Canines and Inmates

Introduction

The title of “man’s best friend” has been assigned to the canine since the beginning of time. That may be a bit of an exaggeration, but generally the word or image of a “dog” comes to mind. Research shows that the exact origin and time of the first domesticated dog is unknown, but most likely began with a domesticated Siberian wolf. The purpose of domesticating can be traced back to early hunters, beginning 27,000 to 40,000 years ago, although evidence does show domestication may have began 15,000 years ago. (Jacobson, 2016) Genetic studies show that domesticated dogs first appeared in China and the Middle East, most likely occurring from natural selection. “Wolves may have been trying to take advantage of resources humans had at the time, or humans may have just been introduced to the animals in an area in which they didn’t previously live.” (Chan, 2016)

So, what exactly makes dogs so special to humans and creates that special bond? Extensive research in prisons, veterans with PTSD, and dogs as emotional support animals shows that dogs have many benefits. One of these many concluded benefits is the release of oxytocin, a hormone in the brain that regulates social interaction, empathy, and generosity. For those suffering from trauma, for example, veterans with PTSD, a dog can maintain a sense of reality in settings that present stressors and even help regulate sleep. Scientists know that humans and dogs have a long history, developing an important place within society and households, many families considering dogs to be family members and not just pets. Because dogs offer a clearly positive presence within households, the effects of human-dog interaction have been pushed into the walls of prisons, where inmates can experience the benefits of working with “man’s best friend.” This paper will continue to explore the published evidence of the benefits dog-therapy provides to inmates.

Research Purpose & Questions

The purpose of this paper is to examine current and recently published peer-reviewed journal articles, as well as publicly published articles on the positive effects of dog-therapy programs and prison inmates. Additionally, this paper aims to answer two research questions:

1. What are the specific positive effects of dog-therapy programs in United States prisons?
2. What specific barriers do prisons face when attempting to implement dog-therapy programs into a prison system?

Dog-therapy programs have become a more focused topic in criminal justice studies, more specifically when discussing dog-therapy as an option for rehabilitation. Before proceeding with answering the specific research questions, it is important to note that rehabilitation is one of six criminal justice models. “The rehabilitation model embraces the notion that, given the proper care and treatment, criminals can be changed into productive, law-abiding citizens.” (Siegel, 2012, p. 570)

Aside from prisons, dog-therapy programs have shown promise with other rehabilitation purposes. As mentioned before, veterans with PTSD have been assigned/adopted dogs to assist in their day-to-day activities; dogs can alert children and/or adults suffering from epilepsy when a seizure is about to take place; anxiety is a common disorder amongst Americans and dogs trained as support animals (SA) or emotional support animals (ESA) offer relief from such disorders. Behind prison walls, dogs offer the chance for inmates to learn new skills, coincide in more peaceful conditions, and create a sense of purpose to those that may feel forgotten.

Research Question One

The first animal-assisted therapy program was introduced to a prison in 1975 by accident. The effects an injured animal, specifically a sparrow, could have on the inmates of Lima State Hospital, were unexpected, but promising. (McCormick, 2016) During the next few decades, the benefits of animal-assisted programs in prisons have gained recognition in their positive impacts of inmates’ behavior and overall well-being behind prison walls. Since the rise of the first jail in 1790, named the Walnut Street Jail, to the construction of the Auburn prison in 1816, punishment and corrections have made positive progress and advancements. (Siegel, 2012) However, even in the 21st century, prisons still face many difficulties with violent outbursts, high depression rates, and failure to properly rehabilitate inmates that will once again have the opportunity to re-enter society.

According to statistics collected in 2017:

…more than 2.3 million people in 1,719 state prisons, 102 federal prisons, 901 juvenile correctional facilities, 3,163 local jails, and 76 Indian Country jails as well as in military prisons, immigration detention facilities, civil commitment centers, and prisons in the US territories. (Wagner & Rabuy, 2017)

Each year over 600,000 people reenter the community, some will be re-offenders, but others will plant to and succeed in becoming active members of society and will not re-enter the justice system. Prisons were established for multiple purposes including protecting society from harmful individuals, deterring victims from seeking vengeance, and as a form of punishment for those that have committed misdeeds. Currently, there remains many debates on the success and structure of prisons within the United States, many surrounding issues of racial profiling and discrimination, as well as an unbalanced justice process. As important as these issues are, the focus of this paper is on what can currently be done, such as implementing dog-therapy programs behind cell walls.

As mentioned previously, dogs help people in healing processes by balancing oxytocin, the hormone that helps regulate emotional response. (Furst, 2014) For veterans with PTSD, balancing this hormone is extremely important for success in functioning in everyday life activities, such as running errands or even going to the movies. According to Allison and Ramaswamy (2016) about 1.25 million inmates suffer from mental disorders such as anxiety and depression. There are many benefits of dog-therapy programs in prisons, such as alleviating these disorders and decreasing the everyday stressors of incarceration. Prisoners are not just handed dogs, but must earn the privilege of handling a dog, and even be involved in training dogs for SA or ESA purposes. (McCormack, 2016) For example, a recent approach to dog-therapy is actually having inmates train dogs to serve veterans with PTSD. “With this model, both inmates and veterans are benefiting from the healing nature of human–animal interactions.” (Furst, 2014) These dogs not only serve the purpose of helping inmates and providing emotional balance, but then move on to provide support to veterans.

The opportunity to train dogs for future purposes also gives inmates responsibility and personal accountability. This responsibility also keeps inmates from essentially having psychotic breaks. Many inmates become withdrawn and can develop more hostile tendencies. Working with a dog provides an outlet different from prison life, and also creates a positive outlook for an otherwise dreary and depressive setting for many.

When individuals are kept away from society, they can become institutionalized. As the one participant expressed, he had become very withdrawn and bitter after spending so much time in an institution. That would have made it very difficult for him to then transition back into society following his release. (Rabuy et al, 2017)

Aside from the benefits that dogs provide as support animals and in the opportunity to be trained, the impact inmates have on the dogs should not be ignored. Many, if not all, of the dogs used for training in prison programs are dogs pulled from shelters where they would have otherwise been euthanized. This is a fairly inexpensive and resourceful way for these programs to acquire dogs, but most importantly give these dogs a second chance at life and do so by serving as companions.

Research Question Two

It is clear that there are numerous benefits to implementing dog-therapy programs in prisons (including juvenile detention centers). Unfortunately, there are also barriers to these programs. The barriers that exist are not focused on the effects dogs have on inmates but are more centered around resource issues and how the general public perceives these programs. Although the programs are generally very inexpensive and there is currently not a limit to providing dogs for training, there is a limit to existing programs to serve the 2000+ prisons in the United States and staffing enough personnel to support the programs. The personnel must undergo training to affectively operate within a prison and efficiently train inmates to produce successful results with their canines. (Allison et al, 2016)

Limited resources are not the only barrier to implementing dog-therapy programs. The interactions between inmate and dog show a strong, positive emotional response. Inmates develop bonds with their assigned canines, but the of course the dogs cannot take up permanent residency inside the prisons. For families dogs are considered pets and family members, where they can see their pet every day, but for inmates this emotional attachment can be damaging when it is time for the dog to leave the program and fulfill their purpose. “Ultimately, though, it is the sadness when the dogs must be returned to the community that is an added challenge to the prisoners, the program, and the dogs themselves.” (McCormack, 2016) Because of this emotional strain on an already stressful environment, it is important that inmates understand the impact that they have provided for the dog and the person potentially receiving the dog for support. Programs hold graduations for both the dog and the inmate, showcasing both of their successes, offering a little relief to the negative emotional strain that can occur when the dog and inmate are finally separated.

Some may view prisoners as not “worthy” of the affection of a dog or the opportunity to participate in such a program as to train dogs as service animals. The purpose of these programs is to rehabilitate prisoners so that they may re-enter society and that recidivism rates will decrease. As discussed before these programs also offer dogs a second chance where they would have otherwise been euthanized. The opinion of the public is little to worry about when considering the overall environment of prisons. Although prisons are closely monitored with trained personnel, dogs are at risk for being exposed to high-stress, high-violent environments. Because inmates become attached to their dogs, studies have shown that prisoners will seek “retribution” for those that attack or harm their dog. (McCormack, 2017) These programs are considered therapy, but they also come with restrictions because the dogs are expected to pass training programs. Other prisoners should not be touching or feedings the dogs, except for the prisoner training the dog. These issues can hold prisons back from participating in dog-therapy programs and restrict prisoners from experiencing the possible benefits of such programs that will better assist them readjusting to society.

A final barrier is found within the training program. There is not a standard method that programs use for training dogs, which can cause complications in the abilities of the dogs and the needs of those receiving the dogs. These groups are competitive amongst each other and are sometime contending for the same limited resources. (Furst, 2014)

Conclusion

Both the qualitative and quantitative research published about dog-therapy programs in prisons does not show that these training programs are more affective than those that take place outside of prisons. The published literature shows that dog-therapy programs in prisons have extremely positive benefits for both inmates and the dogs. Overall the presence of dogs helps regulate emotional response, decreasing anxiety and depression in inmates. Dogs give inmates a sense of purpose, increase self-esteem, provide an opportunity for added responsibility and personal accountability, and offer a connection to the outside world. Inmates report that they feel interactions with dogs are free of judgement and scrutiny.

There have been many studies led on the topic of this paper, numerous focusing on the benefits of dogs with veterans suffering from PTSD and dogs with inmates. However, further studies still need to be led on the presence of dogs and their benefits. For now, it appears that the existing research shares many similarities in the findings, some include the listed benefits in the previous paragraph. Other similarities are shown in the existing barriers: limited barriers, emotional distress from separation, and overall prison environments.

In summary, dog-therapy programs inside prisons are a promising and inexpensive approach to rehabilitation for prisoners that will reenter society. The outcome of these programs serves many groups: inmates, dogs, and the recipient of the trained dog.

References

Allison, M. & Ramaswamy, M. (2016). Adapting animal-assisted therapy trials to prison-based animal programs. Public Health Nursing, 33(5), p. 472-480. DOI: 10.1111/phn.12276

Chan, M. (2016, August 25). The mysterious history behind humanity’s love of dogs. Time. Retrieved Saturday, March 3, 2018 from time.com/4459684/national-dog-day-history- domestic-dogs-wolves/

Furst, G. (2014). Prisoners, pups, & PTSD: The grass roots response to veterans with PTSD. Contemporary Justice Review, 18(4), p. 449-466. DOI: 10.1080/10282580.2015.1093688

Jacobson, L. (2016, August 26). The history of dogs as pets. ABC News. Retrieved Saturday, March 3, 2018 from abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/history-dogs-pets/story?id=41671149

McCormick, J. (2016). Benefit of animal-assisted therapy programs in prison. ESSAI, 14(27), p. 102-105. Available at dc.cod.edu/essai/vol14/issl/27

Neese, B. (2015). Man’s best friend: How dog training is affecting prison rehabilitation. Alvernia University. Retrieved Saturday, March 3, 2018 from online.alvernia.edu/how-dog- training-is-affecting-prison-rehabilitation/

Rabuy, B. & Wagner, P. (2017, March 14). Mass incarceration: The whole pie 2017. Prison Policy Initiative. Retrieved Sunday, March 4, 2018 from www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2017.html

Siegel, L. (2012). Criminology (11th edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Turner, W. (2007). The experiences of offenders in a prison canine program. Federal Probation Journal, 71(1), p. Retrieved Saturday, March 3, 2018 from www.uscourts.gov

Wodder, S. (2014). Exploring perceived benefits of and barriers to the use of pet therapy dogs in a private school for children with special needs. PCOM Psychology Dissertations. Retrieved Sunday, March 4, 2018 from digitalcommons.pcom.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article= 1305&context=psychology_dissertations