Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Controlled Clinical Trial
. 2022 Mar 24;10(1):79.
doi: 10.1186/s40359-022-00782-z.

Multi-level barriers and facilitators to implementing a parenting intervention in prison, perceptions from deliverers and responsible managers: a mixed-methods study

Affiliations
Controlled Clinical Trial

Multi-level barriers and facilitators to implementing a parenting intervention in prison, perceptions from deliverers and responsible managers: a mixed-methods study

Åsa Norman et al. BMC Psychol. .

Abstract

Background: Children of incarcerated parents run a high risk of poor health and own delinquency and positive parenting is vital for their healthy development. Internationally, parenting interventions for incarcerated parents suggest impacts on parenting and child behaviour outcomes. The intervention For Our Children's Sake (FOCS), was developed for incarcerated parents in Sweden and evaluated in a controlled trial with a parallel process evaluation during 2019-2021. This study constitutes part of the process evaluation and aims to describe barriers and facilitators for the implementation of FOCS, and how the intervention targets parents' needs, as perceived by delivering group leaders and responsible correctional inspectors.

Methods: In this mixed-methods study, group leaders (n = 23) and correctional inspectors (n = 12) in both intervention and control group of the FOCS trial responded to a quantitative questionnaire regarding factors of importance for intervention implementation. Group leaders (n = 12) and correctional inspectors (n = 6) in the intervention group also participated in qualitative interviews. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and comparison of means. Qualitative data were analysed inductively using qualitative content analysis.

Results: A synthesis of the quantitative and qualitative results showed that the topic of parenting and child issues in general was perceived as highly important to work with in prison, and FOCS to be an important programme in specific. At the same time, the implementation of FOCS was perceived as reliant on the individual engagement of group leaders and correctional inspectors and implementation was described as a struggle due to the scarce resources that were allowed for FOCS. Thus, additional resources and support from the Prison and Probation Service's management were called for to facilitate implementation of FOCS, and to make it an automatic part of prison activities.

Conclusion: This study showed that there was high engagement among deliverers and managers for working with parenting in prison, where the need among parents has been described as great. Additional resources and support within the overall Prison and Probation Service, is vital to facilitate implementation of FOCS and make it sustainable within the prisons. The findings can be used to refine an implementations structure for similar interventions in the prison or similar settings.

Keywords: CFIR; Child; Child delinquency; Children of incarcerated parents; Correctional services; Crime prevention; Criminal; Disadvantaged children; Implementation; Incarceration; Sweden.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Description of qualitative findings, themes, generic categories, and sub-categories within which barriers and facilitators for the implementation of FOCS in prison are found. Group leaders and correctional inspectors are both included in the overarching theme but have separate sub-themes. Categories and sub-categories are displayed for group leaders and correctional inspectors separately. In cases where sub-categories have been found in data from both group leaders and correctional inspectors, this is indicated by the same sub-category under both participant groups. In cases where sub-categories have not been reflected in data from correctional inspectors, cells have been left blank

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Turanovic JJ, Rodriguez N. Mental health service needs in the prison boom: the case of children of incarcerated mothers. Crim Justice Policy Rev. 2017;28(5):415–436.
    1. Murray J, Bijleveld C, Farrington D, Loeber R. Effects of parental incarceration on children: cross-national comparative studies. Washington: American Psychological Association; 2014.
    1. Murray J, Farrington DP, Seko I, Olsen RF. Parental imprisonment: effects of parental imprisonment on child antisocial behaviour and mental health: a systematic review. Campbell Syst Rev. 2009;5:1–105.
    1. Berman A, Steinhoff R, Koivumaa N. Barn med frihetsberövade föräldrar. Resultat från EU-studien COPING1 med fokus på Sverige. Norrköping: Kriminalvården; 2013.
    1. Dobbie W, Grönqvist H, Niknami S, Palme M, Priks M. The intergenerational effects of parental incarceration. NBER Working Paper Series. 2018;24186.

Publication types