Print this page    •   Back to Web version of article

Disconnected: Incarceration Cuts You Off From Your Social Network -- and HIV Thrives on That

By Maria Khan, Ph.D., and Matthew Epperson, Ph.D.

May/June 2012

Disconnected: Incarceration Cuts You Off From Your Social Network -- and HIV Thrives on That

Most people are not surprised to learn that HIV infections cluster in jail and prison inmates. At any given time, there are over 2.2 million adults in U.S. jails and prisons, and one of every seven HIV-infected Americans are released from these facilities each year.1 Correctional facilities are holding places for those among the most economically and socially disadvantaged in the U.S.

These populations are disproportionately affected by adverse life circumstances and behaviors, such as drug use, that drive HIV risk. However, the process of incarceration itself may also contribute to infection transmission.

Having a history of incarceration or having an intimate partner who has been incarcerated are correlates of HIV risk behaviors and sexually transmitted infection, independent of important factors such as poverty and substance use.2-7 There is emerging evidence to suggest that incarceration may lead to HIV risk because incarceration disrupts social and sexual networks, and HIV thrives on network disruption.


Separation

Because incarceration removes an individual from society, it is expected that ties between offenders and members of their networks will be weakened. This can be a positive event for the offender if ties in the community were negative influences. For example, some inmates are wary of returning home after incarceration for fear of again encountering family members, friends, and acquaintances who were part of a lifestyle that led to the incarceration, such as one characterized by drug use or trade.8

However, one unintended effect of incarceration is to weaken and, in some cases, permanently fracture ties to committed partners, family members, and friends who are positive influences and who provide important sources of social support. Losing a committed partner, in particular, has potential consequences for an inmate's HIV risk. Those who are in committed partnerships are less likely to engage in multiple sexual partnerships.9,10 Consequently, the destabilization and dissolution of committed relationships that occurs during incarceration could promote HIV risk-taking upon release.


Advertisement

Relationship Damage

Many inmates are in committed relationships when they leave for jail or prison, and many of these relationships end during the incarceration.11-15 We interviewed a sample of HIV-positive men incarcerated in North Carolina prison facilities to learn more about the committed relationships of prison inmates.14

Among the inmates, 52% reported having a primary partner at the time of incarceration. The inmates' lives had been highly interconnected with those of their partners. The majority of inmates reported that prior to the incarceration they had lived together with their partners (85%), had seen their partners daily or nearly daily (88%), and had been in long-term relationships with them, for six months or longer (64%) or on and off for a number of years (30%). Over half reported that their partners in the community had relied on them financially. Inmates who were in committed relationships prior to the incarceration reported much lower levels of pre-incarceration multiple partnerships and sex trade than those who did not have committed partners, highlighting the protective effect of these partnerships. Over half of inmates' relationships had ended during the incarceration. These findings suggested to us that those who have lost a primary partner during incarceration may experience heightened levels of sexual risk-taking as they re-enter the community.

We also interviewed a number of individuals at social venues in a North Carolina city to assess how commonly people in the community reported having been in a relationship that was interrupted by incarceration.15 The results told the same story -- incarceration-related relationship disruption and dissolution was common.

Among men who had ever been incarcerated for one month or longer, 43% had a marital or non-marital primary partner at the time of the longest prior sentence. Among women, 22% had ever had a primary partner who had been incarcerated for one month or longer. Of those who were in a relationship that was disrupted by incarceration, more than 40% of men and 30% of women reported the relationship ended during the incarceration. Further, those who had lost a partner during incarceration were twice as likely to report recent multiple partnerships as those who remained with their committed partner during the incarceration.

52%

Among inmates, 52% reported having a primary partner. Over half of those relationships ended during incarceration.

It's not surprising that relationships end during incarceration, given the barriers to maintaining ties during detention. Incarceration physically divides prisoners from their intimate partners, making maintenance of the relationship difficult. Partners may speak infrequently by telephone, as calling is restricted by prison regulations, is monitored for security purposes, and is expensive.16 Likewise, logistical and financial obstacles can prevent visitation, especially because many inmates are held far from their home communities.16 Even when visitation occurs, physical contact is often prohibited and lack of privacy prevents partners from maintaining intimacy during the incarceration.17 For example, in many states, conjugal visits are not permitted. Even written communication is affected, as prisons screen incoming letters for security reasons. Physical separation during incarceration can lead to loneliness and emotional division which puts considerable stress on relationships during incarceration.18-20


Consequences of Instability

Loss of a partner during incarceration may contribute to HIV risk during re-entry in a number of ways. First, if an inmate loses a stable partner during incarceration, upon release, he may seek new partners and potentially engage in multiple partnerships and/or buy sex for money or drugs to meet needs for sexual and emotional companionship. In addition, losing a partner during incarceration may lead to distress and mental health problems. Specifically, incarceration weakens social cohesion and support networks when an individual most needs them -- during the stressful periods of incarceration and re-entry.21-45 An inmate may experience stress during the incarceration due to loss of freedom, isolation, and stigma.18 The period of re-entry is also highly stressful, because released inmates must negotiate a place to live, employment, re-establishing family ties, and returning to high-risk situations.16,19 Social support may buffer the stress associated with incarceration and re-entry by enabling the inmate to cope, thereby reducing negative emotional and behavioral responses.46 However, losing a partner may lead to distress and diminish mental health.47,48 In turn, the former inmate may self-medicate with drugs or sex.

While incarceration disrupts existing networks, it also helps form new ones and may lead to involvement in high-risk social and sexual networks. There is evidence that incarceration introduces inmates into high-risk networks characterized by high levels of drug trade and use (i.e., gangs).49,50 The networks may have high levels of sexual risk-taking and infection, thereby leading to increased risk of sex with an infected partner51-53 Hence, by destabilizing existing networks, incarceration may influence HIV risk not only by increasing the numbers of partners a former inmate has but also by changing the types of partners a former inmate may have sex with.

Finally, when offenders leave for jail or prison, they leave behind loved ones. During an incarceration, the prisoner's partner may seek other partners to fill an emotional or financial void.18 We have found that incarceration is associated with elevated levels of HIV risk behaviors not only of the offender but also of their sexual partners.2-7

Given the high rates of incarceration in many U.S. communities, the influence of incarceration on inmates and their families is high. The fracturing of networks that occurs during incarceration appears to influence HIV risk-taking. For these reasons, it is critical to promote efforts which will diminish the disruptive effects of incarceration on healthy relationships, and to understand the public health implications of incarceration-related relationship disruption.

Maria R. Khan is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of Maryland College Park School of Public Health. Her recent work has focused on investigating STI/HIV among those with a history of incarceration. She was recently funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse to study how incarceration-related dissolution of relationships influences the HIV risk of African American men released from prison.

Matthew W. Epperson is an Assistant Professor in the School of Social Service Administration at The University of Chicago. His primary focus is intervention research on co-occurring problems of HIV, substance abuse, mental illness, and criminal justice involvement. Before earning his Ph.D. in social work from Columbia University, Dr. Epperson spent 15 years as a social worker in behavioral health and criminal justice settings.

References

  1. Spaulding AC, Seals RM, Page MJ, Brzozowski AK, Rhodes W, Hammett TM. HIV/AIDS among inmates of and releasees from US correctional facilities, 2006: declining share of epidemic but persistent public health opportunity. PLoS One. 2009;4 (11):e7558.
  2. Khan MR, Wohl DA, Weir SS, et al. Incarceration and risky sexual partnerships in a southern US city. J Urban Health. 2008;85 (1):100-13.
  3. Khan MR, Miller WC, Schoenbach VJ, et al. Timing and duration of incarceration and high-risk sexual partnerships among African Americans in North Carolina. Ann Epidemiol. 2008;18 (5):403-10.
  4. Epperson M, El-Bassel N, Gilbert L, Orellana ER, Chang M. Increased HIV Risk Associated with Criminal Justice Involvement among Men on Methadone. AIDS Behav. 2008;12 (1):51-7.
  5. Khan MR, Doherty IA, Schoenbach VJ, Taylor EM, Epperson MW, Adimora AA. Incarceration and high-risk sex partnerships among men in the United States. J Urban Health. 2009;86 (4):584-601.
  6. Khan MR, Epperson MW, Mateu-Gelabert P, Bolyard M, Sandoval M, Friedman SR. Incarceration, sex with an STI- or HIV-infected partner, and infection with an STI or HIV in Bushwick, Brooklyn, NY: a social network perspective. Am J Public Health. 2011;101 (6):1110-7.
  7. Epperson MW, Khan MR, El-Bassel N, Wu E, Gilbert L. A Longitudinal Study of Incarceration and HIV Risk Among Methadone Maintained Men and Their Primary Female Partners. AIDS Behav. 2011;15 (2):347-55.
  8. Haley D, Scheyett A, Golin C, et al. BRIGHT Project Qualitative Substudy: Perceptions of Release Among Incarcerated HIV-Infected Persons and Implications for Practice. XVI International AIDS Conference 2006. Toronto, Canada, 2006.
  9. Adimora AA, Schoenbach VJ, Bonas DM, Martinson FE, Donaldson KH, Stancil TR. Concurrent sexual partnerships among women in the United States. Epidemiology. 2002;13 (3):320-7.
  10. Adimora AA, Schoenbach VJ, Doherty I. Concurrent sexual partnership among men in the US. Am J Public Health. 2007;97:2230-7.
  11. Morrow KM. HIV, STD, and hepatitis risk behaviors of young men before and after incarceration. AIDS Care. 2009;21 (2):235-43.
  12. Grinstead OA, Faigeles B, Comfort M, et al. HIV, STD, and hepatitis risk to primary female partners of men being released from prison. Women Health. 2005;41 (2):63-80.
  13. Grinstead O, Zack B, Faigeles B. Reducing postrelease risk behavior among HIV seropositive prison inmates: the health promotion program. AIDS Educ Prev. 2001;13 (2):109-19.
  14. Khan MR, Behrend L, Adimora AA, Weir SS, White BL, Wohl DA. Dissolution of primary intimate relationships during incarceration and implications for post-release HIV transmission. J Urban Health. 2011; 88 (2):365-75.
  15. Khan MR, Behrend L, Adimora AA, Weir SS, Tisdale C, Wohl DA. Dissolution of primary intimate relationships during incarceration and associations with post-release STI/HIV risk behavior in a Southeastern city. 2011; Sex Transm Dis. 38 (1):43-7.
  16. Travis J, Cincotta E, Solomon AL. Families Left Behind: The Hidden Costs of Incarceration and Reentry. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center, 2003.
  17. Comfort M, Grinstead O, McCartney K, Bourgois P, Knight K. "You Can't Do Nothing in This Damn Place": Sex and Intimacy Among Couples With an Incarcerated Male Partner. The Journal of Sex Research. 2005;42 (1):3-12.
  18. Browning S, Miller S, Lisa M. Criminal Incarceration Dividing the Ties That Bind: Black Men and Their Families. Journal of African American Men. 2001;6 (1):87-102.
  19. Visher C, La Vigne NG, Travis J. Returning Home: Understanding the Challenges of Prisoner Reentry, Maryland Pilot Study: Findings from Baltimore. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center, 2004.
  20. Rindfuss R, Stephen EH. Marital noncohabitation: separation does not make the heart grow fonder. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1990;52 (1):259-70.
  21. Rao U, Daley SE, Hammen C. Relationship between depression and substance use disorders in adolescent women during the transition to adulthood. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2000;39 (2):215-22.
  22. Mandell W, Kim J, Latkin C, Suh T. Depressive symptoms, drug network, and their synergistic effect on needle-sharing behavior among street injection drug users. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 1999;25 (1):117-27.
  23. Hawkins WE, Latkin C, Hawkins MJ, Chowdury D. Depressive symptoms and HIV-risk behavior in inner-city users of drug injections. Psychol Rep. 1998;82 (1):137-8.
  24. Mueser KT, Drake RE, Wallach MA. Dual diagnosis: a review of etiological theories. Addict Behav. 1998;23 (6):717-34.
  25. Brooner RK, King VL, Kidorf M, Schmidt CW, Jr., Bigelow GE. Psychiatric and substance use comorbidity among treatment-seeking opioid abusers. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1997;54 (1):71-80.
  26. Castillo Mezzich A, Tarter RE, Giancola PR, Lu S, Kirisci L, Parks S. Substance use and risky sexual behavior in female adolescents. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1997;44 (2-3):157-66.
  27. Dinwiddie SH. Characteristics of injection drug users derived from a large family study of alcoholism. Compr Psychiatry. 1997;38 (4):218-29.
  28. Khantzian EJ. The self-medication hypothesis of substance use disorders: a reconsideration and recent applications. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 1997;4 (5):231-44.
  29. Kalichman SC, Kelly JA, Johnson JR, Bulto M. Factors associated with risk for HIV infection among chronic mentally ill adults. Am J Psychiatry. 1994;151 (2):221-7.
  30. Hasin DS, Glick H. Depressive symptoms and DSM-III-R alcohol dependence: general population results. Addiction. 1993;88 (10):1431-6.
  31. Latkin CA, Mandell W. Depression as an antecedent of frequency of intravenous drug use in an urban, nontreatment sample. Int J Addict. 1993;28 (14):1601-12.
  32. Stephens RS, Roffman RA, Simpson EE. Adult marijuana users seeking treatment. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1993;61 (6):1100-4.
  33. Rounsaville BJ, Anton SF, Carroll K, Budde D, Prusoff BA, Gawin F. Psychiatric diagnoses of treatment-seeking cocaine abusers. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1991;48 (1):43-51.
  34. Regier DA, Farmer ME, Rae DS, et al. Comorbidity of mental disorders with alcohol and other drug abuse. Results from the Epidemiologic Catchment Area (ECA) Study. JAMA. 1990;264 (19):2511-8.
  35. Ross HE, Glaser FB, Germanson T. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders in patients with alcohol and other drug problems. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1988;45 (11):1023-31.
  36. Rounsaville BJ, Weissman MM, Crits-Christoph K, Wilber C, Kleber H. Diagnosis and symptoms of depression in opiate addicts. Course and relationship to treatment outcome. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1982;39 (2):151-6.
  37. Ramrakha S, Caspi A, Dickson N, Moffitt TE, Paul C. Psychiatric disorders and risky sexual behaviour in young adulthood: cross sectional study in birth cohort. BMJ. 2000;321 (7256):263-6.
  38. Williams CT, Latkin CA. The role of depressive symptoms in predicting sex with multiple and high-risk partners. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;38 (1):69-73.
  39. Khan MR, Kaufman JS, Pence BW, et al. Depression, sexually transmitted infection, and sexual risk behavior among young adults in the United States. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163 (7):644-52.
  40. Hutton HE, Lyketsos CG, Zenilman JM, Thompson RE, Erbelding EJ. Depression and HIV risk behaviors among patients in a sexually transmitted disease clinic. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161 (5):912-4.
  41. Castle DJ. Anxiety and substance use: layers of complexity. Expert Rev Neurother. 2008;8 (3):493-501.
  42. Kessler RC, Nelson CB, McGonagle KA, Edlund MJ, Frank RG, Leaf PJ. The epidemiology of co-occurring addictive and mental disorders: implications for prevention and service utilization. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1996;66 (1):17-31.
  43. Ethier KA, Kershaw TS, Lewis JB, Milan S, Niccolai LM, Ickovics JR. Self-esteem, emotional distress and sexual behavior among adolescent females: inter-relationships and temporal effects. J Adolesc Health. 2006;38 (3):268-74.
  44. Mota N, Cox BJ, Enns MW, Calhoun L, Sareen J. The relationship between mental disorders, quality of life, and pregnancy: findings from a nationally representative sample. J Affect Disord. 2008;109 (3):300-4.
  45. Sterk CE, Theall KP, Elifson KW. The impact of emotional distress on HIV risk reduction among women. Subst Use Misuse. 2006;41 (2):157-73.
  46. Draine J, Wolff N. Social capital and reentry to the community from prison: Rutgers University, 2009.
  47. Simpson JA. The dissolution of romantic relationships: factors involved in relationship stability and emotional distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987;53 (4):683-92.
  48. Kawachi I, Berkman LF. Social ties and mental health. J Urban Health. 2001;78 (3):458-67.
  49. Freudenberg N. Jails, prisons, and the health of urban populations: a review of the impact of the correctional system on community health. J Urban Health. 2001;78 (2):214-35.
  50. Moore J. Bearing the burden: how incarceration weakens inner-city communities. In: Justice VIo (ed). The Unintended Consequences of Incarceration. New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 1996.
  51. Friedman SR, Bolyard M, Mateu-Gelabert P, et al. Some data-driven reflections on priorities in AIDS network research. AIDS Behav. 2007;11 (5):641-51.
  52. Klovdahl AS, Potterat JJ, Woodhouse DE, Muth JB, Muth SQ, Darrow WW. Social networks and infectious disease: the Colorado Springs Study. Soc Sci Med. 1994;38 (1):79-88.
  53. Rothenberg RB, Woodhouse DE, Potterat JJ, Muth SQ, Darrow WW, Klovdahl AS. Social networks in disease transmission: the Colorado Springs Study. NIDA Res Monogr. 1995;151:3-19.


Got a comment on this article? Write to us at publications@tpan.com.




This article was provided by Positively Aware. It is a part of the publication Positively Aware. You can find this article online by typing this address into your Web browser:
http://www.thebody.com/content/67097/disconnected-incarceration-cuts-you-off-from-your-.html

General Disclaimer: TheBody.com is designed for educational purposes only and is not engaged in rendering medical advice or professional services. The information provided through TheBody.com should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, consult your health care provider.