Journal of the Institute

_T

his article examines the intersection of prisoner reentry and intimate partner violence in the African American community and the need for culturally competent interventions to address this important aspect of the transition from prison to the community. As a consequence of the increasing financial costs associated with the boom in prison construction, dramatic increases in rates of imprisonment, and the high rates of criminal recidivism and parole revocation, the federal government is leading a national effort to address the challenges that recently released prisoners experience when they return to the community (Taxman, Byrne, & James 2002).

Research on prisoner reentry and criminal recidivism has primarily placed emphasis on how unemployment, substance abuse, and inadequate housing adversely impact successful prisoner reentry (Petersilia 2000; Travis, Solomon, & Waul 2001; Visher & Travis 2003). However, very little attention has been devoted to considering the intersection of prisoner reentry, relationship conflict, and intimate partner violence as a distinct network of factors contributing to criminal recidivism and parole revocation.

Imprisonment, Prisoner Re-entry and African Americans
African American families and communities are disproportionately affected by prisoner reentry given the disproportionate rates of imprisonment and offender reentry among African Americans. For example, at year-end 2002, African Americans represented 45% of all inmates with sentences of more than one year, while white inmates accounted for 34% and Hispanic inmates, 18% (Harrison & Beck 2003). In addition, the incarceration rate of African American males is (3,437/100,000) eight times higher than the incarceration rate of white males (450/100,000). Moreover, in 1991, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that African American males had a 29% lifetime risk of serving at least one year in prison, six times higher than the risk for white males (Bonczar & Beck 1997). Currently, an estimated 10% of black males, age 25-29 were incarcerated at year-end 2002, compared to 2.4% of Hispanic males and about 1.2% of white males in the same age group (Harrison & Beck 2003).

In recent years nearly 600,000 prisoners are released annually from state and federal prisons in the United States (Langan & Levin 2002, Petersilia 2000). However, only 45% of parolees will successfully complete their parole term. It has been reported that within three years, 67% of former inmates were rearrested for a serious offense and 52% were returned to prison for a new criminal offense or a violation of parole (Langan & Levin 2002). Furthermore, parole violators represent one-third of prison admissions nationally (Bonczar & Glaze 1999). Hence, the disproportionate rate of imprisonment and post-incarceration community reentry of African American males has implications for family formation, community stability, and intimate partner violence in the African American community.

Intimate Partner Violence
Researchers, policy makers, and practitioners know very little about the intersection of prisoner reentry and intimate partner violence or how conflict in intimate relationships involving men on parole and their intimate female partners is related to criminal recidivism and parole revocation (Petersilia 2000; Travis, Solomon & Waul 2001). However, there is a body of research that reports that African Americans are disproportionately represented among perpetrators and victims of intimate partner violence (Hampton & Yung 1996; Rennison & Welchans 2000; Tjaden & Thoennes 2000). For example, in an analysis of national crime victim survey data, it was reported that each year between 1992 and 1996, an average of 12 per 1,000 black women experienced violence by an intimate, compared with fewer than 8 per 1,000 white women (Greenfeld 1998). Rennison and Welchans (2000) in a more recent analysis of national crime victimization data confirmed prior findings that indicate that African American women were victimized by intimate partners at significantly higher rates than women of other races between 1993 and 1998. For example, Rennison and Welchans (2000) found that between 1993 and 1998 both African American men and women were victimized by intimate partners at significantly higher rates than any other race. More specifically, African American women experienced intimate partner violence at a rate 35% higher than that of white women and 2 _ times greater than the rate of women on other races. Furthermore, nearly one-third of African American women experience intimate partner violence in their lifetimes compared with one-fourth of white women (Tjaden & Thoennes 2000). Among male victims of intimate partner violence, African American men experienced intimate partner violence at a rate 62% higher than white men and 2 _ times the rate of other race men (Rennison & Welchans 2000). Additionally, rates of non-lethal intimate violence are highest among black women, women age 16-24, women in the lowest income categories, women living in rental housing and women residing in urban areas (Campbell, Webster, Koziol-McLain, Block, Campbell, & Curry 2003). Research also indicates that the demographic profile of black women with the greatest risk for experiencing intimate partner violence (Campbell et al., 2002; Benson & Litton-Fox 2004) parallels the demographic profile of black males who have the highest rates of incarceration (Clear & Rose 2002; Travis, Solomon & Waul 2001).

Research that describes the incidence and prevalence of domestic homicide is another source of data that consistently indicates that African Americans are disproportionately represented among perpetrators and victims of acts of intimate partner violence (Dawson & Langan 1994). In 1999, domestic homicide accounted for 3.5% of all homicides among black men and 24% of all homicides of black women.

One of the most consistent and interesting findings reported in the literature on domestic homicide is that African Americans are more likely to be involved in domestic homicides characterized by a reciprocal patterning of offending among men and women compared to men and women of other racial groups. For example, in a study of murder cases in eight urban counties, it was found that African American women were just as likely to kill their husbands as black husbands were to kill their wives. Among white domestic homicide victims, for example, 38% of victims were husbands and 62% of victims were wives. In contrast, among blacks, 47% of the victims were husbands and 53% of victims were wives (Dawson & Langan 1994).

There are several factors that may contribute to the race-specific reciprocal patterning of domestic homicide offending. First, racial differences in domestic homicide may reflect the fact that black women are more likely to self report having experienced severe acts of intimate partner violence, compared to white women. Thus, higher rates of severe intimate partner violence victimization may increase the number of conflict-ridden situational encounters in which black women may feel compelled to commit acts of victim-precipitated domestic homicide as a means of self-defense or retaliation (Mann 1996; Wolfgang 1958). Second, black women are more likely than are white women to reside in communities experiencing high rates of community violence (Jenkins 2002). Consequently, black women may be more likely than white women to become involved in romantic relationships with male partners who are actively involved in street-related activities (e.g., criminal activity, drug use, hustling, and street gangs, etc.) that encourage the acceptance of pro-violence values and norms (Oliver 1998). Moreover, black men who center their identity and routine activities in “the streets” may import pro-violence values and norms into intimate relationships and believe that resorting to violence against women is an acceptable means of resolving relationship disputes and maintaining control (Dunlap, Johnson & Rath 1996; Richie 1996). Finally, African American women are disproportionately represented among women who are actively engaged in illegal drug abuse, other types of criminal activity, and have prior histories involving incarceration. Thus, women who live lives characterized by social stigma and marginality tend to be isolated from sources of informal and formal support that increase the likelihood that they will resort to acts of retaliatory violence as a means of self-defense (Dunlap, Johnson & Rath, 1996; Richie 1996).

Intimate Partner Violence, Correctional Populations & Prisoner Reentry
Imprisonment is a major source of stress and relationship disruption among incarcerated men and their intimate female partners (Fishman 1990; Hairston 1995; Tripp 2003) According to Prison Fellowship, only 15% of married couples are able to endure a period of incarceration of one partner. Of the 15% who do stay together during the prison term, only an estimated 3 to 5 percent are still together one year after release (Dallao 1997).

Although sparse, there is some emerging data that describes patterns of intimate partner violence among incarcerated populations. This research suggests that male inmates who report abuse are far more likely than women to report that their abusers were family members (Harlow 1999). In contrast, incarcerated women are particularly vulnerable to experiencing intimate partner violence. In a study of prior abuse reported by inmates and probationers, female inmates and probationers reported abused by both intimates and family members. Most abused women reported that their abusers had been current or prior husbands or boyfriends: 61% of abused women in State prison, 66% in Federal prison, 57% on probation, and 43% in local jails (Harlow 1999). Furthermore, incarcerated men self-report high rates of intimate partner battering. For example, White et al. (2002) have reported that 1 in 3 men incarcerated in federal prisons for low risk crimes acknowledged recent physical violence against intimate female partners; and 1 in 10 reported severe violence toward women.

Sources of Conflict
Conflict is normal in intimate relationships. However, imprisonment and community reentry following a period of imprisonment pose a unique set of challenges for intimate partners. Most men who are in prison are single or divorced and less than _ are married. The majority of men in prison are fathers of dependent children (Hairston 1998). However, where men were married prior to their incarceration, research suggests that both marital and non-marital intimate relationships are severely strained and frequently terminate during imprisonment (King 1993; Hairston 1995). The existence of significant levels of conflict between incarcerated men and their female partners is supported in findings reported in prison visitation research. For example, wives are seldom prisoners’ most frequent visitors. Furthermore, Hairston (1995) found that in only 50% of cases were wives, the most important source of support for prisoners.

Many African American males return to the community and their intimate female partners angry, frustrated, poor, and socially stigmatized. These emotions and various community reentry challenges may serve as a catalyst for conflict and violence in their intimate relationships (King 1999). However, there are no data on parolees and their involvement in acts of intimate partner violence (Petersilia 2000; Travis, Solomon & Waul. 2001). For example, studies of parole revocation have not considered to what extent arrests for new offenses or technical violations leading to parole revocation are associated with intimate partner conflict or acts of intimate partner violence (Hughes, Wilson, & Beck 2002). However, there is research which shows that incarcerated and paroled men experience significant levels of conflict with their intimate female partners during and following their incarceration (Fishman 1990; King 1993; Tripp 2003). In his study of incarcerated African American men, for example, Tripp (2003, p.29) found that “conflict between husband and wives and with former partners… was a central subject in most of the inmates’ descriptions of their current family relations.” In addition, in a study of the social-psychological processes affecting recidivism and desistance from crime, Zamble and Quinsey (1997) found that interpersonal conflict with heterosexual partners was a common problem mentioned by recidivists. Consequently, conflicts that emerge between incarcerated men and their intimate female partners, while they are incarcerated, have the potential to lead incarcerated men and their intimate female partners to anticipate conflict, and even acts of intimate partner violence upon the man’s return to the community (Fishman 1990; King 1999; Tripp 2003; Bobbitt & Nelson 2004).

A major factor contributing to conflict between incarcerated men and their wives and girlfriends during and following incarceration involves questions of fidelity, particularly suspicions and accusations that their wives or girlfriends have not remained faithful to them during the period of forced separation (Fishman 1990; King 1993). Furthermore, research that examines the impact of incarceration on the families of incarcerated men has reported that during their period of incarceration, incarcerated men, especially those who are not married to the mothers of their children often fear that other men will replace them as father figures in the lives of their children (Hairston1998). Thus, changes in family and intimate relationship dynamics may emerge as a major source of conflict with one’s wife or girlfriend during a man’s imprisonment and carry over into his transition from prison to the community (Fishman 1990). For example, Tripp (2003) found that conflict with the mother of one’s child was a common subject among men who were no longer involved in a relationship with the child’s mother. Additionally, efforts of incarcerated men to monitor and control the household of their female partners from inside prison, unrealistic expectations regarding the ability of wives or girlfriends to meet the incarcerated man’s emotional and economic needs, the inability to meet the economic expectations of wives or girlfriends upon release, and resuming involvement in fast living and street activities have been found to be sources of conflict that emerge between incarcerated men and their intimate female partners during or following their imprisonment (Fishman 1990; King 1993, 1999; Bobbitt & Nelson 2004; Taxman, Byrne & Young, 2002).
Cultural Competence
Family support during and following a man’s incarceration has been found to have a positive effect on successful transitions from prison to community (Visher & Travis 2003; Nelson, Dees & Allen 1999). Yet, incarcerated men and men on parole have access to very few resources to help them reestablish family ties or cope with intimate relationships that have been strained or disrupted as a consequence of imprisonment (King 1993; Travis, Solomon & Waul 2001). As state corrections departments begin to develop comprehensive prisoner reentry plans with the goal of reducing criminal recidivism and facilitating parolees’ successful social integration in the community, it is essential that correctional agencies collaborate with social service practitioners, community and faith-based organizations to develop interventions that are culturally competent to address the challenges associated with prisoner reentry generally, as well as the intersection of prison reentry and intimate partner violence among various racial and ethnic sub-groups. Furthermore, cultural competency is essential to accomplishing National Offender Reentry Initiative goals that place emphasis on establishing collaborations between correctional agencies, community-based organizations, and local faith-based institutions.

The term cultural competence refers to the skill set of a counselor, social worker or other interventionist and/or the various prevention and intervention strategies that place emphasis on acknowledging and incorporating the “lived experiences” and “social realities” of a distinct sub-group (racial, ethnic, religious, sexual orientation, or age-specific) who are members of a larger treatment population to facilitate personal change and transformation (Williams 1999). Proponents of cultural competence argue that by acknowledging the “lived experiences and social realities” of distinct racial and ethnic groups, interventionists are able to draw on culture-specific understandings and strengths to facilitate personal change (King 1999; Williams 1998, 1999). Identification of the “lived experiences and social realities” of particular racial and ethnic sub-groups is not foreign to the experiences and informal practices of correctional personnel (Clear & Cole 2000). However, the inclusion of culture-specific content in the policy, protocol, training, and practices underlying traditional correctional interventions and contemporary prisoner reentry initiatives is rare (Clear & Cole 2000).

In practice, cultural competence involves some very specific organizational behavior and cultural program efforts. According to Williams and Becker (1994), culturally competent organizational behavior consists of activities a domestic violence service provider or other agency undertakes to prepare itself to work with a culturally diverse or a culturally distinct and homogeneous treatment population, such as providing staff with literature concerning effective service delivery to racial and ethnic minorities; training staff to recognize how various structural and culture-specific experiences are essential to achieving culturally competent delivery of client services; seeking qualified consultants for conducting staff trainings and engaging in self-evaluations and active implementation of program changes to achieve cultural competence. In addition, cultural competence program efforts are “those activities that not only demonstrate organizational preparedness to work with culturally different clients, but also demonstrate a willingness to work with them,” such as outreach activities to educate the community about the program and its goals; show interest in and support for the minority community generally; encourage the minority community to utilize batterer treatment services; and offer treatment that is sensitive to the needs of the population being served (Williams & Becker 1994: 289). In addition, culturally competent intervention with African American should include efforts designed to enhance their capacity to problem solve in terms their unique social realities and challenges.
Rationale for Culturally Competent Intervention

Given the disproportionate rates of imprisonment among African American males, African American families and communities disproportionately experience the consequences and challenges associated with prisoner reentry (Harris & Miller 2003; King, 1993). Studies of incarcerated men and their intimate female partners have found that both partners tend to experience stress when an offender returns home (Fishman 1990). Furthermore, the pressures associated with imprisonment and community transition are compounded by the additional stressors that many African American families experience, including poverty, underemployment, blocked access to educational opportunities, high rates of life threatening diseases, chronic exposure to community violence, and a complicated relationship with the criminal justice system (Wilson 1987, 1996). As a result, this combination of structural and community-level stressors creates conditions that contribute to the high rates of relationship conflict and intimate partner violence among African Americans (Dixon, 1998; Hampton, Oliver, & Magarian 2003; Hare & Hare 1989).

Cultural insensitivity and incompetence among domestic violence service providers has been found to be a major factor contributing to the low rates of program completion among African Americans and other people of color (Williams & Becker 1994; Williams 1999). For example, treatment completion evaluations indicate that black men and women have lower rates of treatment program completion than their white counterparts (Gondolf, 1997; Williams & Becker 1994). Thus, incorporating “minority-specific themes in the treatment and intervention process is important because such information may partially explain the context in which members of distinct racial or ethnic sub-groups rationalize and justify violent behavior and may determine what kinds of interventions will prove effective” (Williams 1998, 276). In addition, the use of culturally relevant content is essential to increase African American males’ involvement in treatment and the likelihood of successful treatment outcomes (Williams 1998, 1999). Furthermore, Williams (1998) has argued that to transform African American men who batter, these men must have accurate information about their history as healthy (non-dysfunctional, non-pathological) people. They must meet and interact with healthy models. Men who batter must be taught the rules of African American male health, which include: living in balance, learning to negotiate life’s challenges adaptively and without violence, and being respectful of African American women and children. They also must be helped to identify how they contribute to problems in their relationships with their intimate partners.

Consistent with Williams’ (1998, 1999) call for culturally relevant interventions, King (1993) has advocated, based on his clinical work with incarcerated African American men and their families, for the development of culturally appropriate prison-based clinical programs that focus on helping incarcerated African American males develop the following: (1) a positive social and cultural identity; (2) a culturally relevant belief system that will help them survive in a hostile and racist society; (3) a sense of compassion, responsibility, and respect for their community; and (4) social support required to overcome pessimism, despair, and hopelessness.

A Framework for Assessing Cultural Competency
Correctional caseworkers, parole officers, and domestic violence service providers are in need of training to assist them in the development of culturally competent skills and interventions to identify and address relationship conflict and intimate partner violence involving African American men who are incarcerated or recently released from prison. In addition, tools are needed to assess the cultural competency of reentry interventions developed to address intimate partner violence.

Williams and Becker (1994) have developed a cultural competency typology that may be used to assess the extent to which community or prison-based domestic violence interventions incorporate elements of cultural competence. Furthermore, the Williams and Becker Cultural Competence Typology may be used to inform the development of prison and community-based interventions designed to address the intersection of prisoner reentry and intimate partner violence in the African American community. The Williams and Becker (1994) Cultural Competency Typology is based on five distinct types of interventions that range from a complete lack of culturally relevant content to interventions deliberately designed to address battering behavior engaged in by African American men.

The Color Blind Approach / “One Size Fits All”

Most domestic violence interventions adopt the color-blind approach. That is, they are based on the assumption that men who batter are motivated by same internal and external factors .This approach ignores differences in lived experiences and social reality among racial and ethnic sub-groups.

Healthy Heterogeneous

Domestic violence interventions that are consistent with the healthy heterogeneous approach place emphasis on having an intervention team that is racially and ethnically diverse. The advantage of having a racially and gender heterogeneous intervention team as group facilitators is that the treatment team models inter-gender and inter-racial cooperation and team work. Furthermore, a major goal of healthy heterogeneous interventions is that the facilitators highlight the universal nature of the problem subject to intervention. That is, that intimate partner violence is common among all racial and ethnic groups and has similar “root causes” across groups. But, this approach also provides opportunities for group workers and group members to have a conversation that considers different manifestations of intimate partner violence among diverse racial and ethnic groups.

Culturally Specific Milieu

Domestic violence service providers who adopt the culturally specific milieu approach make an extra effort to locate the treatment program in the minority community in order that it be accessible to particular racial and ethnic minorities. It is not uncommon for culturally relevant issues to surface in batterers groups based on the culturally specific milieu approach. However, these group workers are reluctant to address race-specific cultural issues because they believe that to focus on cultural issues provides batterers with excuses for their behavior. Hence, they devalue the significance of cultural issues to facilitate and sustain change in batterers.

A major strength of the culturally specific milieu is the emphasis placed on ensuring that a critical mass of the treatment population is from the local community. However, one of the disadvantages of the culturally specific milieu type of domestic violence intervention is that providers of this type of intervention generally assume that merely having a critical mass of a particular racial or ethnic minority group among the staff and client population is sufficient to achieve cultural competence.
Culturally Focused

Culturally focused domestic violence interventions have been designed with emphasis placed on the cultural strengths of specific racial or ethnic minority groups. Culturally focused treatment providers provide their staff with literature and trainings designed to achieve effective delivery of treatment services to racial and ethnic minorities. In addition, interventions that are culturally focused include program components designed to engage and educate the community about intimate partner violence in their respective communities and attempts to mobilize the community to become proactive in addressing intimate partner violence. Providers of culturally focused domestic violence interventions show interest in and support for the minority community generally. Culturally focused treatment providers seek out qualified consultants to conduct staff training on cultural competence. In addition, they use social realities of cultural experiences of the client population to gain insight into the causes of domestic violence as a means of facilitating positive attitudinal and behavioral change. In addition, culturally focused domestic violence interventions routinely engage in self evaluation and active implementation of program changes to achieve cultural competence. As well, these interventions emphasize the importance assisting clients develop a positive self and racial group identity (Williams 1998, 1999).

Culturally Centered

Culturally centered interventions to address intimate personal violence among African Americans are rare because mainstream domestic violence providers are reluctant to establish interventions that target a particular racial group (Williams, 1999). A major feature of culturally centered domestic violence interventions involves addressing the structural and social realities of African Americans generally and the client population particularly (Williams, 1999). This type of intervention draws on African American cultural strengths and practices to guide and facilitate change and transformation. For example, reliance on extended kin as change agents, African American cultural rituals (libation), and Afro-centric values (e.g. the principles of KWANZAA) have been promoted as an alternative value system based on traditional African and African American cultural practices have the potential to transform maladaptive behavior. In addition, proponents of culturally centered interventions to address intimate partner violence and other issues affecting incarcerated African American men and their families have called for the use of various forms of African American popular culture (e.g. blues, R& B, Hip Hop music, lyrics, and videos, and Black gospel plays) to raise community awareness and to facilitate personal transformation of client populations by relying on African American cultural artifacts to facilitate change (King, 1993, 1999; Oliver, 2000; Williams, 1998, 1999).

Conclusion
As correctional organizations and community-based organizations begin to collaborate to facilitate successful prisoner transitions from prison to the community, they must address relationship conflict and intimate partner violence as a fundamental feature of comprehensive prisoner reentry planning. Research has demonstrated that the inability to cope with role strain causes many African American men to withdraw from family responsibilities and committed relationships and to engage in a range of problematic behaviors, including criminal activity following a period of incarceration (Bowman, 1989). A commitment to the provision of culturally appropriate prison and community-based interventions will increase the capacity of correctional caseworkers, parole officers, domestic violence service providers, and treatment groups to address the authentic social and cultural experiences of incarcerated and paroled African American men who batter and those at risk of battering their intimate female partners. However, this can only be achieved if such men are helped to develop skills in problem solving and how to be non-violent in the community and in intimate partner relationships.