empirical papers. This builds on the credibility of the evidence which makes it more reliable to reach a conclusion. The fact that society is not ready to accept them as normal citizens after they are released and are considered a ‘threat to society’ for a lifetime, urges them to turn back to crime to earn a living for them. The emotional and economic hardships that the children have to go through negatively affect their mental development and ultimately result in the adoption of similar professions as their fathers, contributing to consistently high crime rates. Hence, they are unable to bear the stress of broken families and this drives to the conclusion that the deterioration of mental health through prisons generally does not contribute to crime reduction, but rather causes a surge in such activities.

Another argument suggesting the ineffectiveness of prisons is that the period spent in jails exposes them to new ideas for committing crimes and opportunities to know other criminal-minded people and form crime gangs. They are even able to continue their criminal activities while remaining in prison, through their strong connections built over years with other crime-committing groups. An outlaw motorcycle gang is an example of such a group which has its activities spread in more than 20 countries with around 2000 members. Many of them have been convicted and punished for crimes which include assault, kidnapping, drug trafficking, and illegal gambling.  The fact their activities have remained in operation in spite of many of its members going to prison. This evidence is highly reliable as it is provided by the US department of justice which works on investigating the activities of such groups. These figures are from research published by them in 2021 through primary research conducted under the supervision of David L. Jaffe, the Chief of the Organized Crime and Gang Section. This evidence is even more reliable due to the vast experience he has in research work and the multiple state-level awards that he has bagged are evidence of his expertise in this area of study. Hence, the most intriguing fact is that it has developed into a more powerful group with more people joining hands. This shows how prisons are serving as centres for illegal activities and the constant interaction with such people in prisons orders the brain to develop acceptance for criminal behaviour. This strengthens the argument that the present system of prisons is unable to serve the real purpose of preventing crime.

However, the other side asserts that prisons are an effective way of dealing with crime by contributing to crime control in a number of ways. According to neuro experts, the human brain is such that once an unpleasant experience is registered, it would not want to go through the same again. This leads to the development of the concept of deterrence which requires the offender to stop and think about the consequence of the act that he is about to commit. It has also been argued that a severe sentence at an early stage, which politicians refer to as a ‘short, sharp shock ‘can leave a long-lasting impact on the offender. The horrors of prison life deter them from committing crimes in the future. This period spent in prison allows the inmates to undergo various rehabilitative programs and training sessions which help them come out of the criminal world and settle back into normal life. From an initial fragmented range of courses on such matters as anger management, alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence, and victim awareness, the emphasis is now on programs aimed at changing the way prisoners think. In 1998–99, 3,000 prisoners successfully completed one of these programs. The impact of this was that those people were least likely to recommit within the next 2 years, highlighting the effectiveness of these programs in crime control. However, it can be argued that this source is outdated and provides evidence from around 20 years back. The latest research suggests that rehabilitative programs are not fully developed in all countries. Prisons in the developing world are not maintained due to a lack of resources and capital investment available. For instance, overcrowding rates in prisons in Pakistan as high as 134%. The government has not been able to make arrangements for the rehabilitation of prisoners. The pathetic living conditions with poor management lead to a further build-up in the anxiety and mental stress of those locked inside. However, the ultimate point being made is that rehabilitative programs enable prisoners to cut off their connection with the crime. This is further verified by the latest report from The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime which states that these programs can make a significant impression on the minds of the prisoners and serve as a benchmark in establishing a strong connection with the real ‘humane’ world. Therefore, it can be concluded that prisons allow an improvement in psychological behavior which leads to a reduction in the crime rate.

Another argument in favour of the prisons is the reparation often known as ‘restorative justice ‘. This allows the offender to provide remedies to the offender or the community for the harm that they have caused. It helps to overcome the mental stress that comes with committing a crime, especially the first-time offenders. Research into its effectiveness was published in Restorative Justice: The Evidence (Sherman and Strang, 2007) which highlighted that the symptoms of severe disorders and post-traumatic stress were reduced after the offenders took part in restorative justice. This evidence emphasizes that an emotional and apologetic interaction between the offender and the victim can lead to a mental realignment of the criminal and urge him to put an end to this behaviour after hearing about the suffering they have caused through their conduct. The ultimate impact of this was that those people were less likely to commit violent offences in the future. Hence, it remains an effective way of helping criminals to put a stop to their criminal lifestyle and achieve the ultimate goal of lowering crime rates.

In conclusion of this view, it can be said that the negative impact on the mental health of prisoners clearly outweighs the benefits that prisons bring in reducing crime rates. Severe sentences make the prisoners more immune to the harsh treatment and the deterrence effect of punishment becomes weaker each time they are punished which makes it harder to reform them. Hence, it can be concluded that custodial sentences have not had a major contribution to crime reduction and in fact, led to further psychiatric disorders in prisoners.

Political perspective 

The effectiveness of prisons can also be examined from a political perspective. These institutions stigmatize prisoners through moralistic denunciations and indictments based on bad genes e.g. skin as a crime. The increasing number of black, Latino, Hispanic, Asian, and youth detained in US prisons is evidence of the fact that the policies tend to criminalize targeted populations to keep the third-world countries and the working class behind bars. Digging deeper into this evidence, it is true to say that most prisoners are imprisoned not because they are criminals but because they have been accused of breaking the laws designed to exert tighter social control. The unfair treatment within prisons is a problem on its own. The unjust imprisonment based on these political factors is one of the root causes of social inequality in society which is a crime on its own. The evidence to this is that in countries like the US, UK, or Canada, the population of non-whites in prisons far exceeds their total population. For example, black people form 3% of the total population in Canada. However, they make up 8.6% of the prison population. In fact, between 2003 and 2013, the incarceration rate among Black people increased by nearly 90 per cent. This reiterates the argument that black and other minorities are overrepresented in prisons. This evidence is put forward by Policy Options Politiques, a well-known magazine in Canada. The author of this article is a human rights lawyer, policy consultant, and community educator. Through a thorough evaluation of multiple studies, he justifies his argument that blacks are unfairly overrepresented in Canada’s prisons. Another element that enhances the reliability of this evidence is that this magazine has bagged various state-level awards in the past which shows its authenticity and credibility. However, this article heavily relies on stats obtained till 2013 which might give rise to the claim that it is outdated. But, the basic argument of over-representation on political grounds still stands valid and the strengths of this magazine article heavily outweigh the weak points. Therefore, we can argue that these unfair punishments do not help in reducing crime rates as the real culprits are free to roam around. The inequality in the prison system does not provide a solution to high crime rates. It can be said that the aftermath of imprisonment is social criticism. The distinction that is created on the basis of power and race gives rise to political inequality which the prisons cannot end. Therefore, prisons predominantly fail to achieve the aim of crime reduction.

Another argument against the effectiveness of prisons is that the politics behind putting people in jails renders the purpose of crime control void. It remains a valid concern that judges are more likely to grant custodial sentences to those coming from weak backgrounds with no dominant position in society as compared to those who have stronger sources of income. This argument can be supported by the evidence presented by the prison policy initiative which shows that in 2014, the average income of those incarcerated was 41% lower than the of non-incarcerated people from similar age groups. This evidence asserts that the political nature of prisons is such that the economic background of the offender remains important in determining the appropriate sentence. The punishment given may not even match the harm caused. Their report is credible for its methodology. They have conducted a survey by dividing the population into groups based on their age. The fact that it relies on data from similar age groups, helps draw a fairer comparison in the incomes of those incarcerated with those who are not. Moreover, this argument is also supported by the author of the book; the English legal system, which shows the validity of this claim. However, it can be counter-argued that these arguments are particularly effective in the Pakistani context where class determines whether someone will be sentenced to prison. This is evident from a very recent case of Noor Muqaddam. The murderer is the son of a US national and the heir to Jaffer Group of Companies belonging to one of the wealthiest families in Pakistan. It took the courts almost an entire year to acquit him because of the influence and power that his family held over the justice system. It was a high-profile case which attracted a lot of public attention and this is one of the reasons for the final verdict which declared him guilty and sentenced to prison. However, the loophole still exists as his parents who were initially declared to be involved in the murder were acquitted. On the other hand, their employees-the weaker ones, were sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment. This emphasizes that the background of the offender plays a significant role in determining the sentence and those with the stronger background can get away with the legal system without being properly punished. The result is that the actual criminals keep on with their activities while the disadvantaged ones suffer. This prohibits crime control and rather brings forward new criminals from the prisons who have lost faith in the justice system. They see joining huge crime groups as a last resort to work under the shelter of influential people who can save them from going to prisons-maintaining high crime rates.

Another strong argument is that people are even imprisoned for crimes that they have not even committed. After they have spent years in jail, they are proven innocent. The impact of this might be that even non-criminals would turn into ones just by spending years with inmates. The principle of equal concern is a part of the theory put forward by Dworkin. The crux of this is that the distribution of goods should not determine the amount of respect and concern that an individual should be entitled to. People should only be held responsible for the crimes that they have deliberately committed, not for things that happen to them through no choice of their own. The evidence to this is the fact that since 1990, more than 200 miscarriages of justice have been reported where people who have spent long years behind bar were proven not guilty. The result of these wrongful convictions is that after these people are out, they are unable to bear the burden of legally-acceptable employment discrimination with a criminal record that will remain with them forever. The failure to provide people with the concern and respect that they deserve is itself a huge contributor in convincing them to use illegal methods to survive. Thus, this political dimension of imprisonment significantly reduces the effectiveness of prisons in reducing crime.

However, these arguments can be rebutted through a series of the latest developments happening in the politics of prisons. The latest governments have tried to tackle this issue by passing legislation that aims to prevent political discrimination in the civil justice system. Research conducted by the PEW research centre published in 2020 highlights that the incarceration rates of blacks have decreased by 34% since 2006. It is a clear indication that political inequality in the justice system has reduced over the years. This is significantly strong evidence as it comes from a well-established and recognized source. BJS is the primary statistical agency of the Department of Justice which is one of the most expansive and detailed legal mandates among all agencies. The fact that they have access to important government-based surveys and also conduct primary research to keep their data updated builds on their credibility. Primary research ensures that all data is relevant to the research topic and is in line with the latest updates. The author of this source is a senior writer at the PEW research centre with vast experience in this field which is evident from the multiple studies that he has published on a range of subject matters. Pew conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, and media content analysis to support its articles which exclude the risk of any political bias or manipulation of figures. Hence, it can be said that non-whites are getting increasing recognition through political institutions that promise them fairer treatment regardless of their status and dominance in society. Therefore, it leads back to the main argument that a fairer system of imprisonment ensures that only the wrong is convicted and imprisoned. This also helps society develop faith in the justice system as the punishments are being meted out on meritocratic grounds which helps establish the argument that prisons are an effective way of reducing crime.

In conclusion, it can be said that although there have been a few developments, this is something that has only happened in the last few years. The long history of prisons highlighting political injustice truly outweighs the recent changes. The fact remains that this politics of prisons still exist and inhibits the prisons from carrying out effective crime reduction. Fairly high crime rates throughout the years are obvious evidence of the lack of effectiveness of prisons.

CONCLUSION

Ultimately, it comes down to the extent of the effectiveness of prisons in curtailing crimes. While the economic perspective relies on the cost-benefit analysis to reach a conclusion, one side asserts that the huge cost of prisons is not justified by the crime rates, and the other argues that the cost of crime curtailed through prisons is very significant. The ultimate conclusion depends on the cost-effectiveness and a comparison to the impact on crime rates which suggests that the cost of prisons conflicts with the crime rates. Looking into it from the psychological perspective, there is a clear inclination towards the deterioration of the mental health of prisoners in comparison to the deterrence effect of prisons. Similarly, the recent developments in the socio-political nature of prisons do not outweigh the long-existing political inequality in the justice system which itself has been a source of crime. It is important to see the other possible sentencing options such as non-custodial sentences e.g community sentences and compare their impact on crime rates with the prisoning system to see the effectiveness of prisons. The ultimate outcome remains the same even increased incarcerations have not had any major contribution to crime reduction. The severe impacts on the inmates do not allow them to come out of the criminal cycle, leading to persistent peaks in crime graphs.

REFLECTION

My view of the prison system has significantly been modeled and shaped following the extensive research carried out through different perspectives. When I chose this research topic, I had never expected it to have so many dimensions through which it could be discovered and debated. In fact, the debate turned out to be a dynamic argument on the various implications of the present system of prisons and its direct relevance with crime rates. It was way beyond a basic argument on the pros and cons of the sentencing system. The in-depth analysis of research papers, such as the articles published by the US department of justice and research done by the Prison Policy Initiative were rich sources in developing my understanding of the actual nature of the prisons and their long-lasting impacts on crime rates. They also established an understanding of the technicalities in the justice system that come through the prisons. That, in part, is why I dedicated a solid portion of my introduction to defining the terms so that no confusion would befall the reader.

Initially, I had to struggle with choosing the perspectives as I could not draw a distinction between certain points. However, after some research, I settled into my chosen perspectives: economic, psychological, and socio-political. I could easily summarize my arguments within these perspectives. For instance, the impact of prisons on the mental health of prisoners could easily be classified under the psychological perspective. The majority of the data provided in this essay comes from secondary research. However, the data is a result of a thorough evaluation of research articles, journals, and books published by recognized authors and bodies which I have also tried to attest with other research to the best of my capabilities. This, I believe, strengthens my research and justifies my research methodology, though field research has always been my priority. Another limitation of my research is that it relies heavily on evidence from the United States. This is because most of the studies were conducted in the US and many of the other countries did not conduct such extensive research due to their limited resources. However, I have still tried to incorporate other shreds of evidence from countries like Canada, the UK, as well as Pakistan, to my utmost availability of data. With my vested interest in this area, I hope to conduct further detailed research in the future to explore the prisons and their effectiveness in preventing people from committing crimes, by accessing data to which I denied access at this point in time. Lastly, I hope to have presented well-balanced, analyzed, and thoroughly evaluated perspectives that led to the development of a well-reasoned conclusion.

Bibliography

Author(s) V Fox, V Fox. “Politics of Prison Management.” Politics of Prison Management | Office of Justice Programs, 1984, https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/politics-prison-management. 

Bagaric, Mirko. “Rich Offender, Poor Offender: Why It (Sometimes) Matters …” Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality Volume 33 , June 2015, https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1219&context=lawineq. 

Bruce, Jacob R. “Reparation or Restitution by the Criminal Offender … – Core.” Reparation or Restitution by the Criminal Offender to His Victim: Applicability of an Ancient Concept in the Modern Correctional Process, Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons, 1970, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/231018806.pdf. 

Buck, Marilyn. “Prisons, Social Control, and Political Prisoners – JSTOR.” Prisons, Social Control, And Political Prisoners, 2000, https://www.jstor.org/stable/29767227. 

Bülow, William, and Lars Lindblom. “The Social Injustice of Parental Imprisonment.” De Gruyter, De Gruyter, 1 Oct. 2020, https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/mopp-2019-0044/html?lang=en. 

cherie, armour. “Mental Health in Prison: A Trauma Perspective on Importationand Deprivation.” View of Mental Health in Prison: A Trauma Perspective on Importation and Deprivation, Aug. 2012, https://ijcst.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/ijcst/article/view/35703/32435. 

“Detention and Incarceration – Justice.” Detention and Incarceration, U.S. Department of Justice, https://www.justice.gov/archive/ag/annualreports/ar99/Chapter5.pdf. 

Elliott, Catherine, et al. English Legal System. Pearson, 2018. 

Elliott, Catherine, et al. English Legal System. Pearson, 2018. 

Elliott, Catherine, et al. English Legal System. Pearson, 2018. 

Gifford, Ben. “Prison Crime and the Economics of Incarceration .” Stanford Law Review, Jan. 2019, https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/01/Gifford-71-Stan.-L.-Rev.-71-2019.pdf. 

Gifford, Ben. “Prison Crime and the Economics of Incarceration .” Stanford Law Review, Jan. 2019, https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/01/Gifford-71-Stan.-L.-Rev.-71-2019.pdf. 

Gramlich, John. “The Gap between the Number of Blacks and Whites in Prison Is Shrinking.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 27 Aug. 2020, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/30/shrinking-gap-between-number-of-blacks-and-whites-in-prison/. 

Haney, Craig. The Psychological Impact of Incarceration, 30 Jan. 2002, https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/60676/410624-The-Psychological-Impact-of-Incarceration.PDF. 

Harding, David J. “Do Prisons Make Us Safer?” Scientific American, Scientific American, 21 June 2019, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-prisons-make-us-safer/. 

Initiative, Prison Policy, and Peter Wagner and Bernadette Rabuy. “Following the Money of Mass Incarceration.” Prison Policy Initiative, 25 Jan. 2017, https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/money.html. 

Jones, Lauren, et al. The Cost of Incarceration in New York State, Vera Institute of Justice, Jan. 2021, https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/the-cost-of-incarceration-in-new-york-state.pdf. 

2019, Justin Ling 16 Sep, et al. “All Work and Low Pay.” CBA National Magazine, 16 Sept. 2019, https://nationalmagazine.ca/en-ca/articles/law/in-depth/2019/all-work-and-low-pay. 

lee, david. The Deterrence Effect of Prison … – Princeton University. July 2009, https://gceps.princeton.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/189lee.pdf. 

Martin, Jacqueline. English Legal System. Routledge, 2014. 

Menu SLS |Publications, John J. Donohue III, and Steven D. Levitt. “The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime over the Last Two Decades.” American Law and Economics Review, 16 Nov. 2020, https://law.stanford.edu/publications/the-impact-of-legalized-abortion-on-crime-over-the-last-two-decades/. 

“Noor Mukadam Case: Zahir Jaffer given Death Penalty.” Thenews, The News International, 24 Jan. 2022, https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/936362-noor-mukadam-murder-case-verdict-due-today. 

Ombudsman’s report calls for extensive jail reforms 14 Dec 2016 Ombudsman’s report calls for extensive jail reforms, et al. “Pakistan.” Pakistan | World Prison Brief, Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research, Birkbeck University of London, 1 Jan. 1970, https://www.prisonstudies.org/country/pakistan. 

“Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs (Omgs).” The United States Department of Justice, 29 Apr. 2021, https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ocgs/gallery/outlaw-motorcycle-gangs-omgs. 

“Pakistan: Overcrowding in Pakistan’s Prisons Is a Ticking Time Bomb.” Amnesty International, 12 Aug. 2021, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/12/pakistan-overcrowding-in-pakistans-prisons-is-a-ticking-time-bomb/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20Federal%20Ombudsman,tested%20positive%20for%20COVID%2D19. 

Rabuy, Bernadette, and Daniel Kopf . “Prisons of Poverty: Uncovering the Pre-Incarceration Incomes of the Imprisoned.” Prisons of Poverty: Uncovering the Pre-Incarceration Incomes of the Imprisoned | Prison Policy Initiative, 9 July 2015, https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/income.html. 

Shannon , Sarah, and Christopher Uggen. “Incarceration as a Political Institution.” Chapter Prepared for the Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology., Department of Sociology University of Minnesota, http://users.cla.umn.edu/~uggen/Shannon_Uggen_BW_10.pdf. 

“Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics.” Perma.cc, 9 Oct. 2018, https://perma.cc/3AKP-LPX2. 

Williams, Terrance. “THE PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS OF IMPRISONMENT: IMPLICATIONS AND PERSPECTIVES.” THE PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS OF IMPRISONMENT, Oct. 2001, https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/56243/Williams,%20Terrance.pdf?sequence=1. 

with Steven Guilbeault, et al. “Black Canadians and the Justice System.” Policy Options, 25 May 2021, https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2018/black-canadians-justice-system/. 

“Wrongful Convictions.” Prison Fellowship, 3 Oct. 2016, https://www.prisonfellowship.org/resources/advocacy/sentencing/wrongful-convictions-2/?mwm_id=295748255472&sc=WB1710B10&gclid=CjwKCAiAsNKQBhAPEiwAB-I5zUwcWEy3XBM8WzzZzt6p5SrN1NOcNBraVI-5XhvWZ6poJpJV6x3iHBoC0jwQAvD_BwE.