Chloe Rankin
WP4 Draft Final Paper
4/17/23
Prisons were built to punish people who have caused harm or done wrong to society. This punishment is mainly psychological, where prisoners are confined, stigmatized, segregated, and deprived of many healthy forms of social interaction. In addition to the lack of healthy social interaction, they are also deprived of many forms of physical, emotional, creative, and intellectual forms of stimulation. When a human being’s world is reduced to the walls of a cell, they can lose touch with society, lose forms of community, and become traumatized. Without a healthy sense of community or support, over time their social skills become rusty, their ability to fluidly connect with a variety of people diminishes, and their perception of their own self-worth can become distorted. All of these factors can worsen a person’s mental health. Many incarcerated people are in prison for decades or for life, meaning they endure such detrimental environments for the majority of their existence. The lack of mental health support and inhumane living conditions can worsen one’s depression, anxiety, and overall world view. These determinants not only impact inmates during incarceration, but they continue to affect their lives after release. Prison’s negative impacts on an inmate’s mental health can increase their likelihood of recidivating, which perpetuates the cycle of incarceration, thus impacting society as a whole. How can we improve the social, emotional, psychological, intellectual, and creative deprivation that negatively impact inmates’ mental health during and after incarceration? Through research, I found that the damage done to mental health in prison can be mitigated through the implementation of arts-based programs. Still, no existing research specifically addresses the strong potential of film as a rehabilitative tool that could be implemented in prisons to improve inmates’ mental health. I will show that film has unique potential, either through cinematherapy (where inmates are the audience) or through filmmaking itself (where inmates are the artists), to enhance prisoners’ lives during and after incarceration. However, before I discuss my proposed solution, I want to prove that prison environments, especially those that contribute to isolation and the deprivation of resources negatively impact inmates’ mental health in profound ways.
First, research establishes that prison negatively impacts prisoners’ mental health before and after incarceration. In Cherie Armour’s article, “Mental Health in Prison: A Trauma Perspective on Importation and Deprivation,” Armour examines the impact of incarceration on the mental health of prisoners. (Armour, 2012). Armour analyzes the effects of something they call importation (which is pre-existing trauma) and deprivation (which is trauma caused by incarceration) on prisoners. They talk about how pre-existing trauma not only makes people more vulnerable to mental health problems in prison, but also how the experience of incarceration itself can exacerbate these problems. In other words, being imprisoned is associated with trauma importation and deprivation. Armour points out that prison environments are inherently traumatic. Common features like overcrowding, violence, and limited access to mental health services actually contribute to mental health problems in inmates. The author stresses the need for trauma-informed care to address the mental health needs of incarcerated people and reduce recidivism.
The British Medical Journal article agrees, based on focus groups consisting of inmates and staff that reveal the impact of environmental factors on prisoners’ mental health. (Nurse et. al, 2003). Similar to other studies, this article discusses how conditions like social isolation, overcrowding, noise, lack of privacy, and limited access to health and services contribute to stress, anxiety, and depression among prisoners. It reveals that some inmates even turn to drugs to relieve “long hours of tedium.” It also emphasizes that negative interactions between prisoners and staff, especially due to staffing shortages, contribute to poorer mental health of prisoners and staff. Thus, the institution of prison creates a “cycle of stress” exchanged between and among prisoners and staff, creating a “dysfunctional system.” These poor environmental factors negatively impact prisoners’ mental health. The authors conclude that prison conditions need to be improved to better support the mental health needs of inmates.
Another study from Population Health starts by reviewing scientific proof that incarceration is linked to poor health and then tests their hypothesis that this link could result in higher likelihoods of recidivism upon release. (Wallace, 2020). Ultimately, their research shows that a person’s level of in-prison health follows them after release, and poor physical or mental health can increase the likelihood of recidivating. The authors note that many programs try to address health after someone is released, but their research suggests that the most important time for intervention and treatment of health is before or during incarceration. So the authors argue for greater investments in mental health treatment and support in prison rather than after.
While the foregoing articles do not offer particularly specific solutions to the negative impacts of prison on mental health, a few others focus on how art programs in prison can help with rehabilitation. One, from the Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, talks about how art can provide a creative outlet for incarcerated people and help them develop new skills, express themselves, and engage in therapeutic activities. (Johnson, 2008). Thus, art can help to improve mental health outcomes, reduce recidivism rates, and promote positive behavior within prisons. The article discusses some challenges with implementing these programs, such as limited funding and staffing, but it ultimately argues for the need for increased support and resources to expand and improve these programs because investing in art programs in prison can have significant benefits for incarcerated people, staff, and the wider community.
Such arguments are well supported by a comprehensive study in The Arts in Psychotherapy. (Meekums, 2011). This report reviews many studies published over the last 40 years to ask whether art programs — like visual arts, music, theater, dance and creative writing — help to rehabilitate prisoners and help with reentry. The overwhelming answer was yes. The authors found that arts significantly improve the mental health and well-being of inmates, which then improves their overall functioning and reduces recidivism rates. Ultimately, this article concludes that more art programs need to be implemented in prisons to help with rehabilitation and to reduce recidivism.
If art programs are so impactful, why aren’t they implemented throughout all prison systems? There’s many reasons why art programs are not brought to scale. First, many policymakers believe the fundamental purpose of prison is to punish inmates. If prison were made to be more rehabilitative or therapeutic, some people may believe that the punishing purpose of prison is not being served. Second, as established in some of the foregoing literature, many of the art programs struggle with finding sufficient staff, volunteers, and funds.
The first challenge — society’s belief that prison should prioritize punishing impacts — is beyond the scope of this paper. The real solution to the punishing impact of prison on inmates’ mental health might only come from getting rid of incarceration altogether or from fundamentally changing the function of prison from punishment to rehabilitation. Since this fundamental shift is a systemic one, it’s not likely to happen, at least anytime soon. However, in the interim, we should point to the literature proving that, even if we cannot change current prison conditions such as overcrowding or violence, art programs are still shown to positively impact the mental health of inmates and reduce the likelihood of recidivism after release. The second challenge, where art programs lack staffing and funds, might be able to be addressed by partnering with universities, as I explain in my film-related proposal below.
While art programs are demonstrating progress in prisoners’ mental health, one gap in the literature is the unique promise of film. Film is an artistic endeavor that not only requires creativity and self-reflection from filmmakers, but also from audiences. I argue that film needs to be examined as a critical therapeutic and rehabilitative tool in the prison context.
These benefits can come from cinematherapy, which is a guided process where prisoners are the audience: they watch a film and then discuss it with a therapeutic facilitator to examine what it means for them and their lives. The practice of cinematherapy reveals that film can generate positive emotional and psychological benefits. In this context, cinematic films can be understood to provide a “series of cues” that lead the audience through a meditation on the self. (Voss et al., 142). Such therapy begins when a professional suggests a client watch a film and use the film’s characters, plot, and themes to facilitate the client’s self-exploration and reflection. (Robertson). Watching films then provides a visual and sensory focus that shares some benefits with mindfulness, such as reducing stress, allowing people to better perceive and appreciate others’ perspectives and increase empathy, but also to improve their own self-awareness and strive toward inner peace. (Robertson). Carefully selected films can illustrate and encourage “core concepts of mindfulness and mind-body healing, including slowing down, paying attention, acceptance, self-compassion, and the impact of toxic emotions on health and well-being.” (Robertson). Some cinematherapy practitioners even report explicitly “integrat[ing] mindfulness-oriented exercises before and/or after viewing cinematic selections, followed by in-depth processing of the cinematic experience.” (Robertson). Cinematherapy has been shown to have goals and benefits of focusing one’s attention to achieve personal, cognitive, emotional, and even spiritual reflection, healing, and growth. (Woltz). All of these measures are similar to those valued in prior studies on the effectiveness of art programs in prison, so we could expect similar positive effects on mental health from cinematherapy. Moreover, cinematherapy would allow prisoners to build community by watching and discussing films together.
However, cinematherapy would likely face similar challenges to those described for art programs generally, especially challenges in lack of funding and staffing, especially because a cinema therapist or facilitator is required. However, perhaps universities with social work programs could partner with prisons to create new student-staffed cinematherapy programs. The social work students would receive the pedagogical benefits of practicing their therapeutic skills in a community service environment, and the prisoners would benefit from their efforts.
While cinematherapy would position inmates as the audience, a completely new intervention might be to position inmates as filmmaking artists. This opportunity would empower inmates to make and produce films themselves so their stories and voices are elevated and better understood by broader audiences. Compared to writing or drawing intensive arts, film may be more accessible for both audiences and artists, because it does not rely on the same sort of technical skills that writing or drawing might. Also, unlike other arts, film allows audiences to see and hear, engaging more dimensions of our senses, emotions, and thoughts. Actually hearing and seeing inmates’ stories through film could have a greater impact on audiences on the outside of prison walls, allowing inmates to reach more people in more impactful ways. Finally, in today’s digital age where consumers often prefer visual motion pictures over other art forms, films made by prisoners can be shared widely with broader audiences, increasing the potential impact of their stories on the outside world. To make such programs happen, I imagine that film schools could partner with neighboring prisons and build community service programs where film students work with inmates to assist them in creating films to tell their own stories and to elevate their own voices.
Mass incarceration is one of the most critical issues facing contemporary America. We imprison more people than any other civilized nation and our rates of recidivism are high. The literature clearly supports the argument that prison can make one’s mental health worse, and that poor or worsening mental health during prison is correlated to higher rates of recidivism after release. Therefore, if prison cannot improve someone’s mental health, it is actually contributing to the perpetuation of a cycle of incarceration. If we want to break the cycle of recidivism and re-incarceration, we must ensure that prisons do not negatively affect someone’s mental health. Art programs are shown to help address inmate rehabilitation and recidivism, but we underinvest in these programs and need to bring them to scale. As a specific art form, film would likely offer similar benefits to those proven for fine art programs, but film offers several unique benefits that should be further explored. Cinematherapy is an effective form of art therapy, but we would need to look at partnerships with university social work programs to enable cinematherapy to be offered as a free community service by students. Although there appears to be no evidence of existing filmmaking partnerships between film schools and prisons, this type of community service program could further empower inmates to express themselves and to be heard and seen in ways that other art programs do not offer. To address the likely challenges with staffing and funding of such film programs, I propose that more film schools engage film students to build and staff such programs through community service in neighboring prisons. The students will find pedagogical benefits and community service benefits, while the prisoners can benefit from the programs the film students provide for free. Despite these potential limitations and challenges, film should be further explored as another way to help break the cycle of mass incarceration.
Prisons should implement more artistic, expressive, and social programs within the prison, specifically cinematherapy or filmmaking programs, to create a space for inmates to connect and build a sense of community and have an outlet for self expression. The impact of isolation on mental health can be addressed through socialization and creating a space for self expression and processing of trauma. While neither cinematherapy nor prison-based filmmaking programs will fix the many negative impacts of poor prison conditions, they offer unique benefits that could help to mitigate the negative impacts of prison on inmates’ mental health. While prison creates an environment of isolation and deprivation — cinematherapy and filmmaking programs could provide a space for prisoners to creatively express themselves and have a sense of community. While film’s potential to disrupt mass incarceration may be small, it promises to have a positive impact on inmates’ mental health and quality of life.
Works Cited
Armour, Cherie. “Mental Health in Prison: A Trauma Perspective on Importation and Deprivation.” International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory, vol. 5, no. 2, 2012, pp. 866–894, https://ijcst.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/ijcst/article/view/35703
Johnson, Lee Michael. “A Place for Art in Prison: Art as A Tool for Rehabilitation and Management.” The Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, vol.5, no.2, 2008, pp. 100–120, https://www.swacj.org/_files/ugd/4d13c6_ddf185230f354e119fe1b89a761df0f0.pdf
Meekums, Bonnie, and Jennifer Daniel. “Arts with Offenders: A Literature Synthesis.” The Arts in Psychotherapy, vol. 38, no. 4, 2011, pp. 229 — 238, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2011.06.003.
Nurse, Jo, et.al. “Influence of Environmental Factors on Mental Health within Prisons: Focus Group Study.” British Medical Journal, vol. 327, no. 7413, 2003, pp. 1–5, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7413.480.
“Program Directory — Justice Arts Coalition.” Justice Arts Coalition — A National Network and Resource for Those Creating Art in and around the Criminal Legal System., 28 Feb. 2023, https://thejusticeartscoalition.org/programs.
Robertson, Bronwyn. “All Things Connect: The Integration of Mindfulness, Cinema and Psychotherapy.” Counseling Today, 29 Mar. 2016, ct.counseling.org/2016/03/all-things-connect-the-integration-of-mindfulness-cinema-and-psychotherapy/.
Voss, Christiane, et al. ““Film Experience and the Formation of Illusion: The Spectator as ‘Surrogate Body’ for the Cinema,” by Christiane Voss.” Cinema Journal, vol. 50 no. 4, 2011, pp. 136–150. Project MUSE, doi:10.1353/cj.2011.0052.
Wallace, Danielle, and Xia Wang. “Does In-Prison Physical and Mental Health Impact Recidivism?” SSM — Population Health, vol. 11, Aug. 2020, pp. 1 — 16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100569.
Wolz, Birgit. “Cinematherapy.com: Using Movies for Healing and Growth.” Cinematherapy.com: Using Movies for Healing and Growth, https://www.cinematherapy.com/.
J
