Prison Drug Research Articles

Exploring the factors influencing prison incentive scheme status among adult males: A prospective longitudinal study

Despite its impact on imprisonment, no quantitative study has examined the factors related to people's status on prison incentive schemes. This study addresses this gap by using administrative data to explore the factors related to the status of 405 men on a prison incentive scheme. Results revealed that those who had a prior history of passing prison drug tests at time 1, and spent more time imprisoned during the follow-up period, were more likely to be on the highest level of the scheme one year later at time 2. In contrast, those who had a history of past involvement in misconduct, referrals for serious self-harm/attempted suicide in prison, not taken a prison drug test, property offences, and greater periods of custody at time 1 were more likely to be on the lower levels of the scheme at time 2. The potential implications for theory, policy, and practice are discussed.

Understanding and managing drug trafficking in prison. A rapid evidence assessment (REA)

This Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) discusses the structure, organisation, and motivation of drug trafficking in prison, as well as the supply route and how these evolve, which could be key in developing strategies to restrict the supply of drugs in prisons. Literature within this area is limited, specifically research into prison drug markets and distribution, despite it being a significant focus within policies within custodial settings. The aims of this REA were achieved, and the findings have been divided into structure, organisation and motivation of drug trafficking and supply as well as distribution routes, which have then been subdivided into further themes. The insight and understanding provided in the current review, could inform the development and implementation of effective management strategies for drug trafficking in prison, including interventions for this population. Additionally, these findings could be used to aid Forensic Psychologists in providing consultancy, conducting research, as well as assessing and understanding the criminogenic needs for this population.

Extent and patterns of drug use in prison in Burkina Faso: findings from a cross-sectional study in central prison of Ouagadougou

PurposeDrug use in prisons remains a public health concern because it is often the place of drug initiation. The purpose of this study was to analyze the drug use in prison in Burkina Faso.Design/methodology/approachWe conducted cross-sectional study in the prison of Ouagadougou. The adult prisoners (male and female) incarcerated for more than one month at the largest prison of Burkina Faso were included in the study. Participants were selected using a systematic random sampling. Data were collected from October 28 to November 26, 2018. The face-to-face interviews were conducted in the prison grounds. Logistic multivariate regression was used to identify factors associated with in prison drug use. All analysis was done using Stata.FindingsA total of 379 prisoners were included in this study. Approximately one-third inmates (32.71%; n = 124) experienced illicit drug in lifetime. Nearly one-third (28.76%; n = 109) of the prisoners were drug users before incarceration and 11.87% (n = 45) used drug inside the prison, of which 33.33% (n = 15) initiated drug use in the prison. Cannabis was the first drug used by the prisoners (71.11%) followed by tramadol (62.22%), diazepam (13.33%) and cocaine (2.22%). Four prisoners (3.63%) had reported Heroin use before incarceration. Cannabis was mainly smoked. Tramadol, diazepam and amphetamines were swallowed or mixed with food. Cocaine is smoked and snorted. Case of injection of cocaine and heroin was reported before incarceration. Main factors independently associated with drug use in prison is drug use before prison and young age of inmates. Indeed, inmates who had reported drug use before prison had 4.01 time {adjusted odd ratio (AOR: 4.01 [95% CI: 1.91–8.41])} higher odds to use drug in prison.Research limitations/implicationsTo conduct the interviews in the prison grounds could be a limitation due to social desirability bias. Indeed, the prisoners may understate drug use in prison for the fear of likely additional sentence. Availability of biological tests for drug markers might help addressed this bias. Nevertheless, the findings of this study should help to plan effective drug use prevention and care programs for prisoners.Practical implicationsThe actions must include the implementation of a medical and psychological care in continuum of healthcare system in Burkina Faso. This system should include screening at entry and adequate health and psychological care in prison for drug users for an effective control of drugs use in prison.Social implicationsMost of these drug users in prison have a low level of education and are unemployed. Education activities and training on occupational activities to prepare drug users for a successful social reintegration less dependent on drugs is essential. This study can be a basis to explore more possibilities and find out what is available to help those with substance use disorder, manage these cases in prison and prevent relapse on release.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first study on drug use in prison in Burkina Faso. It indicates that the repressive strategy against drug use seems ineffective because former users continue their consumption inside and also new users are initiated to use drugs in prison.

A global review of prison drug smuggling routes and trends in the usage of drugs in prisons

AbstractPrisoners have significantly greater levels of drug use than the general population, which is related to many adverse outcomes both during and post‐imprisonment. Reducing the availability of drugs in prison can lead to a reduction in the drug use of prisoners but requires knowledge of the different drug smuggling routes and the implementation of effective security measures. The main smuggling routes identified in the literature are through visitors; mail; prisoners on reception, remand, or work release; staff; and perimeter throwovers, but they differ between prisons depending on various contextual factors and security measures in place. Based on a total of 81 studies from 22 different countries, the average prevalence of drug use during incarceration is 32.0% with a range from 3.4% to 90%. The types of drugs used in prisons vary among geographical regions, countries, and even regions within countries. The most common drug reported to be used by prisoners in most studies was cannabis, except in South Asia and Scotland, where heroin was more prevalent. The drugs used in prison tend to reflect the prevalence of drugs in the local community, except where a drug has advantages unique to use in prison. It is vital to examine the prevalence of drug use and different types of drugs used during incarceration to help inform drug treatment services, assist prison staff in identifying potential drug use or intoxicated prisoners, and advise prisons about the most prevalent drug smuggling routes so new security measures can be considered.This article is categorized under: Toxicology > Drug Analysis Toxicology > New Psychoactive Substances

'Keeping a lid on it': Exploring 'problematisations' of prescribed medication in prisons in the UK.

The non-medical use of prescription medication and risk of diversion have become policy and practice concerns within prison settings in the UK. These issues have been highlighted by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons and Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (2019) prison drugs strategy. In 2019, new prescribing guidance was issued by the Royal College of General Practitioners for clinicians working within prison settings. Informed by Bacchi's (2009) What's the problem represented to be? framework, the ways in which the 'problem' of prescribed medication in prisons have been represented is interrogated through an analysis of the prescribing guidance framework for clinicians working in prisons. Restrictive prescribing practices are recommended as a solution to the 'problem' of diversion and misuse of prescribed medication. Prescribers are advised to consider de-prescribing, non-pharmacological treatments and alternative prescriptions with less diversionary potential. They are represented as responsible for the 'problems' that prescribed medication bring to prisons. The guidance is underpinned by the assumption that prescribers lack experience, knowledge and skills in prison settings. People serving prison sentences are assumed to be 'untrustworthy' and their symptoms treated with suspicion. This representation of the 'problem' has a number of effects including the possibility of increasing drug-related harm, damaging the patient-doctor relationship and disengagement from healthcare services. The representation of prescribed medication as problems of diversion and prescribing practices inhibits alternative representations of the problem which would inform different policy directions including improvements to regime and healthcare provision and would include a range of practitioners in prison settings to address the 'problem' more holistically.

Harm reduction: a public health approach to prison drug use.

As prison drug use continues to be a concern worldwide, harm reduction practices serve as an alternative approach to traditional abstinence-only or punishment-oriented methods to address substance use behind bars. The purpose of this study is to present a summary of research surrounding prison-based harm reduction programs. This narrative review of the international literature summarizes the harms associated with prison drug use followed by an overview of the literature surrounding three prison-based harm reduction practices: opioid agonist therapy, syringe exchange programs and naloxone distribution. A collection of international research has found that these three harm reduction programs are safe and feasible to implement in carceral settings. Additionally, these services can effectively reduce some of the harms associated with prison drug use (e.g. risky injection practices, needle sharing, fatal overdoses, etc.). However, these practices are underused in correctional settings in comparison to their use in the community. Various policy recommendations are made based on the available literature, including addressing ethical concerns surrounding prison populations' rights to the same standard of health care and services available in the community. By taking a public health approach to prison drug use, harm reduction practices can provide a marginalized, high-risk population of incarcerated individuals with life-saving services rather than punitive, punishment-oriented measures.

Exploring Prison Misconduct and the Factors Influencing Rule Infraction in Northern Ireland

Research has linked prison misconduct to reoffending and re-entry experiences, yet no studies have sought to examine the factors influencing misconduct in Northern Ireland or if these factors operate differently for separated prisoners (those claiming their offences are politically motivated and demanding to be held separately to the rest of the prison population) compared to the general prison population. This study addresses this gap by examining the characteristics related to misconduct in Northern Ireland. Using a cross-sectional sample of 892 imprisoned adult men, the findings indicate that increased involvement in misconduct is associated with multiple needs. Younger age, racial/ethnic identity, accommodation issues, addiction, impairments, property offences, previous incarceration, prison complaints, not having a drug test and engagement/suspected engagement in serious self-harm while imprisoned increased the risk of misconduct. Reporting a nationality other than British, Irish or Northern Irish, passing prison drug tests and prison visitation lowered the risk of misconduct. Factors were found to operate in a similar manner for both the general prison population and separated prisoners, with the exception of prison complaints. Given the link between misconduct and reoffending, it is argued that specialist supports are required to address the multiple needs of those who frequently engage in misconduct if efforts to reduce recidivism are to be enhanced.

Women offenders in Europe: drug problems and drug offences and/or gender-based violence

Abstract Worldwide the proportion of women in prison for drug-related offences is higher than that of men. In Europe (27 Member States, Norway, United Kingdom and Turkey) it varies considerably, between 5 % in Bulgaria, approximately 25 % in Denmark, Finland and Sweden, 33 % in Italy and 40 % in Spain. Women are reported to have less dominant roles in drug trafficking, often occupying the lowest level of the drug supply chain. There are, however, recent indications of involvement of women in higher levels of supply chains The prevalence of illicit drug use before incarceration is much higher among prison population as compared to the general population. This excess is substantially higher among women. The patterns of drug use among women in prison are similar to those reported by men, with majority reporting having used cannabis in their lifetime. Prevalence is also high for other illicit substance use, such as heroin (19% - 49%), cocaine (21% - 41%), and amphetamines (17% -64%). Inside prison drug use is often reduced, but exists. The reduction in drug use is in many countries smaller among women then among men. Reasons for this high prevalence of drug use among women in prison are likely to be related to the high proportion of women incarcerated for drug related offences and their high level of vulnerability. Targeted interventions for women with drug related problems who experience imprisonment are needed and should be implemented with a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach to tackle their physical, mental health and social needs. The presentation will discuss the latest European data on drug related problems among women in prison and available targeted interventions.

Prisoners' experiences of prison drug treatment - what matters?

This study aims to analyze prisoners' experiences of prison drug-treatment programs in Sweden. How do they describe their personal relationships with the prison staff and with other prisoners in the wings? How do they describe the social climate and the control in drug-treatment wings? How could differences between these wings be understood? The data consist of observations and face-to-face interviews with male and female prisoners in three Swedish prison drug-treatment wings. Analytical concepts used are roles, relationships and rituals. The prisoners' relationships with prison officers seemed connected to what kinds of rituals the prisoners and staff engaged in. In all three treatment wings, the staff and prisoners were involved in natural rituals. This was most frequent in the women's prison with a 12-step program. The prisoners were frustrated with control measures but were mainly positive to the measures as preventing drugs from coming into the wing. Only three prison wings, however in varying prisons, have been studied. These results gives a useful prisoners' perspective on the development of drug-prevention and treatment in different kinds of prisons.

Prisoner Society in an Era of Psychoactive Substances, Organized Crime, New Drug Markets and Austerity

AbstractFramed by the limited and now dated ethnographic research on the prison drug economy, this article offers new theoretical and empirical insights into how drugs challenge the social order in prisons in England and Wales. It draws on significant original and rigorous ethnographic research to argue that the ‘era of hard drugs’ has been superseded by an ‘era of new psychoactive drugs’, redefining social relations, transforming the prison illicit economy, producing new forms of prison victimization and generating far greater economic power and status for suppliers. These changes represent the complex interplay and compounding effects of broader shifts in political economy, technological advances, organized crime, prison governance and the declining legitimacy and moral performance of English and Welsh prisons.

The spice trail: transitions in synthetic cannabis receptor agonists (SCRAs) use in English prisons and on release

Since 2010, synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRAs) have dominated concerns about drug use in prison; particularly as their use increases in custody and has profound impacts on users, non-users and prison staff. However, far less is known about whether SCRA use continues on release, when ex-prisoners are under the supervision of Community Rehabilitation Companies or resident in Approved Premises (APs). This study, the first of its type, examined experiences of SCRAs amongst recently released ex-prisoners and found that, most often, use discontinues on release, suggesting that SCRAs are seen predominantly as a ‘prison drug’ or, for those continuing use, as a way to avoid a positive drug test and/or breaching their licence whilst living in an APs. Awareness of SCRA use amongst their clients differed notably between Community Rehabilitation Company staff and APs staff; with the former having far less awareness and thus, also far less experience of the associated problems for supervision of their clients.

“A spray bottle and a lollipop stick”: An examination of policy prohibiting sterile injecting equipment in prison and effects on young men with injecting drug use histories

BackgroundAustralian young male prisoners with histories of injecting drug use are more likely to report injecting in prison, to do so more frequently, and to be involved in more un-safe injecting-related practices than their older counterparts. Despite international evidence that prison needle and syringe programs are both feasible and effective in reducing the harms associated with injecting drug use in prison, these young men do not have access to such equipment. MethodsWe critically analyse the interview transcripts of 28 young men with histories of injecting drug use who were recently released from adult prisons in Victoria, Australia, and prison drug policy text. We use Bacchi’s ‘What’s the problem represented to be?’ approach to examine how the ‘problem’ of injecting drug use in prison is represented in prison drug policy, including the assumptions that underpin these problematisations, and the subjectification and lived effects that are produced for the young men in our study. ResultsOur analysis reveals how prison drug policy enables the creation and re-use of homemade injecting equipment crafted from unsterile items found in prison, and that in doing so the policy produces a range of stigmatising subjectification effects and other harmful material effects (such as hepatitis C virus transmission and injecting related injury and harms). Findings highlight, how injecting drug use is represented in policy silences other ways of understanding the ‘problem’ that may have less harmful effects for incarcerated young men who inject drugs. ConclusionWe argue that somewhat paradoxically, the approach of prohibiting access to sterile injecting equipment in prison—which is constituted as a solution for addressing such harms—in fact helps to produce them.

Producing the ‘problem’ of new psychoactive substances (NPS) in English prisons

BackgroundThere has been a significant change in the types of substances consumed within English prison settings in the last eight years. There have been particular concerns regarding the acceleration in the use and availability of New Psychoactive Substances (NPS), mainly synthetic cannabinoids. Although NPS were identified as a ‘problem’ in prisons in 2011, government responses emerged only in 2015. As yet, there is no overarching policy document or strategy for dealing with NPS. This paper analyses the various strands of the response to NPS in prisons published from January 2015 to December 2016. MethodsDrawing on Bacchi’s ‘What’s the problem represented to be’ framework, the ways in which the NPS ‘problem’ in prisons has been represented is analysed through a number of related policy texts including press releases, new legislative and regulatory measures, government documents and training package. ResultsFrom the various measures introduced to deal with the ‘problem’, NPS use is produced primarily as a law, order and control ‘problem’ requiring regulation, penalties and control, rather than a ‘demand problem’ calling for prevention, education, treatment and harm reduction or a ‘regime problem’ demanding greater emphasis and resources for purposeful activities such as education, training and work opportunities. This problematisation of drug use in prisons has a history dating back to the 1995 prison drug strategy and has become entrenched and reproduced within policy development over time. ConclusionThe law, order, and control problematization blames the volatility of the substances and the individual prisoners who use them as key factors contributing to the current prison crisis, rather than as consequences of the wider practices, cultures, contexts, and conditions. Multiple representations of the problem of NPS in prisons are needed in order to address the regime and structural issues which lead those imprisoned to use substances.

“I Lost Me Visits”

Utilizing Bacchi’s poststructuralist approach, “What’s the problem represented to be?,” we critically examine how the “problem” of drug use in prison is represented within a key initiative—the Identified Drug User program (IDUP)—of prison drug policy in one Australian jurisdiction. We use two data sources for our analysis: interview transcripts of recently incarcerated young men (aged 19–24) with histories of injecting drug use and selected prison drug policy and program documents. We examine how the “problem” of drug use in prison is problematized within the IDUP and question commonly accepted ways of thinking that underpin the program. We explore the discursive and subjectification effects of problem representations which produce young men as “rational” and “choosing” and, at the same time, as “untrustworthy” and “deserving of punishment.” We highlight how these effects have consequences for young men’s connections to family while incarcerated which can work against the very issues the IDUP is trying to address. We make two claims in particular: that the IDUP produces harmful effects for young men and their families and that the harmful effects produced are, paradoxically, those the IDUP aims to avoid. Our analysis offers insights into how drug use in prison could be thought about differently, including suggestions that might reduce at least some of its adverse effects.

The potential of prisons to support drug recovery

Purpose – Recovery is the predominant discourse within current UK drug policy, promoted as freedom from dependence. In support of such a policy driver, prison drug recovery wings have been piloted in ten prisons in England and Wales to address high drug prevalence rates in prisoner populations. The purpose of this paper is to explore the development of these specialist wings within the context of wider developments to tackle reoffending among drug-using prisoners. Design/methodology/approach – The first part of the paper offers an analysis of the emergence of the recovery paradigm in the prison context through analysis of official policy documents. The second draws predominantly upon two process evaluations of the drug recovery wings, alongside literature on prison drug treatment. Findings – There is limited empirical evidence to inform the debate about whether prisons can provide settings to facilitate recovery from the effects of illicit drug use. What is available suggests that effective therapeutic environments for recovering drug users could be established within prisons. Key components for these appear to be sufficient numbers of staff who are competent and confident in providing a dual role of support and discipline, and a common purpose of all prisoners committing to recovery from illicit drugs and supporting each other. Further research regarding the impact of drug recovery wings upon health, crime and wider social outcomes is needed. Originality/value – This paper provides an updated perspective on the development of drug treatment in prisons, with a particular focus on the implications of the new recovery paradigm.

Exploring prison drug use in the context of prison-based drug rehabilitation

Aims: The research on motivations and meanings associated with drug use in prisons has received little scholarly attention. Particularly, there are few studies analysing drug use in prisons from the perspective of both prisoners and prison officers, and in the context of prison-based drug rehabilitation. This article explores prisoners and prison staffs perceptions on why drug use occurs in prison. Methods: The data is derived from participant observation and qualitative interviews (N = 35) conducted during eight months of ethnographic fieldwork in two drug rehabilitation programmes in a closed Norwegian prison. Findings: Prison staff emphasises drug addiction and prisoners troubled life trajectories when explaining in-prison drug use. Prisoners, on the other hand, explain that drug use can be (a) a way to alleviate some of the pains of imprisonment; (b) an integral part of social life in prison; (c) a route to status in the prisoner community and (d) a defiant way to subvert institutional rules and expectations. Conclusions: Prison staff tends to privilege pre-prison characteristics when explaining prisoners’ drug use, whereas prisoners tend to privilege how the prison context motivates and give meaning to their drug use. Implications for penal policy and practice are discussed.

Three enactments of drugs in Danish prison drug treatment: Illegal drugs, medicine and constrainers

Drugs are an increasingly salient concern in many European prisons. Drug policies are made, drugs are controlled, used and prescribed and drug use is treated and sanctioned. In light of the growing significance of drugs in prison life, we analyse the different ways of drugs that are enacted in Danish drug treatment programmes, based on insights derived from Science and Technology Studies. We ground our analysis with data from two qualitative research projects conducted between 2007 and 2010 and between 2011 and 2014. In all, eight prisons were involved in the two studies. Our analysis reveals three distinctive drug enactments characterised by rather different practises, discourses and narratives: drugs as illegal substances, as medicine and as constrainers. Furthermore, we examine how policy makers, prison officers, health personnel, counsellors and prisoners contribute to the construction and organisation of these three enactments, along with the practical and discursive domains in which this work takes place. We conclude by assessing some of the implications of these different enactments of drugs for prisoners’ subjectivities.

“There's that many people selling it”: Exploring the nature, organisation and maintenance of prison drug markets in England

Aims: To explore the nature, organisation and maintenance of drug markets within male prisons in England from the perspective of drug users, considering the role of policy and practice in shaping the markets. Methods: Thirty in-depth qualitative interviews with former male prisoners were analysed using a Framework approach. Findings: Prison drug markets traditionally operated through “Established Enterprises,” sophisticated and business like ventures run by community drug dealers. Prisoners maintained the market by selling or delivering drugs or collecting payments and enforcing violence towards debtors. They were reimbursed for their “work” with money or drugs. Market competition was increasingly created by the concurrent existence of less formalised, more spontaneous markets through “Separate Suppliers,” where individual prisoners opportunistically sold illicit drugs, directly benefitting from the profit. Irrespective of provider, illicit drugs were commonly available within male prisons, although they were expensive, of poor quality and small deal sizes. Drugs had a pervasive and powerful influence on prison environments and were strongly linked to the threat and experience of violence. Conclusions: Two main types of drug markets operated alongside one another in male prisons in England. They operated flexibly, as prices, supply routes and payment methods quickly responded to changes in prison policy, prison drug prescribing, drug availability and prisoner demand.

Inmates’ perspectives on prison drug treatment

The purpose of this article is to employ a user-perspective on prison drug treatment. Based on data from 32 in-depth qualitative interviews with inmates and three months of observational studies in three Danish prisons, the article examines how drug treatment in prison is experienced and strategically approached by enrolled inmates. The analysis shows the broad range of reasons for entering as well as staying in treatment during imprisonment, including how the prison setting influences and constrains inmates’ experiences in different ways. By employing a user-perspective the article follows the research tradition, beginning in the 1990s, of including drug users’ perspectives on treatment. It adds important information to the drug treatment literature on issues such as organization, social relations and output of drug treatment. Including a user-perspective, we were able to uncover aspects and experiences of treatment services that differ from other actors in the field, e.g. counsellors, medical doctors, nurses, politicians, and officers. A user-perspective also challenges our understanding of what is at play in drug treatment as well as treatment in prisons.

Injecting drug use in prison: prevalence and implications for needle exchange policy.

The purpose of this paper is to explore prison drug injecting prevalence, identify any changes in injecting prevalence and practice during imprisonment and explore views on prison needle exchange. An empirical prospective cohort survey conducted between 2006 and 2008. The study involved a random sample of 267 remand and sentenced prisoners from a large male category B prison in England where no prison needle exchange operates. Questionnaires were administered with prisoners on reception and, where possible, at one, three and six months during their sentence. In total, 64 per cent were injecting until admission into prison. The majority intended to stop injecting in prison (93 per cent), almost a quarter due to the lack of needle exchange (23 per cent). Yet when hypothetically asked if they would continue injecting in prison if needle exchange was freely available, a third of participants (33 per cent) believed that they would. Injecting cessation happened on prison entry and appeared to be maintained during the sentence. Not providing sterile needles may increase risks associated with injecting for prisoners who continue to inject. However, providing such equipment may prolong injecting for other prisoners who currently cease injecting on account of needle exchange programmes (NEPs) not being provided in the UK prison setting. Practical implications - Not providing sterile needles may increase risks associated with injecting for prisoners who continue to inject. However, providing such equipment may prolong injecting for other prisoners who currently cease injecting on account of NEPs not being provided in the UK prison setting. This survey is the first to question specifically regarding the timing of injecting cessation amongst male prisoners and explore alongside intention to inject should needle exchange facilities be provided in prison.