Kinship care when parents are incarcerated:
WHAt we know, what we can do

A review of the
research and
recommendations
for action

A Report Prepared for the Annie E. Casey Foundation
Creasie Finney Hairston, Ph.D.
May 2009

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 1

1
5/28/09 3:08:54 PM

Acknowledgements

The Annie E. Casey Foundation

Creasie Finney Hairston, PhD is Dean and
Professor, Jane Addams College of Social Work,
University of Illinois at Chicago and Editor
of the Journal of Offender Rehabilitation.
Dr. Hairston acknowledges her colleagues and
research assistants, especially Beatrice Coleman,
her late mother and volunteer assistant, for
regularly updating and maintaining the library
of research and essays on prisoners and families
that informs this report.

The Annie E. Casey Foundation is a private
charitable organization dedicated to helping build
better futures for vulnerable children and families
in the United States. It was established in 1948
by Jim Casey, one of the founders of United
Parcel Service, and his siblings, who named the
Foundation in honor of their mother.

2 Printed in Canada
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 2

This review was funded by the Annie E. Casey
Foundation. The findings and conclusions
presented in this report are those of the author
alone, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of the Foundation. The author does wish to
acknowledge the support of the Foundation and,
specifically, Carole Thompson and Stacey Bouchet
for their support, constructive feedback and edits.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:54 PM

Table of Contents
Introduction  4
Changing family arrangements  6
Understanding the numbers  8
Adapting to the change  10
Rewards and challenges  12
Understanding the experience  14
Coping with incarceration  16
Managing the caregiver/parent relationship  18
Child welfare outcomes  20
The effects of policies and administrative regulations  22
What we can do  28
Conclusion  32
References  34

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 3

3
5/28/09 3:08:54 PM

Introduction
More than 1.7 million children in the United States
have a parent who is incarcerated, and the majority
of these children are cared for by relatives while
their parents are in prison. Despite the large number
of children affected by these circumstances, our
understanding of their care arrangements is limited.
When a parent is incarcerated, it affects their
children, their extended family and the greater
community. Family members who step in to care
for the children during the parent’s absence face
many obstacles. As well as practical considerations,
such as domestic arrangements and financial
issues, families must also meet the demands of
the child welfare and criminal justice systems,
and cope with the effects of social, community
and institutional stigma. Many families are
also dealing with issues such as poverty, and
physical and mental illness. There are even
greater stressors for the Native American and
Latino populations that are over-represented in
our prisons. Kinship arrangements made among
these populations can be especially problematic,
as parents may be incarcerated in prisons located
far from reservation lands, isolated further by
language barriers and burdened with fears that
the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
may remove their children from kinship care.
Developing a better understanding of existing
forms of kinship care for children of parents
who are incarcerated is becoming increasingly
central to our ability to address important social
issues in the United States. Concerns about
intergenerational crime and incarceration,
significant increases in the number of women
going to prison, and high concentrations of
arrests in poor, inner city neighborhoods of
color have directed considerable attention to
the support and care of prisoners’ children.

While there is a lack of consensus among
policymakers about how to deal with the effects
of drugs, crime and the prison system in this
country, there is a growing recognition that a
narrow, traditional focus on individuals and
criminal activity alone is insufficient. As part of
this emerging awareness, Federal initiatives are
providing funding for mentoring programs for
prisoners’ children, parent education and marriage
enrichment courses in prison, and other family
services. Similarly, corrections departments and
government agencies are joining with health and
human services organizations and faith-based
institutions to develop programs for prisoners
who are returning home. They also focus on
providing family-oriented services for correctional
populations and their families and children.

When a parent is incarcerated, it affects
their children, their extended family and
the greater community.

This growing awareness is also reflected in
current research. A number of national surveys
on prison inmates now include data on
incarcerated parents and their children, and several
State legislatures have commissioned reports
on parents in prison.1 Only rarely conducted
in the past, studies of children whose parents
are involved in the criminal justice system have
now become more common. Although there is
no comprehensive research agenda, researchers
from diverse disciplines are conducting studies
on children’s care during parental incarceration,
the social and emotional adjustment involved,
children’s relationships with incarcerated parents,
and their involvement in the justice system.
1.	 California, Oregon and Washington are among
the states who have conducted studies.

4
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 4

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:54 PM

Kinship Care When Parents are Incarcerated
examines the involvement of the child welfare
system in children’s care and protection when
parents are incarcerated, with a focus on kinship
care. Kinship care is defined as care in which
relatives other than a child’s parent assume
parenting responsibilities for the child. It is
a common care arrangement for children of
incarcerated parents. There are three main forms
of kinship care. Formal kinship care, also called
relative foster care, refers to care provided by
relatives when children are under the custody of
the child welfare system. Voluntary kinship care
typically refers to care provided by relatives when
children are involved in the child welfare system,
but not under the state custody. Private kinship
care refers to private arrangements that families
make without child welfare system involvement.
Given the significant role these grandparents
and other relative caregivers are playing in
the lives of children of incarcerated parents,
there is an urgent need to collect and analyze
existing research, as well as conduct new
research in key areas. There is also a need to
share knowledge broadly across disciplines and
provide opportunities for ongoing feedback
from those directly involved in kinship care
relationships, including children, parents
and caregivers. Kinship Care When Parents are
Incarcerated describes what current research tells
us, and explores what we need to know and
what we can do to develop more effective and
compassionate social policies and programs.
The knowledge and experience I have gained
from several years of research and consultation on
family-oriented correctional programs, as well as
communications with prisoners and their family
members, provide context for the topics covered
and the interpretation of research findings.

Incarcerated parents and their children—
a look at the numbers2
The number of children who grow up with a parent
in prison during some portion of their formative
years continues to increase, yet we know relatively
little about these children and the care they receive.
We do know:
■■

The problem disproportionately affects poor
families of color

■■

Many incarcerated parents have not completed
high school

■■

Many parents have serious substance abuse issues

■■

Many parents will remain in prison while their
children reach adulthood.

The incarcerated parents
■■

2.25 million people are incarcerated
in federal, state and local prisons3

■■

Average sentence 7.5 years, average time
served five years

■■

93% are male and poor

■■

40% are African American

■■

62% of female prisoners and 51% of male prisoners
have children under the age of 18

■■

57% of Hispanic males are fathers

■■

54% of African American males are fathers

■■

45% of Caucasian males are fathers4

The children
■■

1.7 million children have a parent in a federal
or state prison

■■

22% of these children are under the age of five

■■

28% are five to 10 years old

■■

34% are 10 to 14 years old

■■

16% are 15 to 18 years old

2.	 Unless otherwise noted, numbers in this section
are from Glaze & Maruschak, 2008.
3.	 Sabol & Couture, June 2008
4.	 Statistics represent state prison inmates unless
otherwise noted.
Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 5

5
5/28/09 3:08:54 PM

Changing family arrangements
Parental incarceration impacts children in a number of ways

Most incarcerated parents played a role in their
child’s upbringing before they were arrested and
incarcerated. That role may have been as one half
of a traditional, two-parent household, but it is more
likely they were involved in a different caregiving
arrangement, such as maintaining a single-parent
household or even living apart from their children.
Whatever the arrangement, when interrupted
by their arrest and imprisonment, it can have
a profound effect on their children’s domestic
situation and the care they receive.

Most incarcerated parents played a role
in their child’s upbringing before they
were arrested and incarcerated.

Before incarceration
Although some mothers and fathers carried
out traditional parenting roles before they
were incarcerated, most parents did not live in
married, two-parent households. Parents may
have had all their children living with them, or
some of them, or in some cases, none. Some
mothers and fathers have had children with
different partners, and children in the same
family who come from different adult unions
may receive different caregiving arrangements.
A greater proportion of mothers than fathers
lived with their children. Among state prisoners,
two-thirds of mothers lived with their children,

6
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 6

compared to close to one half of fathers.1
Forty-two percent of incarcerated women headed
a single-parent household before their arrest
and imprisonment, compared to 17 percent
of men.2 However, it is important to note that
because men make up 93 percent of incarcerated
parents, there are actually substantially more
father-headed single-parent families affected
by incarceration. The importance of this fact
is routinely overlooked in the current literature
on the effects of parental incarceration.
Of the mothers and fathers who did not live
in the same household with their children,
many appear to have been involved in their
children’s lives. Although research does not
tell us where their children lived or who was
responsible for their care, one study found that
many men who lived separately from their
children reported seeing their children regularly
prior to incarceration, and two-thirds said they
supported them financially.3 Interviews with
incarcerated mothers reveal that many who
lived separately from their adolescent daughters
still saw them frequently, and reported that the
mother-daughter relationship was very positive.4
Regardless of living arrangements, women
are three times more likely to provide child
care than men prior to incarceration, and
women are also much less likely to share child
care responsibilities with another adult.

1.	
2.	
3.	
4.	

Glaze & Maruschak, 2008
Ibid
Hairston, 1995
Lawrence-Wills, 2004

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:54 PM

cha n g i n g

When parents go to prison, it can affect children’s
lives in a number of ways, and to varying degrees.
For instance, children may be able to remain in
their own home, or, if the incarcerated parent
was the sole caregiver, they may need to move
to a different household, a different family or
even a different community. These changes in
household structure create disruptions and stress
for both the children and their new caregivers.
The transition can also pose new challenges for
children and caregivers who were not living in
the same households. Many non-resident parents
are engaged in parenting, too, and changes in
their personal situations affect the children for
whom they are providing emotional and economic
support. Children in the same family may
experience the impact of parental incarceration
differently, as mothers and fathers with more
than one child frequently have different living
arrangements for each of their children.5 This can
also be the case for children living in the same
family who are from different adult unions.
During incarceration, parents primarily rely on
their families for the care of their children. In
almost 90 percent of cases, fathers report that
the children’s mother is providing primary care.6
For incarcerated mothers, grandparents provide
primary care in close to half of the cases and
fathers in about one-third of the cases, with other
relatives providing care in almost one-quarter of
the cases.7 Incarcerated parents seldom indicate
that their children are in foster homes or other
child welfare system care arrangements. Two
percent of parents, 11 percent of mothers and two
percent of fathers, report that their children are in
the care of the state.8 However, these figures are
problematic, for reasons that will be explored next.
Hairston, 2003
Glaze & Maruschak, 2008
Glaze & Maruschak, 2008.
Ibid

64% of mothers and 46% of fathers
Lived with their children
36% of mothers and 54% of fathers
Lived separately from their children
18% of mothers and 14% of fathers
Lived with their children in a two-parent household
42% of mothers and 17% of fathers
Lived in a single-parent household
70% of mothers and 26% of fathers
Provided most of the daily care for their children
18% of mothers and 63% of fathers
Shared responsibility for daily care of their
children with another adult
Five times more fathers than mothers
Headed a single-parent household

During incarceration:
88% of fathers
Rely on the children’s mother for primary care
37% of mothers
Rely on the children’s father for primary care
45% of mothers
Rely on the children’s grandparents
23% of mothers
Rely on other relatives
2% of fathers and 11% of mothers
Rely on foster care9

9.	 Glaze & Maruschak, 2008.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 7

a r r a n g eme n ts

Before incarceration:

During incarceration

5.	
6.	
7.	
8.	

fami l y

7
5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

Understanding the numbers
Current foster care and child welfare system
data require further interpretation

The data provided by national surveys indicate
that no more than two percent of the children
of incarcerated parents are in foster care or the
child welfare system. Given that families involved
in the criminal justice system share many of the
social and living conditions—for instance, poverty,
substance abuse and community violence—that
characterize families involved in the child welfare
system, this number is surprisingly low.
A number of factors may be obscuring the real
numbers. Parents providing the data may not
know whether their children are under state
custody; fathers are seldom included in child
welfare decision-making even when paternal
relatives are children’s kinship caregivers.1 Most
fathers have limited contact with their children
during incarceration; some do not know where
their children are. Fathers, as well as mothers,
who have been out of touch with their children
and families may base their statements about
their children’s care arrangements on information
months or even years old. Or they may not
understand that children who are in the custody
of the state but living with relatives in formal
kinship care arrangements are in foster care.
The research methodology used in studies of
parents in prison also contributes to confusion
regarding families’ involvement in the child
welfare system, particularly their involvement
in relative foster care. Research questions with
preset response categories do not usually allow
for the fact that a child may be living with a
relative and still in foster care, or involved in the
child welfare system but voluntarily placed with
relatives. Without additional probing, even openended questions such as, “Where or with whom

1.	 O’Donnell, 1995; Hairston, 1998.

8
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 8

does your child live?” may not elicit responses
that allow an accurate assessment of whether
or not a child is a ward of the state or living
in a formal relative foster care home, or in a
voluntary or informal kinship care arrangement.

A number of factors may be obscuring
the real numbers.

Another way of determining the number of children
with incarcerated parents who are in child welfare
system care is by looking at how many children in
foster care on a particular date have a parent who is
incarcerated. Determining these numbers is difficult.
The data is not systematically compiled or collected
and there are no national child welfare surveys or
reports that provide this information. Various data
sets and methods are used to obtain estimates.2
The Adoption and Foster Care Analysis Reporting
System, for example, provides data on whether
incarceration is a reason for child welfare placement.
National or regional data sets on family life or
youth development, ask whether a parent has ever
been arrested and whether or not a child is in foster
care. Some studies of child welfare populations ask
whether a parent is, or has ever been, incarcerated.
Estimates for the number of children in foster
care who have an incarcerated parent using these
different methods vary widely, with numbers
in the different studies ranging from under 10
percent to as much as 70 percent. The AFCARS
2005 data place this number at 6 percent, the very

2.	 See, for example, studies by Phillips, 2008;
Johnston, 1995a; Moses, 2006.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

u n de Er lsta
ding di
n an gaute
the de
n umbe
l e n im
rs

low end of the spectrum.3 A study of children in
long term foster care, in contrast, reports that 70
percent of the children had a parent incarcerated
at some point during their time in foster care.4
These different methods can be useful for different
purposes, but they also produce very different
and sometimes conflicting results. Some seriously
underestimate, while others overestimate the extent
and nature of the connection between parental
incarceration and foster care. The data tracking
a child’s reason for placement is specific to the
child’s custodial parent, which more often than
not is the child’s mother, and provides incomplete
information about the father’s status. Parental
incarceration is not the reason for placement in
many situations involving mothers as a significant
number of children are placed or lived with
relatives prior to the mother’s imprisonment.
In addition, some mothers are arrested and
incarcerated after their children are placed in
foster care. A New York study found that the
removal of children from their mothers’ homes
seemed to lead to a downward spiral which
led to incarceration.5 Finally, incarceration and
arrest are not interchangeable variables and
have very different implications for children’s
short- and long-term care and well-being.
Obtaining accurate numbers on children in foster
care who are living with relatives is also difficult.
Sometimes children who are involved in the child
welfare system are placed with relatives in a formal
kinship care arrangement. The state has custody
of the children and relatives provide care under
the same guidelines as other foster parents. In
other cases, the child welfare system is involved
3.	 AFCARS 2006
4.	 Genty, 2008 citing Johnston,1999.
5.	 Ehrensaft, Khasshu, Ross & Wamsley, 2003.

but relatives provide care for children under
voluntary arrangements. In reporting numbers
of children under different care arrangements,
some child welfare agencies do not distinguish
between children who are in relative foster homes
and those in non-relative foster homes. Similarly,
some studies do not distinguish between formal
kinship care and voluntary arrangements, and
others treat voluntary kinship care arrangements
and informal or private care provided by relatives
as the same. Using AFCARS data which bases
numbers on reason for placement, Child Trends
indicates that 24 percent of the 513,000 children
in foster care in 2005 were in relative foster care.6

Different methods can be useful for
different purposes, but they also
produce very different and sometimes
conflicting results.

It is clear that caregiving by relatives is a dominant
form of care for children whose parents are
incarcerated. We do not know, however, or have
even best estimates from either correctional
surveys or child welfare studies of how many
children in foster care have both relative
caregivers and parents who are incarcerated.

6.	 Child Trends, 2006.

Kinship
Kinshipcare
carewhen
when parents
parents are
are incarcerated: What we know,
know, what
what we
wecan
cando
do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 9

9
5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

Adapting to the change
Children can be affected in different
ways by the incarceration of a parent

Parental involvement in the criminal justice
system disrupts families and creates new family
roles and obligations. When parents are unable
to take care of their children, others must assume
that responsibility. Typically those that do so
are relatives, or kin. Sometimes the transition
is planned, with children and caregivers fully
prepared for the change; sometimes the change
can be abrupt and sudden. Frequently, the
arrangements for kinship care occur long before
parents are incarcerated, and the care itself
extends for years. In other cases, a caregiving
arrangement is made for a short period of time,
after which parents resume the roles they played
in the children’s lives prior to the incarceration.
Regardless of the care arrangements made,
families and children must adjust to the changing
conditions and circumstances. Research helps
us identify some of the risks associated with
these new care situations, as well as some of the
factors that help improve children’s outcomes.
Significant challenges1
During the past 10 years, we have learned a
lot about children’s experiences when parents
are incarcerated. We know that children whose
parents are involved in the criminal justice system
are exposed to many situations and conditions
that pose risks to their well being and healthy
development. Many parents were poor, used
drugs, and were victims of violence prior to going
to prison. When these parents are incarcerated,
it causes additional stress for families, creates
new family obligations, and presents additional

risks for children as well. A parent’s incarceration
and the experience of being uprooted can
compound existing challenges, such as poverty
and instability, which children may already face.

When parents are incarcerated, it
causes additional stress for families,
creates new family obligations, and
presents additional risks for children.

Complex responses
Parental incarceration affects individual children
in different ways; each has a unique response
to their parents’ absence. Nevertheless, several
common responses have been found across
numerous studies. Children’s reactions to parental
incarceration reflect normal responses to crisis
and trauma. Some children exhibit externalizing
behaviors such as aggression and disobedience;
others internalize and are fearful or sad. Some
engage in excessive crying or regressive behaviors
such as bed-wetting. Among younger children,
emotional withdrawal, anxiety, anger and
hostility toward caregivers are more pronounced.
School difficulties, including high rates of grade
failure, suspension and problems with peers are
common among school-age children. Some
responses and behaviors are short term and
are more prevalent when a parent first leaves
home. But when children do not receive the
support and help they need, social and emotional
problems may endure or even escalate.

1.	 The research on children is summarized
in Hairston, October 2007.

10
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 10

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

adapti n g

Protective factors
Researchers have identified several factors that
make a difference in children’s well-being when
their parents are incarcerated. One factor is the
quality of the child’s home environment. Another
is the influence of the child’s caregiver. Children
also generally fare better when they communicate
with their parents. Studies show that children’s
contact with their parents in prison predicts
parent-child attachment and parents’ involvement
with their children when parents are released from
prison. Children’s contact with their incarcerated
parents, in turn, is influenced by the relationship
between children’s parents and their caregivers.
A positive relationship between parents and
caregivers, a stable home life and a supportive
caregiver can make all the difference in how the
child fares during childhood and into adulthood.
Outcomes
Although children whose parents are involved in
the criminal justice system endure challenging
experiences, research indicates that most are
not poorly adjusted and do not end up in the
criminal justice system themselves. Most children
of incarcerated parents score within normal
ranges when tested for mental illness, cognitive
development, health status, and social behavior.
Teenagers whose parents are incarcerated do not
show widespread participation in delinquency
or socially deviant behavior, though their rates
of participation may be higher than those found
among the general youth population. When
prisoners’ children are compared with their peers,
such as classmates or children living in the same
neighborhood or under similar conditions, the
results do not conclusively indicate differences in
behavior or performance. Although some studies
show higher rates of depression, disruptive behavior
in schools, and conduct disorders among children
with incarcerated parents, others show no differences,

the

cha n g e

or even lower rates, or indicate that differences
disappear when socio-economic status and other
variables, such as parenting styles, are controlled.
Areas for further study
Although research in this area is starting to
accumulate, we still do not know very much about
the complex ways in which children behave when
a parent is incarcerated. Applying existing child
development, bonding and attachment theories
suggests that the impact of short- and long-term
parent-child separations will be quite different
depending on whether the separation occurs
during infancy or adolescence. It’s also reasonable
to assume that the stability of children’s home
environments and family connections help to
ensure successful adjustments. But there are many
topics that require further study: for instance,
what are the effects of maternal versus paternal
incarceration on children? Are there differences
in behaviors and outcomes for children who
lived with their parents prior to the incarceration
compared to those who did not? When a parent is
incarcerated, how do children’s behaviors change
over the long term? What kind of relationships do
children establish with their incarcerated parents
once they are released from prison, and how do
parents adjust to the new family dynamics that
have evolved during their absence? Gathering this
information will give us a deeper understanding of
the complex issues affecting children’s outcomes.

Although children whose parents
are involved in the criminal justice
system endure challenging experiences,
research indicates that most are not
poorly adjusted.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 11

to

11
5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

Rewards and challenges
Kinship care is often provided under difficult conditions

Research on kinship caregivers and the conditions
of care has been extensive. Most of these studies
focus on formal kinship care and examine
kinship caregiver characteristics, the potential for
improvements to the home environment, and the
need for related services to support home care.
The Urban Institute’s research, based on the 1997
National Survey of Families and Children, is a
major source of information on kinship care.1
According to this study, one in five children in
kinship care faces three or more simultaneous risks
to their healthy development; levels of risk do
not differ significantly among children in formal,
voluntary, or private kinship care arrangements.
These children are often exposed to poverty
and a lack of social supports. Forty-one percent
of children in kinship care live in families with
incomes less than 100 percent of the federal
poverty level; 55 percent live with a caregiver
who does not have a spouse and 19 percent live
in households with more than four children.
Despite being eligible to receive services such
as foster care payments, Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families, food stamps and Medicaid,
relatively few children in kinship care live in
families that actually receive those benefits.
When the Urban Institute researchers compared
children living in kin and non-kin foster care,
they found higher risks for children in kinship
care.2 Seventy percent of children in voluntary
kinship care lived with caregivers over the age of
1.	 Ehrle, Geen, & Clark, 2001; Main,
Macomber, & Geen, 2006.
2.	 Ehrle & Geen, 2002.

12
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 12

50, compared with 42 percent in relative foster
care and 26 percent in non-kin foster care. More
children in voluntary care (23 percent) and
children in relative foster care (19 percent) than
children in non-kin foster care (9 percent) lived
with relatives in poor mental health. A fifth to a
quarter of children in kinship and non-kinship
care lived in homes where the caregiver was
highly aggravated; for instance, the caregiver
found the child hard to care for, or found it
difficult to control their temper with the child.

There are important benefits from
kinship care that outweigh the
environmental adversities.

Studies of kinship care using more recent data
report results similar to those found in the Urban
Institute studies. A study of grandparent caregivers’
mental health needs is illustrative.3 Two-thirds of
the 39 grandmothers participating in the study had
incomes under $30,000. Thirty percent were 60
years of age or over; 90 percent were 50 or older.
About one quarter were still employed, but 26
percent had stopped working when they assumed
care of their grand children. Eighty percent had
one or more health problems, typically arthritis,
diabetes, or high blood pressure. One half said
they needed or participated in mental health
services and two-thirds said the grandchildren
3.	 Smithgall, Mason, Michels, LiCalsi, & George, 2006

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

r ewa r ds

under their care had emotional or behavioral
problems. One half of the grandmothers were
caring for children involved in the child welfare
system. Children and grandparents were not
receiving the services recommended by caseworkers
because they were not available in their area.
A University of Illinois at Chicago study of 207
informal kinship caregivers4 (89 percent African
American and 96 percent female) found that
71 percent had incomes under $20,000 per
year. Fifty-nine percent had not completed high
school. Their ages ranged from 22 to 72 with a
mean age of 48. Only 25 percent were married,
though 65 percent reported that another adult
also lived in the home. Twenty-eight percent of
the children cared for by these relatives had a
mental or physical disability. Fifty percent of the
participants had legal custody of the children
under their care at the time of the study’s
first interview. This number increased to 65
percent at the 18 month follow up interview.

cha l l e n g es

also have fewer allegations of institutional abuse
and are less likely than children in traditional
foster care to be involved in the juvenile justice
system.6 Other research indicates that when
compared with children in foster care, children in
kinship care have fewer behavior, developmental,
running away and school attendance problems,
and closer attachments with their caregivers.7, 8

Kinship caregivers
■■

Primarily female

■■

Predominantly poor and African American

■■

Mostly unemployed

■■

Often burdened with health issues (arthritis,
diabetes or high blood pressure)

■■

Likely to have mental health issues

■■

Have usually not completed high school

Children in kinship care
20% face three or more developmental risk factors
28% have a mental or physical disability

Rewards of caregiving
Despite these environmental concerns and
children’s problems, several child welfare experts
support placing children whose parents are
unable or unwilling to care for them in the
homes of relatives, rather than in the homes
of unrelated foster parents. They cite research
that suggests there are important benefits from
kinship care that outweigh the environmental
adversities prevalent in kinship care arrangements.
Among these are fewer placement disruptions
and more regular contact with their parents
and siblings.5 A study that controlled for
demographic and placement characteristics
found that children placed in kinship care

4.	 Gleeson, Hsieh, Anderson, Seryak, Wesley, Choi,
Ellis, Washington, Talley, & Robinson, 2008.
5.	 Gleeson, 2007; Cuddeback, 2004.

41% live below the poverty level
55% live with a caregiver who doesn’t have a spouse
19% live in households with more than four children
70% live with a caregiver over the age of 50

6.	 Winokur, Crawford, Longobardi, & Valentine, Valentine,
7.	 Chapman, Wall, & Barth, 2004; Benedict,
Zuravin, & Stallings, 1996.
8.	 Cuddeback’s 2004 review of several studies indicate that
findings about children’s behavior are inconclusive.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 13

a n d

13
5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

Understanding the experience
There are rewards and frustrations for children and their caregivers

Studies of the day-to-day experiences and
concerns of kinship caregivers and the children
they care for indicate that the quality of home
environments and care provided are far more
complex than statistics suggest. Relatives
who are caregivers must also deal with legal
issues related to child custody, relationships
with children’s parents, their own health
problems and social stresses that occur when
elderly persons raise young children and
teenagers. When relatives assume the primary
responsibility for other relatives’ children, their
social lives, marital and romantic relationships
and employment are also affected.

The supportive role of extended families
seems to be a significant factor in the
health and well-being of both children
and kinship caregivers.

Grandmothers in one study1 talked about how
raising their grandchildren negatively affected
their marriages and lifestyles. The assumption of
care for grandchildren created additional stresses
for relationships that were already troubled, and
some marriages ended. Other marital relationships
were strained; grandmothers said they felt
they were caught in the middle between their
grandchildren and their spouses or mates. New
financial obligations related to children’s care,
as well as the loss of freedom, prevented some
1.	 Smithgall, et.al., 2006.

14
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 14

families from taking part in recreational activities
they had previously enjoyed, such as socializing
or going to the beauty parlor. Some grandmothers
were caring for children without having legal
custody, thereby creating other difficulties.
Although this study focused on problems,
grandmothers, even those with significant
challenges, also spoke spontaneously of good
moments and positive aspects of caring for
their grandchildren. The positive aspects of
providing care for children who are kin but
not “your own” are found throughout the
literature on grandparents raising grandchildren.
Positive experiences include feeling young
again, having a sense of pride in seeing
children’s accomplishments, and getting a
second chance to parent again. Maintaining
the family and keeping children out of foster
care are also mentioned frequently.2
Supportive care
Myriad factors influence relative caregivers’ quality
of life and home environments, and the quality of
care they provide for the children they parent. The
quality of that care, in turn, influences children’s
well-being and how they view their lives. The
supportive role of extended families seems to be a
significant factor in the health and well-being of
both children and kinship caregivers. Children who
were interviewed as part of a study on kinship foster
care3 described the many ways their grandparents
and other extended family members helped keep
them feeling loved and happy. According to these
2.	 Brown, Cohon, Wheeler, 2002; Gibson, 2002.
3.	 Altshuler, 1996.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

U n de r sta n di n g

the

e x pe r ie n ce

children, their well-being was based, in part, on
three factors: the love and care their caregivers
provided; their involvement in the extended family
system; and the opportunities they were given to
participate in decisions made about their lives.
Children in informal kinship care arrangements who
were interviewed in focus groups4 also defined their
families broadly and expressed positive views about
being part of an extended family network. They
did not view living with a relative as stigmatizing,

When examining kinship care, it is
important to look not only at risks, but at
factors that sustain and support children
during periods of adversity.

although some children were disappointed in, and
angry with, the incarcerated parent, particularly
when it was their mother. Children expressed
the hope that their parents would change and
be able to live with them in the future. A third
study on children’s outcomes and experiences
found that children who were more resilient lived
in kinship homes where there was structure and
clear boundaries between children’s caregivers and
their parents. The caregivers of resilient children,
in contrast to caregivers of non-resilient children,
had a clear understanding and acceptance of their
new parenting responsibilities and also had more
supportive extended families. These studies suggest
that when examining kinship care, it is important
to look not only at risks, but at factors that sustain
and support children during periods of adversity.

4.	 Messing, 2006

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 15

15
5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

Coping with incarceration
Having a parent in prison can create
additional stress for families in kinship care1

Kinship care research is an important resource for
understanding the challenges and rewards that come
with assuming responsibility for the care of children
when a parent who is a relative is unable or unwilling
to do so. But when that parent is incarcerated,
it presents challenges beyond those normally
encountered in other forms of relative caregiving.
Social stigma
Being a convicted felon carries a stigma that extends
to prisoners’ children, parents, siblings and other
family members. Prisoners, former prisoners and
their families are denied certain benefits, such as
housing, insurance and employment through legal
as well as discriminatory practices. Felons are also
excluded from social and civic activities, including
voting in many states. Prisoners’ children may be
teased or ostracized by other children, sometimes
with the approval or encouragement of adults. Some
family members react to shame by being secretive
and guarded about the incarcerated parent, and may
encourage children to be secretive or even prohibit
them from discussing their parents’ situation.
Uncertainty and insecurity
Confusion and uncertainty is a part of the dayto-day reality for prisoners’ families and children.
Some families do not know why the parent is
incarcerated or the particulars of the criminal
case. Even if they know the length of the parent’s
sentence, they may not know when or under what
conditions the parent will be released. Caregivers
may quickly lose track of the incarcerated parent’s
location, as prisoners are moved from one facility
to another during a typical prison stay. Incarcerated

parents do not control their connection with
their children. The ability to communicate with
them depends on prison lockdowns, disciplinary
“writeups,” work assignments, and other prison
rules, none of which are at the discretion of
an individual prisoner. This lack of knowledge
and control affects children’s involvement with
their parents and caregivers’ management of the
caregiving experience. In some ways, all family
members must “serve time,” since their ability to
function as a family is determined to some extent
by ever-changing correctional policies and practices.

When a parent is incarcerated, it
presents challenges beyond those
normally encountered in other forms
of relative caregiving.

Expense
Maintaining communication with a person
in a correctional institution, and supporting
communication between incarcerated parents
and their children is costly. Phone calls from
prisons and jails are very expensive and must
usually be made collect to the caregiver’s home.
Family visits to prisons in remote locations, seldom
served by public transportation, are a financial,
as well as an emotional and physical drain. For
example, children living in Chicago must travel
four hours or more each way to visit their mothers
at the women’s prison in Decatur, Illinois. The

1.	 Descriptions of family/prison matters are found in
Braman, 2004; Hairston & Oliver, 2007.

16
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 16

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

c o pi n g

price of maintaining family connections escalates
when families must also take on the cost of
providing money to prisoners for items such as
stamps, health care, snacks and personal items.
Parent/caregiver conflicts
If children’s relationships with their incarcerated
parents are maintained, the care and well-being
of children involves co-parenting between the
parent in prison and the relative in whose home
the child resides. It is not unusual for relationships
between caregivers and parents to be stressful and
tenuous. In some instances, relationships were
troubled before the parent went to prison. An
incarcerated parent’s substance use and criminal
lifestyle may have caused distress and even harm
to their children and other family members. To
protect themselves and the children they care
for, some grandparents control children’s access
to their parents. They refuse collect phone calls,
ignore letters, and don’t make arrangements for
children to visit. In other instances, co-parents
respect one another and maintain positive
relationships, but disagree on child-rearing in
general, and in particular, on how much the
parent who is physically absent can or should
be involved in making decisions about their
children. When one party is confined to prison,
it is even more difficult for the two parties
to confer and work through these important
matters in a timely or meaningful way.
Lack of trust
Imprisonment presents an opportunity for
incarcerated parents to reflect on the poor choices
they have made and problems they have caused
for their children. This process can inspire
incarcerated parents to make promises to change
their behavior and their lives for the better—
promises that are difficult or even impossible

with

to keep. Whether these promises are made by
habitually or newly incarcerated parents, the
gesture can lead to false hopes and disillusion.
If the parent lives in the community, their daily
behavior can be observed and evaluated; prisoners’
relatives have few ways, if any, to assess an
incarcerated parent’s sincerity or trustworthiness.

Caregivers must adhere to the demands
of the child welfare system and the
regulations of the criminal justice system
as well.

Legal/personal conflicts
When children in formal kinship care arrangements
have parents in prison, caregivers must adhere to
the demands of the child welfare system and the
regulations of the criminal justice system as well.
The requirements of one or both systems may
present personal conflicts and create compliance
problems. Prisoners’ mothers and other family
members are not only children’s caregivers but
also prisoners’ most important sources of support
during incarceration and a primary support when
they are released as well. It is very difficult for
families to deny help to their children, despite
potential legal conflicts. A child welfare regulation
that prohibits a caregiver’s daughter from living
in the grandparent’s home when she is released
from prison may present a moral struggle and
a practical problem. Knowing that a daughter
has few housing options that a parole officer will
approve, a grandmother may consider letting
her daughter secretly live in the home “for a
few days” when she is released from prison.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 17

i n ca r ce r ati o n

17
5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

Managing the caregiver/parent relationship
Sharing the care of a child with the incarcerated
parent can be challenging

Three studies of relatives caring for children of
incarcerated parents help to illustrate some of
the dynamics involved in co-parenting under
conditions of incarceration. Although the studies
do not specify whether the participating families
are involved in the child welfare system, they offer
insights into some of the challenges that caring for
children with incarcerated parents can present.

We have more work to do before we can
identify the best ways to support the
well-being of everyone involved in the
kinship care experience.

The first, a study of women in jail and
grandmother caregivers, examined solidarity
in co-parenting relationships.1 Three types of
co-parenting relationships were identified: in
one, the grandmother had primary power and
control; in another, the mother, though in jail,
had the power to control caregiving decisions;
in the third, the grandmother and mother
shared power equally. Achieving solidarity in the
parenting relationship helped co-parents to be
accepting of their role, whether they held the
majority of the control or not. Situations that
jeopardized this solidarity included those in which
mothers felt disconnected from parenting, in
which mothers had substance abuse issues, and in
which mothers and grandmothers were affected
by sadness, remorse and fear about the future.

The researchers observed that both mothers and
grandmothers in this incarceration study faced
formidable stresses far beyond those experienced
by families in other co-parenting studies.
The second, a study in which the author is
currently involved, was designed to explore and
develop a co-parenting intervention for mothers
in jail and relatives taking care of their children.
The research team has discovered that strains
and tensions between parents and caregivers pose
unexpected difficulties around recruitment and
retention for the study. Some caregivers agree to
participate in interviews about parenting issues,
but are very reluctant to be part of interviews or
services that involve the mother while she is in
jail. One participant believed that joint interviews
with the incarcerated mother would create more
problems. Others had no contact with the mother
and did not want any. Most caregivers had not
visited the jail and did not want to go because
they had heard negative things about visiting
conditions, or because they were disappointed by
the behavior of the mother. One grandmother
took her grandchild to the jail for regular visits,
although she had deep concerns about the visiting
routines. She endured these conditions and made
financial sacrifices of $300 a month, for phone
bills to maintain family connections with her
daughter, who was in jail for a drug-related
charge and had a substance abuse problem. The
grandmother believed that her daughter was very
different from the other jail inmates, whom she
perceived to be violent criminals. She said she
had high hopes for her daughter’s release and
resumption of a parenting role. At the same time,

1.	 Strozier & Armstrong, 2008.

18
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 18

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:55 PM

ma n a g i n g

she indicated that she would probably not allow
her granddaughter to return to the mother’s home.
The third study interviewed incarcerated parents
who were addicted to drugs and whose children
were cared for by relatives.2 The participants were
grateful to their relatives for taking care of their
children, but sometimes their appreciation was
mixed with feelings of anger, jealousy and criticism
of the caregivers. Most had not been living with
their children at the time of their arrest. Many of
the parents reported they had been using drugs for
many years and their children had continuously
lived with relatives for long periods of time.
Almost three-quarters of participants had not
seen their children since they were incarcerated.
Despite being separated from their children
and not having been their children’s primary
caregiver for many years, they felt connected
to their children. The majority had dreams of
rebuilding a family when they were released.

the

ca r e g i v e r / pa r e n t

behavioral outcomes for children. They reason that
low levels of dysfunction found among children
whose parents are addicted and incarcerated may
be due to their having been in protective, safe and
nurturing environments with kin long before their
parents’ arrest and incarceration. Further study and
a deeper understanding in this area is needed to
allow social service providers to make decisions that
are in the best interests of the children in kinship
care situations during parental incarceration.

Co-parenting challenges
Studies suggest that co-parenting during an
incarceration creates greater stress for those
involved than other co-parenting situations.
Stressors include:
■■

Family/financial pressures caused
by incarceration

■■

Incarcerated parents’ history of substance abuse

■■

Caregivers’ distrust of/disappointment
in the incarcerated parent

■■

Parent not accessible to caregiver or child

Areas for further study
We know a lot about the challenges families face in
managing kinship care and dealing with corrections
institutions. We know much less about how they
manage a co-parenting role or how extended
family support makes a difference for different
family members, including children. We also
have more work to do before we can identify the
best ways to support the well-being of everyone
involved in the kinship care experience. For
instance, we have not determined the different
ways in which children are affected when kinship
caregivers have provided care for years before the
parental incarceration, compared to situations
in which parental incarceration triggers the
children’s placement in kinship care. As Hanlon,
Carswell & Rose3 suggest, these differences may
indeed account for some of the findings related to

r e l ati o n ship

2.	 Smith, Krisman, Strozier & Marley, 2004.
3.	 Hanlon, Carswell, Rose, 2007

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 19

19
5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

Child welfare outcomes
Systemic factors reduce the likelihood of parent-child reunification

Just as we know little about the numbers of children
of prisoners who are in formal kinship care, we
know little about the child welfare system outcomes
for this service population. We do know that
permanency is an important child welfare goal and
that parent-child reunification is a preferred option
when appropriate. However, research that addresses
reunification of a previously incarcerated parent and
children who have been in the child welfare system
is rare; for those situations specifically involving
kinship foster care, the research is practically
nonexistent. The role of caseworkers in facilitating
the reunification process also merits further study.
Reunification data
One of the few published studies examining relative
foster care, incarceration and reunification analyzed
Adoption and Foster Care Analysis Reporting
System (AFCARS) data.1 The study found that
there was no difference in reunification rates for
children of incarcerated parents and other children
in foster care. However, children of incarcerated
parents who were in relative foster care were less
likely than children in other types of care to reunify.
These findings are consistent with those for children
in foster care who do not have a parent in prison.
Another study suggests that children in foster
care who have a parent in prison are less likely to
reunify with that parent than are children with
parents who are not incarcerated. An Illinois
study that compared state corrections and jail data
with child welfare data over a 10-year period to
identify children in foster care whose mothers were
incarcerated found that these children were half
as likely as other children in care to reunify with
1.	 Hayward & DePanfilis, 2007.

20
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 20

their parents.2 Although Illinois had large numbers
of children in kinship foster care that might have
accounted for reunification findings, the study did
not compare children in kinship care with other
children in foster care or other care arrangements.
A study using Minnesota child welfare data also
provides reunification information.3 The study
examined Minnesota child welfare discharge data
from January 2000 to June 2007 and identified
4,800 cases where children were placed in another
home because of parental incarceration. In 72
percent of the cases where parental incarceration
was the primary reason for placement, children
were discharged from placement care because of
reunification with a parent. In 13 percent of the
cases, however, children were discharged from
placement to live with relatives. This did not include
adoptions, guardianship or permanent transfers of
legal custody, although these latter categories may
have also involved placing children in relatives’
care. Unfortunately, the study did not provide
information on children who were placed in another
home for reasons other than parental incarceration,
which means we cannot compare the outcomes
for children of incarcerated parents with other
children in the Minnesota child welfare system.
Caseworkers—a critical role
Caseworkers play a central role in the child welfare
delivery system, influence the processing of cases,
and shape outcomes for children and families.
Caseworkers also provide services children and
families need and sometimes serve as children’s
advocates. At the same time, some parents
2.	 Moses, June 2008.
3.	 Larson & Swanson, 2008.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

chi l d

and caregivers do not think their child welfare
caseworkers are very helpful. They report that
caseworkers have limited or no contact with
parents in prison and do little to help relative
caregivers maintain contact between parents
and children during parental incarceration.
In the early 1990s, a study of incarcerated mothers
with children in foster care found that almost half
of the women had no correspondence from their
children’s caseworkers and almost two thirds had not
received a copy of their reunification plan.4 Another
study found high numbers of women who had not
received appropriate reunification services, including
communication from caseworkers, notification of
custody hearings and opportunities to participate
in case planning.5 Numerous articles and reports
detail instances in which incarcerated mothers
whose children are in foster care receive little or
no information about their children, don’t know
where their children are or how they are doing, and
don’t receive the legal help or social services they
need to prevent termination of parental rights.6
Some advocacy groups, noting the general
scarcity of services for children whose parents are
incarcerated and the inadequate attention given
to their needs, are promoting a bill of rights for
children of incarcerated parents.7 Among the areas
covered by the bill of rights are a child’s right to
have contact with his or her parents, the right
to a relationship with the parent, and the right
to be well cared for during the parent’s absence.
Although these rights are not that different from
the basic principles that guide child welfare
practice, they are not routinely considered by child
welfare or social service agencies that interact with
families involved in the criminal justice system.

we l fa r e

o utc o mes

Navigating the system
Working with families involved in the criminal
justice system is challenging and involves complex
individual and systemic factors. Caseworkers’
personal concerns about prison visits, views
about parents who are criminals, and lack of
knowledge about prison regulations are all
factors that affect service delivery. The lack of
standardization in casework approaches for cases
involving parental incarceration also makes
the work more challenging. Each caseworker
interprets criminal histories and agency policies
on background checks differently, resulting in
inconsistent evaluations of children’s incarcerated
parents and caregiving relatives. In addition,
service agencies do not systematically make efforts
to improve service standards. There is limited
training available to help caseworkers better service
families involved in the criminal justice system.
We do not know the extent to which various
individual and systemic factors influence services
or outcomes for families involved in both the
child welfare system and the criminal justice
system. We have very little information on
the progress and outcomes of children who
entered relative foster care because of a parental
incarceration, or on those children who entered
care for other reasons and whose parents were
subsequently incarcerated. But we do know that
child welfare caseworkers play a critical role in
those outcomes, and that improvements in current
approaches are needed. Further research in this
area is important to our understanding of the work
that they do and in identifying ways to support
and improve on this work to ensure the best
outcomes for the children and families involved.

4.	 Beckerman, 1994; Beckerman, 1998.
5.	 Johnston, 1995
6.	 See Margolies & Kraft-Stolar, February
2006; Allard & Lu, 2006
7.	 Newell, 2008
Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 21

21
5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

The effects of policies and
administrative regulations
Current laws and correctional policies can
alienate incarcerated parents from their children

Most mothers and fathers in prison want to
maintain relationships with their children, and
hope to reunite with them upon their release from
prison. Research tells us that regular, ongoing
communication between parents and children is
essential for maintaining parent-child attachments,
and important in reunifying households following
separation. Children who have limited contact with
their parents may begin to view their parents as
strangers or even forget who they are. And parents

Communication between incarcerated
parents and their children is not under
parents’ control and revolves instead
around administrative regulations.

who have little contact with their children and
their children’s caregivers have few opportunities
to fulfill parental roles, responsibilities, and
commitments and play a significant role in their
children’s upbringing. This leads to frustration
and hopelessness, causing some parents to give
up a role in their children’s lives long before
they might be legally enjoined to do so.
In some cases, imprisonment leads directly to the
permanent, legal severance of family ties. Parental
incarceration is reason for termination of parental
rights in several states, although in others—notably
Colorado, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania—
incarceration of the parent is insufficient reason
for termination of parental rights. In other cases,
incarcerated parents’ failure to demonstrate that

22
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 22

they engaged in ongoing communication with their
children under state custody can also be used in
establishing grounds for termination of parental
rights. Yet we know that many parents in prison
do not see their children on a regular basis. During
imprisonment, almost 60 percent of mothers and
fathers in state prisons have never had a personal
visit with any of their children; fewer than 20
percent have visits at least monthly. Forty-seven
percent of fathers and 41 percent of mothers have
not talked with their children on the phone.1
Communication between incarcerated parents
and their children is not under parents’ control
and revolves instead around public policies,
administrative regulations, and staff practices.
Policies demonstrate the value that states place
on parent-child relationships, relative caregivers
and family relationships, and they safeguard
the protection and well-being of children
when parents are incarcerated. They guide the
allocation of resources for parent-child visiting
and parental and caregiver involvement in the
decisions made about the child’s welfare. And
they shape caseworkers’ practice with incarcerated
parents, their children and their families.
Visiting
The problematic nature of prison visitation policies
has been documented extensively over a long period
of time.2 These policies are not consistent between
states, and can even vary between correctional

1.	 Glaze & Maruschak, 2008
2.	 Hairston & Hess, 1989; Hairston, 2003; Comfort,
2003; Margolies &Kraft-Stolar, 2006.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

the

E ffects

o f

p o l icies

institutions within a single state. Some corrections
departments, such as those in Tennessee, require
that the individual submit their social security
number, pictures and other identifying information
for processing and prior approval to be placed
on a prisoner’s visiting list. Despite the risk of
identity theft posed by this policy, they offer no

Some prisons do not permit contact visits
between parents and children.

assurance that the information will be secured.
Other corrections departments require visitors to
bring children’s birth certificates when visiting.
Some require that an adult accompanying a child
on a visit bring written approval from a nonincarcerated parent, or proof that the caregiver
escorting a child on a visit is the legal guardian.
Children’s ability to spend time with their parents
is further hampered by restrictive visiting schedules
and conditions. Most state corrections departments
post visiting policies on their websites, but it is
not unusual for each correctional facility in a
state system to have its own set of rules—rules
which change frequently and often without
notice. Most prisons permit contact visits;
however, parents and children at many jails are
separated by a glass partition and must speak to
each other using telephones. Conservative dress
codes, frisk-and-search procedures, crowded
visiting rooms and long waits for processing are
the norm. Visiting rules and practices are subject
to widely different interpretation by the staff
who enforce them and often seem arbitrary.
There are no consistent policies in place for special
visiting procedures and accommodations for child
welfare caseworkers, kinship caregivers, or foster
parents accompanying children on visits. Some

a n d

admi n ist r ati v e

institutions do make special arrangements for
children who are participating in parent-child
projects or visitation programs endorsed by the
institution. Some women’s prisons also have special
visiting areas or programs (parent education,
support groups, overnight stay) for parents and
their children. The children’s visiting center at
New York’s Sing Sing Prison is particularly
unusual, providing toys and games in an
informal, relaxed setting where incarcerated
fathers can interact with their children.3
Also unusual is the fact that this center has
existed for many years, run by a not-for-profit
organization and funded with state monies.
Making calls
Parent-child communication by phone, while not
as physically arduous and emotionally exhausting
as prison visits, is very expensive and has become
more so since phone company deregulation. The
costs for calls from incarcerated parents to their
children are borne by relative caregivers. Almost
all phone calls from correctional institutions
must be made collect (or prepaid by debit card)
to a residential phone. Charges are exorbitant
and generate lucrative profits for corrections
departments and the telephone companies

Parent-child communication by phone is
very expensive and has become more so
since phone company deregulation.

with whom they contract services. Kinship
caregivers and other family members may want
children to talk with their parents in prison,
but be prevented by the high costs involved.

3.	 Jeffries, Menghraj, & Hairston, 2001.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 23

r e g u l ati o n s

23
5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

Few correctional departments enact
policies that promote and support
the maintenance of parent-child and
co-parenting relationships.

Six states (Nebraska, Michigan, Missouri, Maryland,
New York, and Oklahoma) have established policies
that eliminate the state’s phone commissions and
make phone calls more affordable for prisoners’
families and friends.4 In contrast to states that
charge as much as $30 for a 30-minute phone call,
the phone rate for prisoners in the Montgomery,
Maryland jail, is less than $1 for a 20-minute
collect phone call to anywhere in the country.5
Sending letters
Contact by ground mail, though not a significant
financial cost to families or prisoners, carries
a tremendous social burden. Letters from
correctional institutions typically carry a large
stamped disclaimer noting that the letter is from
an inmate at a correctional institution and has not
been reviewed by prison authorities. This stamp
and the resulting stigma discourages families
who are trying to maintain privacy or secrecy
about a relative’s imprisonment. The long period
of time required to mail a letter and wait for a
reply makes this a less and less acceptable form of
communication in this era of text messages and
e-mail. However, for security reasons, e-mail and
text messaging between prisoners and families
is prohibited in correctional institutions.
Family communication policies have undergone
significant reform in some correctional systems,
but the changes have not been universal, nor
have they been widely adopted. Although most
correctional departments have statements that

indicate inmates’ family ties are important in
achieving correctional goals, few enact policies
that promote and support the maintenance of
parent-child and co-parenting relationships.
Child welfare policy
We know little about how child welfare policies
affect families involved in the criminal justice system;
studies that document their experiences have been
limited. Analyses of major child welfare policies
indicate, however, that some features of legislation
and administrative policies surrounding the child
welfare system do not support these families, and
may actually be harmful to them. Maintaining
parent-child relationships during imprisonment
is difficult for families, especially when children
are in the child welfare system and in the care of
relatives. Policies are explicit about the need for
parents to have regular contact with their children
and take part in plans for their children’s futures.
But these policies do not explicitly allocate funds
for visits and calls between incarcerated parents
and their children, or facilitate incarcerated parents’
presence at hearings involving their children.

Children’s relative caregivers may not
be acknowledged in any meaningful
decision-making role.

Generally, established protocols, practice guide­
lines, or agency administrative units do not
exist to ensure that incarcerated parents receive
timely information about custody issues or are
able to participate in case planning. Children’s
relative caregivers may not be acknowledged
in any meaningful decision-making role either,
even when they have acted as the children’s
“parents” throughout the children’s lives.

4.	 CURE, 2008.
5.	 Ibid.

24
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 24

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

the

E ffects

o f

p o l icies

The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997
(AFSA) has been of particular concern to advocates
who work on behalf of women in prison and
their children.6 ASFA requires that termination
of parental rights proceedings be filed whenever
a child has been in foster care 15 of the past 22
months—a period that is significantly shorter
than the expected average prison term. ASFA
strongly favors adoption of the child and does
not adequately respect the relationship between
the child and the incarcerated parent or the
kinship care arrangement that most incarcerated
mothers choose for their children. The law
does contain a provision allowing states to use
kinship care to avoid adoption and also includes
three broad exceptions to the time limits.
These exceptions accommodate cases in which
parents are expected to be incarcerated past
the timelines but are likely to be released in a
reasonable amount of time. However, the child
welfare system does not always support families
involved in the criminal justice system in taking
advantage of these opportunities, placing these
children at risk of permanent separation from
their parents and extended family members.
In the 10 years since enactment of this major
legislation, fewer children are in foster care
nationally and adoptions by relatives have
increased in some states. Some reports, based
on incomplete records and limited data analysis
also show increasing numbers of incarcerated
mothers whose parental rights have been
terminated.7 Although researchers have examined
states’ termination of parental rights statutes as
they apply to incarcerated parents, comprehensive
assessments of the impact of ASFA on children
in relative care with an incarcerated parent have
not been published. Our understanding of ASFA’s
effect on these families is, therefore, quite limited.
6.	 Genty, 1998; Genty, 2008; Lee, Genty,
& Laver, 2005; Allard & Lu, 2006
7.	 Lee, Genty & Laver, 2006.

a n d

admi n ist r ati v e

Subsidized guardianship of children in the welfare
system offers an option that does not involve the
termination of parental rights and provides relatives
with legal and financial assistance needed to keep
children during a parent’s prison term. These
plans typically come into effect only after a child

Subsidized guardianship programs aim to
prevent children from entering the foster
care system.

has been in foster care for a designated period,
though some states, including Kansas, Kentucky,
New Jersey, Nevada, Ohio and the District of
Columbia, offer preventive subsidized guardianship
programs. These programs aim to prevent children
from entering the foster care system by providing
support, in the form of a modest monthly subsidy
and sometimes other services, to kinship caregivers.
A few child welfare departments have made, or
are in the process of making, important policy
shifts that respond to the unique needs of families
and children affected by incarceration. The New
York City Administration for Children’s Services,
for example, issued a memorandum detailing the
agency’s legal obligation to arrange visits between
children in foster care and their incarcerated
parents. In collaboration with the Women’s Prison
Association, the agency also produced a guide to
New York’s criminal justice system for child welfare
workers. The agency’s Division on Permanency
established a program for children with incarcerated
parents that provides dedicated staff who deliver
services and supports to the whole family. This
support includes transportation for children visiting
their incarcerated mothers, parent education
courses, and technical assistance for caseworkers
working with parents in prison. While applauding
these and other system changes, critics note that

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 25

r e g u l ati o n s

25
5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

Although most children are in informal
kinship care arrangements, child welfare
policies seldom include prevention or
intervention services for those children.

the program’s resources are not adequate to meet
the need created by New York’s large correctional
and foster care populations and that, in the absence
of systems of accountability, many caseworkers
ignore rules regarding their responsibilities towards
incarcerated parents.8 The program itself must
also remain accountable; rigorous evaluation
must be applied to both process and outcomes.
Accessing aid
We know that although most children are in
informal kinship care arrangements, child welfare
policies seldom include prevention or intervention
services for those children. We also know that many
grandparent caregivers, though needing services,
prefer not to have child welfare workers intruding
in their lives. Some fear losing the children they
are parenting, and others are concerned about
becoming entangled in a bureaucratic maze that
may produce more harm than help. Children in
informal kinship care may be at risk of going into
custody if their situations change or if they do not
receive appropriate assistance. The kinship care
arrangement can be disrupted by such issues as a
caregiver’s chronic illness and lack of appropriate
health care, the loss of a job or other income source,
or a child’s behavior problems or health condition.
Even when informal caregivers do receive
services and financial assistance, such as childonly Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) payments, food stamps and referrals to

8.	 Margolies & Kraft-Stolar, 2006, Child
Welfare Watch, Winter 2008

26
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 26

social services, this support is far less robust than
that provided for children in formal foster care
arrangements.9 To receive the level of care that
children in foster care receive, informal caregivers
may have to wrongfully allege that the parents
of the children under their care have abused or
neglected them. By making these allegations, they
are able to access the benefits available through
the child welfare system, although they may also
lose their right to care for the child by doing so.
They may still receive less support as kinship
foster parents than that provided for non-related
foster homes. Several studies have found that
children in relative foster homes receive fewer
services than those in non-related foster care.10
Accessing information
Aside from concrete aid and benefits, providers
of informal kinship care generally do not receive
information and services to assist them with basic
issues such as parent-child visiting, boundarysetting with parents, and parent-child reunification.
These issues are crucial ones for relatives who
co-parent with parents who are incarcerated or are
being released from incarceration, and represent
core areas of child welfare practice. If child welfare
workers were able to share their knowledge and
expertise in these areas with families who are not
formally involved in the child welfare system,
it would be of great benefit and might possibly
prevent some children from entering the system.
The Fostering Connections to Success and
Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 addresses key
kinship care issues and establishes significant,
new policy directions for child welfare.11 Under
the Act, kin must be notified when children
are brought into care and preference is given
9.	Main, Macomber & Geen, 2006;
Ehrle, Geen & Clark, 2001
10.	Ibid
11.	Stoltzfus, October 2008 summarizes the major
provisions of the Fostering Connections Act.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

the

E ffects

o f

p o l icies

to relatives for placement. Supports that make
subsidized guardianship a more viable option for
relative caregivers are also provided, and navigator
programs that provide support for informal
kinship caregivers are also part of the legislation.

Though outcome evaluations are few, several
states had subsidized guardianship and navigator
programs for families involved in the child welfare
system prior to passage of the Act. They can build
on those experiences to expand and further develop
their programs. Most child welfare systems are just
beginning, however, to develop plans to implement
this recently enacted legislation. Since the Act does
not address parental incarceration specifically, it is
not likely, based on past history, that the specific
needs of relatives providing care for children with
incarcerated parents will be a priority. Nonetheless,
it is very important for us to know and understand
how this legislation, other major child welfare laws,
and administrative regulations support or undermine
children, families and kinship networks affected
by the criminal justice system. More work must be
done in the future to build this knowledge base.

a n d

admi n ist r ati v e

r e g u l ati o n s

Parents who are prisoners must comply with
corrections policies, procedures, and the nuances
of correctional staff practices, but compliance
often affects their ability to meet child welfare
department regulations and kinship caregivers’
expectations. No matter how much they may
want to spend time with their children, attend
an administrative hearing, or participate in a
self-help program as required by a child welfare
case plan, their ability to participate depends on
institutional rules and correctional staff decisions.

If child welfare workers were able to
share their knowledge and expertise,
it might prevent some children from
entering the system.

Putting families first
Maintenance of family relationships and relatives’
protection and care of children are extremely
challenging when parents are incarcerated and
children are under the custody of child welfare
departments. In these situations, parents and
relative caregivers alike must comply with the
demands and requirements of both the child
welfare and criminal justice system. Sometimes
these requirements are onerous and conflicting.
Families must adhere not only to prison rules
but also to child welfare agency regulations
and stipulations. They often do not receive
the organizational support they need to meet
various mandates and sometimes live in fear of
divulging information or making mistakes that
would put children’s permanent relationships
with parents or caregivers in jeopardy.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 27

27
5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

What we can do
The time is right to make positive changes system-wide

Historically, the placement and care of children
of incarcerated parents has not been a priority
for child welfare departments, but there is a great
need to address this issue now. The growing
prison population, changing public policies,
and greater reliance on kinship caregivers as a
child welfare option are creating an immediate
need to explore new approaches that ensure
the well-being of these vulnerable children.

There is much we can do to address
the issues, create effective and
compassionate public policies and
programs, and ensure a better future
for families.

care as a formal child welfare approach when
parents are incarcerated is needed to address gaps
in our knowledge, enhance our understanding
and shape future program and policy directions.
Studies of incarcerated parents, kinship care,
and child welfare system processing, as well as
informed analyses of policy statements provide
a useful reference point. Studies that examine
the circumstances unique to families that are
simultaneously involved in two different systems
of social control and that analyze outcomes
the systems generate for children and their
families must also be a part of this broader
research agenda. We must move beyond relying
on small, ad hoc studies, inadequate data, and
speculation as the basis for decision making.
Improve data collection

Develop a research agenda
There is much we can do to address the issues,
create effective and compassionate public
policies and programs, and ensure a better future
for families involved in kinship care and the
criminal justice system. The development of a
comprehensive knowledge base that is shaped by
empirical study as well as theoretical understanding
is critical in advancing new directions. A broad,
inclusive research program that focuses on kinship

28
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 28

We can improve ways in which we collect child
welfare data to enhance our specific knowledge of
children with incarcerated parents in the system.
When children are in the custody of the child
welfare system, their case records should indicate
where their parents are residing and whether
they are incarcerated. Because parents’ status
can change over time, information on fathers
and mothers should be collected when children
enter care, at case review and upon discharge.
The data should be systematically collected and

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

what

We can make children in kinship care whose
parents are incarcerated a more visible and
central part of national agendas.

maintained in a manner that allows identification
and dissemination of group data for individual
child welfare departments, and for the Adoption
and Foster Care Analysis Reporting System
(AFCARS). The data that AFCARS currently
collects on the numbers of children who are
placed in care as a result of parental incarceration
provides a base on which to build a more detailed
picture, although there is still a need for additional
research to complement this basic information.
The establishment of a child welfare data collection
and reporting system that accurately identifies the
number of children in state care whose parents are
incarcerated and are being cared for by relatives
should be a core component of a child welfare
research program. It is, furthermore, a prerequisite
for effective policy development and program
planning. In the absence of this basic information,
it is difficult to determine how many children
are affected, to trace trends and patterns, and to
assess the financial and service implications of
specific or general policies for kinship care, parental
incarceration, or more general child welfare issues.

we

ca n

d o

systems have established to help parents and
children separated by incarceration and children’s
kinship caregivers. These state-of-the-field reviews
would identify best practices, or at least promising
ones, outline the conceptual frameworks underlying
different programs, describe implementation issues,
and assess results and outcomes. This effort could
prevent groups from wasting limited resources on
“reinventing the wheel,” and help agencies with
similar needs and objectives to identify potential
partners and establish learning collectives. It could
also help shape a relevant research agenda to guide
future work. There are numerous models for
conducting, funding and disseminating the results
of these types of reviews to academic audiences,
policymakers, and service providers.1 The Children’s
Bureau, National Institute of Corrections, Annie

We can take action now to remove some
of the barriers to the maintenance of
family ties during imprisonment.

E. Casey Foundation, Jane Addams Center for
Social Policy and Research, Child Welfare League
of America and Council of State Governments
are among the organizations that have provided
leadership for this type work in the past.

Identify and document promising practices
We can conduct national reviews of the policies
and programs that different state legislatures,
departments of corrections and child welfare

1.	 See Gleeson & Craig, 1994; Jeffries, Menghraj,
& Hairston, 2001; Lee, Genty &/Laver, 2005
for examples of state of the field reviews.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 29

29
5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

Engage in cross-system collaboration

Affordable telephone communication
and child-friendly visiting environments
should be the norm.

Consider the impact of federal and state
policies on children whose parents are
incarcerated and their kincare providers
We can make children in kinship care whose
parents are incarcerated a more visible and central
part of national agendas. It is important for
federal and state agencies to assess the current and
potential impact of the Fostering Connections
Act on these populations and to systematically
monitor the development and implementation
of new rules that apply to them. The next White
House Conference on Children must not overlook
the plight of prisoners’ children and the unique
challenges—over and above poverty, parental
substance abuse, and parental absence—that
they must cope with. The racial makeup of the
prison and child welfare populations indicates
that the issue of prisoners’ children should be
included in the discussions of groups concerned
about race matters, health disparities, and
disproportionality. There is likewise a place
for this issue on the agenda of organizations
that advance the causes of grandparents raising
their grandchildren. Grandparents caring for
children with incarcerated parents may not,
for reasons of shame or embarrassment, be a
vocal group, but they may be among the most
vulnerable and most in need of being heard.

30
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 30

We can take action now to establish collaborations
between child welfare agencies and departments of
corrections, and remove some of the barriers to the
maintenance of family ties during imprisonment.
It has been more than 10 years since a national
institute on incarcerated parents convened child
welfare and criminal justice professionals to discuss
family needs and system reforms. Since that time,
there has been little movement in establishing
standards of practice, formal channels of contact
between the two systems, or coordination of
services. Yet the need for change and the numbers
of children affected is that much greater, and
the resources that could be used to facilitate
collaborative work more readily accessible.
For instance, newer technologies allow parents
in prison to participate in case conferences and
hearings without being physically present, and
online resources and digital communications
make the transmission of information between
caseworkers and prison counselors much swifter.
Improve parent/child access
It’s also time for corrections departments to
drop exorbitant and excessive phone charges.
After extensive analysis and review, some
states have lowered excessive rates, indicating
that the prevailing rates charged by most
corrections facilities are not justified on the
basis of cost-recovery for service installation
and maintenance. There is also evidence that
visiting policies, practices, and facilities that
allow for child- and family-friendly visits
can be established without compromising

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

what

security measures or adding significant cost.
Affordable telephone communication and
child-friendly visiting environments should
be the norm rather than the exception.
Build infrastructure
Agency infrastructure, including policies, resources,
and training are needed to support the many
individuals in both child welfare and the criminal

A fundamental shift in thinking and
leadership is needed.

justice system who work diligently to support
children and kinship caregivers. A fundamental
shift in thinking and leadership is needed for
meaningful change to occur. Governmental
agencies that set policy, organizations that provide
funding to mount and sustain system reform,
and accreditation bodies such as the American
Correctional Association need to be involved in
establishing fundamental principles and specific
goals. When crafting solutions to the issues, it
will also be important to include the incarcerated
parents, caregivers, children and caseworkers
who have direct and valuable experience of the
child welfare system. Additionally, more effective,
more standardized caseworker practice protocols
during initial intervention are critical. Many
of the key decisions for kinship caregivers (and
key opportunities for intervention and support)
happen right after a parent is first arrested or
incarcerated. This is a critical juncture that

ca n

d o

deserves a careful look and more thorough
approach by most child welfare agencies; it is the
best chance for a primary intervention with the
caregivers and a point at which key information
about services and supports can be relayed.
Convene a second national institute on
incarcerated parents
A follow-up to the first national institute on
incarcerated parents is long overdue. A second
institute on incarcerated parents and their
children and families could be instrumental in
consolidating our knowledge of the child welfare
and criminal justice administrative system, and in
finding strategies to ensure key objectives are
achieved. The Administration on Children and
Families, in partnership with departments and
organizations that have a demonstrated track record
in addressing human service and justice matters,
could undertake this much needed initiative.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 31

we

31
5/28/09 3:08:56 PM

Conclusion
Close to two million children are growing up
with a parent in federal or state prisons, and many
more will join their ranks in the coming years.
The challenges these children face are significant.
Often, they are already living in poverty, and the
incarcerated parent will have had a substance abuse
issue. The incarceration process itself can create
additional strain, including domestic disruption
and instability, stigma and additional economic
hardship. How do we ensure that these children
are adequately protected and cared for? How do
we help their families to cope with the incarceration
and resulting kinship care responsibilities? How
can we facilitate the relationship between parents
and their children during the incarceration
period, and ensure that after the sentence is
served, families are reunited wherever possible?
Existing research points us in the direction of the
answers, but a deeper understanding is still needed.
We know that when children with incarcerated
parents are placed in kinship care, a family with
already stretched financial and emotional resources
must learn to navigate the conflicting, confusing
and sometimes humiliating requirements of the
criminal justice system and the child welfare system.
We know that many families are overwhelmed by
the experience, and that the infrastructural supports
that could help them cope are often not available
or not accessible. We know that caseworkers, who
play a pivotal role in helping families through
this process, are also not given the resources
and training they need. And we know that state
and federal policies can undermine a family’s
ability to stay in contact with the incarcerated
parent, and reunite upon that parent’s release.
But we also know that there are things we can
do to make the experience of kinship care more
positive for the incarcerated parents, the

32
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 32

caregivers and the children who are placed in
their care. And we know that there are ways to
improve both childrens’ individual outcomes
and the chances that families will reunify
when the parents are released from prison.
We can help caseworkers to become betterinformed and more active in maintaining contact
between relative caregivers, incarcerated parents
and their children. Changes to visiting and
communications policies can be made to make
contact between parents and their children easier
to maintain during the incarceration period. The
child welfare system can be reviewed to ensure
that it supports families with parents involved
in the criminal justice system. And we can do
a better job of helping these families to access
financial aid, services and information that can
help them manage the challenges of raising
children while the parents are incarcerated.

Further research is needed to help
bring the experiences of these families
to light.

We can also improve the information-gathering
processes. By doing a better job of collecting data
on families and their experiences, we can trace
important trends and assess the financial and systemic
effects of the various policies that affect them.
This report offers a stepping-off point for further
exploration of a complex topic. Further research
is needed to help bring the experiences of these
families to light, and to better understand the
factors that increase children’s chances of thriving
under difficult circumstances. This research must be

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

complemented with timely action, such as ensuring
relevant policies and programs are thoroughly
reviewed and their effects monitored, making these
children’s issues a central part of national agendas.
The numbers of children and families affected by
the incarceration of a parent and the co-ordination
of kinship care arrangements continues to grow.
Their plight cannot continue to be ignored.
We know what steps to take towards developing
a better understanding of these families and
providing a better support framework for
them. We must make this issue a priority and
facilitate change through research and action.
Note:
An earlier version of this report appears as a
chapter entitled Kinship Care When Parents
are Incarcerated in Gleeson, J. & Hairston,
C.F. (Editors). Kinship Care Improving
Practice Through Research. Washington,
D.C.: CWLA Press, 1999. This report updates
research findings and expands the central
ideas presented there. Some passages have been
taken directly from the chapter as the general
ideas and knowledge remain the same.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 33

33
5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

References
■■ African-American Family Commission (2004, March). Social and economic profile of African-Americans
in Illinois. Illinois: Chicago: African-American Family Commission.
■■ Allard, P. E., & Lu, L. D. (2006). Rebuilding families, reclaiming lives. State obligations to children in foster
care and their incarcerated parents. New York: New York University, Brennan Center for Justice.
■■ Altshuler, S.J. (1996). The well-being of children in kinship foster care. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Illinois at Chicago.
■■ Beckerman, A. (1998). Charting a course: Meeting the challenge of permanency planning for children with
incarcerated mothers. Child Welfare, 77(5), 513-529.
■■ Beckerman, A. (1994). Mothers in prison: Meeting the prerequisite conditions for permanency planning.
Social Work, 39(1), 9-14.
■■ Benedict, M. I., Zuravin, S., & Stallings, R. Y. (1996). Adult functioning of children versus nonrelative
family foster homes. Child Welfare, 75 (5), 529-549.
■■ Braman, D. 2004. Doing time on the outside. Incarceration and family in urban America. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
■■ Brazzell, D. (2008). Merging local data to explore the experiences and needs of children of incarcerated parents.
Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center.
■■ Brown, S., Cohon, D., & Wheeler, R. (2002). African American extended families and kinship care: How
relevant is the foster care model for kinship care? Children and Youth Services Review, 24 (1/2), 53-77.
■■ Chapman, M. V., Wall, A., & Barth, R. P. (2004). Children’s voices: The perceptions of children in foster
care. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74 (3), 293-304.
■■ Child Trends DataBank (n.d.). Foster care. Retrieved December 22, 2008, from
http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/pdf/12_PDF.pdf
■■ Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2005, March). Kinship caregivers and the child welfare system.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Service. Children’s Bureau/ACYF. Retrieved
November 28, 2008, from http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/f_kinshi/f_kinshi.pdf
■■ Child Welfare Watch (2008, Winter). Against the clock: The struggle to move kids into permanent homes.
Child Welfare Watch, 15.
■■ Christian, S. (2008, September). Children in foster care with an incarcerated parent. Casey Family Programs.
Retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/EBB/2008/12164/T60964/
CHRISTIAN%20Children%20in%20Foster%20Care%20with%20an%20Inc.pdf
■■ Comfort, M. L. (2003). In the tube at San Quentin. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 32 (1), 77-107.
■■ Cuddeback, G. S. (2004). Kinship family foster care: A methodological and substantive synthesis of
research. Children and Youth Services Review, 26 (7), 623-639.
■■ CURE (2008). Same priorities for the 111th Congress. Newsletter. Washington, D.C.: Citizens United for
Rehabilitation of Errants.

34
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 34

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

r efe r e n ces

■■ Durose, M. R., & Langan, P. A. (2007). National Judicial Reporting Program: Felony sentences in state
courts, 2004. Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs.
■■ Dworsky, A. (n.d.). Foster care placement among children with incarcerated mothers. Chicago, Illinois:
University of Chicago, Chapin Hall Center for Children. Retrieved November 25, 2008, from http://www.
urban.org/Pressroom/thursdayschild/upload/Dworsky-TChandout.pdf
■■ Ehrensaft, M., Khashu, A., Ross, T., & Wamsley, M. (2003). Patterns of criminal conviction and
incarceration among mothers of children in foster care in New York City. New York: Vera Institute of Justice
and Administration for Children’s Services.
■■ Ehrle, J., Geen, R., & Clark, R. (2001). Children cared for by relatives: Who are they and how are they
faring? New Federalism: National Survey of America’s Families, B-28. Washington, D. C.: The Urban
Institute.
■■ Ehrle, J. & Geen, R. (2002). Kin and non-kin foster care - Findings from a national survey. Children and
Youth Services Review, 24 (1/2), 15-35.
■■ Genty, P H. (1998). Permanency planning in the context of parental incarceration: Legal issues and
recommendations. Child Welfare, 77(5), 543-560.
■■ Genty, P. M. (2008, Spring). The inflexibility of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and its unintended
impact upon the children of incarcerated parents and their families. CW360º - Children of Incarcerated
Parents (pp.10-11 & 30). St. Paul, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced Studies in
Child Welfare.
■■ Gibson, P. A. (2002). African American grandmothers as caregivers: Answering the call to help their
children. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 83, 35-43.
■■ Glaze, L. E., & Maruschak, L. M. (2008, August). Parents in prison and their minor children. Bureau of
Justice Statistics Special Report. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs.
■■ Gleeson, J. (2007). Kinship care research and literature: Lessons learned and directions for future research.
The Kinship Reporter, 1 (2). Child Welfare League of America. Retrieved December 18, 2008, from
http://www.cwla.org/programs/kinship/kinshipsummer2007.pdf
■■ Gleeson, J., Hsieh, C., Anderson, N., Seryak, C, Wesley, J., Choi, E. Hi, Ellis, R., Washington, T., Talley,
G. W., & Robinson, J. (2008). Individual and social protective factors for children in informal kinship care.
Final Report. Chicago, Illinois: University of Illinois at Chicago, Jane Addams College of Social Work.
■■ Gleeson, J. P., & Craig, L. C. (1994). Kinship care in child welfare: An analysis of states’ policies. Children
and Youth Services Review, 16, 7-31.
■■ Governor’s Office for Children, & The Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (2007,
December). Report to the joint committee on children, youth and families on programs and initiatives in
Maryland for children of incarcerated parents. Retrieved December 18, 2008, from http://www.urban.org/
Pressroom/thursdayschild/upload/Hiers-Incarcerated%20Parents%20Report%20Final.pdf
■■ Hairston, C. & Hess, P. (1989). Family ties: Maintaining child-parent bonds is important. Corrections
Today, 5l, 102-106.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 35

35
5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

■■ Hairston, C. (1995). Fathers in prison. In D. Johnson & K. Gables (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents
(pp. 31-40). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
■■ Hairston, C. (1998). The forgotten parent: Understanding the forces that influence incarcerated fathers’
relationships with their children. Child Welfare, 77, 617-838.
■■ Hairston, C. F. (2003). Social capital and family connections. Women, Girls and Criminal Justice, 45 (5),
67-68, 76.
■■ Hairston, C. F. (2003). Prisoners and their families: Parenting issues during incarceration. In J. Travis & M.
Waul, (Eds.), Prisoners once removed: The impact of incarceration and reentry on children, families, and
communities (pp. 259-282). Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
■■ Hairston, C.F. (2007). Focus on children with incarcerated parents: An overview of the research literature.
Baltimore, Maryland: The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
■■ Hairston, C. F., & Oliver, W, (2007). Domestic violence and prisoner reentry: Experiences of African American
men and women. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.
■■ Hairston, C. F. (2008, Spring). Children with parents in prison: Child welfare matters. CW360º - Children
of Incarcerated Parents, (pp.4 & 32). St. Paul, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced
Studies in Child Welfare.
■■ Hanlon, T. E., Carswell, S. B., & Rose, M. (2007). Research on the caretaking of children of incarcerated
parents: Findings and their service delivery implications. Children and Youth Services Review, 29 (3),
348-362.
■■ Hayward, R. A., & DePanfilis, D. (2007). Foster children with an incarcerated parent: Predictors of
reunification. Children and Youth Services Review, 29 (10), 1320-1334.
■■ Jeffries, J.M., Menghraj, S., & Hairston, C.F. (2001). Serving incarcerated and ex-offender fathers and their
families: A review of the field. Retrieved November 29, 2008, from www.vera.org/publications/
publications_5.asp?publication_id=20
■■ Johnson, D. (1995a). Children of criminal offenders and foster care. Family and Corrections Network
Rep., 22.
■■ Johnston, D. (I995b). Child custody issues of incarcerated mothers. The Prison Journal, 75(2), 222-238.
■■ Johnson-Garner, M. Y., & Meyers, S. A. (2003). What factors contribute to the resilience of AfricanAmerican children within kinship care? Children & Youth Care Forum, 32 (5), 255-269.
■■ Larson, A., & Swanson, M. (2008, Spring). Identifying children with incarcerated parents: The child
welfare data environment. CW360º - Children of Incarcerated Parents (pp.5 & 31). St. Paul, Minnesota:
University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare.
■■ Lawrence-Wills, S. (2004). Incarcerated mothers reports of their daughters’ antisocial behavior, maternal
supervision and mother-daughter relationship. Journal of Family Social Work, 8 (3), 55-73.
■■ Lee, A. F., Genty, M., & Laver, M. (2005). The impact of the Adoption and Safe Families Act on children of
incarcerated parents. Child Welfare League of America; Washington, D.C.: 2005.

36
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 36

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

r efe r e n ces

■■ Main, R., Macomber, J. E., & Geen, R. (2006). Trends in service receipt: Children in kinship care
gaining ground. New Federalism: National Survey of America’s Families, B-68. Washington, D. C.:
The Urban Institute.
■■ Margolies J. K., & Kraft-Stolar, T. (2006, February). When “free” means losing your mother: The collision of
child welfare and the incarceration of women in New York State. New York, N Y: The women in Prison Project
of the Correctional Association of New York.
■■ Messing, J. T. (2006). From the child’s perspective: A qualitative analysis of kinship care placements.
Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 1415-1434.
■■ Moses, M. C. (2008, June). Correlating incarcerated mothers, foster care and mother-child reunification.
Corrections Today and Tomorrow: A Compilation of Corrections-Related Articles. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
■■ Moses, M. C. (2006). Does parental incarceration increase a child’s risk for foster care placement? NIJ
Journal, 255, 12-14. Retrieved November 10, 2008 from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/jr000255.pdf
■■ Mumola, C. J. (2000). Incarcerated parents and their children. Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report.
Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs.
■■ National Conference of State legislatures. (2007, March). Kinship care legislative policy network news.
Retrieved August 29, 2008, from http://www.ncsl.org/programs/cyf/kinshipnews0307.htm
■■ Newell, D. A. (2008, Spring). Overview of the national project to implement the Bill of Rights for
Children of the Incarcerated. CW360º - Children of Incarcerated Parents (pp.21 & 31). St. Paul, Minnesota:
University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare.
■■ O’Donnell, J. M. (1995). Casework practice with fathers in kinship foster care. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago.
■■ Okagbue-Reaves, J. (2005). Kinship care: Analysis of the health and well-being of grandfathers raising
grandchildren using the Grandparent Assessment Tool and the Medical
■■ Outcomes Trust SF- 36 TM Health Survey. Journal of Family Social Work, 9 (2), 47-66.
■■ Philips, S. D. (2008, Spring). Parents’ involvement in the criminal justice system and children’s entry into
foster care: Findings and implications from two studies. CW360º - Children of Incarcerated Parents (pp.8 9). St. Paul, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare.
■■ Ross, T., Khashu, A., & Wamsley, M. (2004). Hard data on hard times: An empirical analysis of maternal
incarceration, foster care, and visitation. New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice. Retrieved November 28,
2008, from http://www.vera.org/publication_pdf/245_461.pdf
■■ Sabol, W. J., & Couture, H. (2008, June). Prison inmates at midyear 2007. Bureau of Justice Statistics
Bulletin. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
■■ Sabol, W. J., & Minton, T. D. (2008, June). Jail inmates at Midyear 2007. Bureau of Justice Statistics
Bulletin. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 37

37
5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

■■ Seymour, C., & Hairston, C.F. (Eds.) (2000). Children with parents in prison: Child welfare policy, program,
and practice issues. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Pub.
■■ Smith, A., Krisman, K., Strozier, A.L., & Marley, M. A. (2004). Breaking through the bars: Exploring the
experiences of addicted incarcerated parents whose children are cared for by relatives. Families in Society,
85(2), 187-200.
■■ Smithgall, C., Mason, S., Michels, L., LiCalsi, C., & Goerge, R. (2006, May). Caring for their children’s
children: Assessing the mental health needs and service experiences of grandparent caregiver families (Working
Paper). Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago, Chapin Hall Center for Children.
■■ Stoltzfus, E. (2008, October). Child welfare: The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act
of 2008. CRS Report for Congress. Retrieved November 10, 2008 from http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/081
1webcastfosteringcrsreport.pdf
■■ Strozier, A., & Armstrong, M. (2008, October). Issues in coparenting for grandmothers and incarcerated
mothers. Paper presented at the meeting of the Council on Social Work Education., Philadelphia, PA.
■■ Waldrop, D. P. (2003). Caregiving issues for grandmothers raising their grandchildren. Journal of Human
Behavior in the Social Environment, 7 (3/4), 201-223.
■■ Winokur, M. A., Crawford, G. A., Longobardi, R. C., & Valentine, D. P. (2008). Matched Comparison of
Children in Kinship Care and Foster Care on Child Welfare Outcomes. Families in Society: The Journal of
Contemporary Social Services, Vol. 89(3). Retrieved December 18, 2008, from www.familiesinsociety.org/
New/Teleconf/081007Winokur/89-3Winokur.pdf

38
101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 38

Kinship care when parents are incarcerated: What we know, what we can do

5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 39

5/28/09 3:08:57 PM

The Annie E. Casey Foundation
701 St. Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202

101478-01_Kinship_Paper06a.indd 40

5/28/09 3:08:57 PM