International Journal of Law And Criminology
1
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue05 2025
PAGE NO.
1-5
The Role of Emotional and Instrumental Support in
Reducing Recidivism Among Ex-Prisoners
Dr. Nadine Fischer
Department of Social Work, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Received:
03 March 2025;
Accepted:
02 April 2025;
Published:
01 May 2025
Abstract:
This study explores the pivotal role of social support networks in shaping the post-prison lives of
individuals, focusing on how different types of support
—
emotional, instrumental, and informational
—
affect their
reintegration into society. Using a mixed-methods approach, the research includes surveys, interviews, and
observational data from 150 recently released prisoners across two rehabilitation programs. The findings reveal
that strong social support networks significantly reduce recidivism, enhance mental health, and improve family
relationships and employment prospects. Emotional support, particularly from family and close friends, was found
to be the most influential, while instrumental support (such as housing and job assistance) is crucial but less
consistently available. Conversely, individuals with limited support or negative relationships faced greater
difficulties reintegrating, often resulting in recidivism. The study highlights the need for comprehensive
reintegration programs that not only provide practical resources but also foster healthy social connections. The
research provides recommendations for policymakers and rehabilitation programs to strengthen social support
structures for former prisoners, thereby improving their post-prison outcomes and reducing the likelihood of
reoffending.
Keywords:
Social Support Networks, Post-Prison Reintegration, Recidivism, Emotional Support, Instrumental
Support, Family Relationships, Employment Opportunities, Mental Health, Prisoner Rehabilitation, Reentry
Programs, Social Stigma, Post-Prison Life, Community Reintegration.
Introduction:
The transition from prison to society
presents significant challenges for individuals who have
been incarcerated. For many former prisoners,
reentering society can be an overwhelming experience
marked by social stigma, limited employment
opportunities, and emotional distress. Research has
consistently shown that one of the most critical factors
in successful reintegration is the presence of social
support networks
—
the relationships and resources
that provide emotional, psychological, and practical
assistance during the post-prison transition.
Social support networks are often composed of family,
friends,
community
groups,
social
service
organizations, and even online communities. These
networks can provide emotional support by offering a
sense of belonging and reducing feelings of isolation,
and instrumental support by helping with financial
resources, housing, employment, or legal matters.
In the context of post-prison life, the importance of
social support cannot be overstated. Studies have
suggested that individuals who have strong, positive
social support networks are less likely to reoffend and
more likely to successfully reintegrate into society.
However, the quality of social support can vary widely,
with some individuals receiving strong, positive
support, while others may experience rejection or
negative reinforcement, especially if they have limited
or broken ties with family and society.
Despite its importance, research on the specific role of
social support networks in shaping post-prison life
remains underexplored. The current study aims to fill
this gap by examining the role of social support in post-
prison life, focusing on how different types of support
networks influence reintegration outcomes, including
employment, family relationships, mental health, and
recidivism.
Research Objectives
This study seeks to explore the role of social support
International Journal of Law And Criminology
2
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
networks in shaping the lives of individuals after their
release from prison. Specifically, the study will:
1.
Investigate the different types of social support
(emotional, informational, and instrumental) available
to ex-prisoners and how these support systems vary
across different demographic groups.
2.
Examine how positive and negative support
networks impact the mental health, employment
opportunities, and family relationships of individuals
after prison.
3.
Analyze the relationship between social
support and recidivism rates, identifying how social
support networks may contribute to reducing the
likelihood of reoffending.
4.
Explore the challenges individuals face in
establishing and maintaining social support networks
post-incarceration.
Significance of the Study
This research is significant in that it explores a key
factor that influences the success or failure of post-
prison reintegration. By examining how social support
networks affect individuals in the post-prison phase,
the findings of this study can provide valuable insights
for policymakers, social service providers, and
organizations focused on prison reform and
rehabilitation. The results can help shape effective
reentry programs and post-prison support systems
aimed at reducing recidivism, enhancing mental health
outcomes, and improving the quality of life for ex-
prisoners.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
This study adopts a mixed-methods approach,
integrating both qualitative and quantitative research
methods. The combination of these methods allows for
a comprehensive understanding of the complex role of
social support networks in post-prison life.
Participants
The study includes 150 participants, all of whom have
been recently released from prison. Participants were
selected from a diverse set of individuals, representing
different ages, genders, ethnicities, and socio-
economic backgrounds, to ensure a representative
sample. The participants are recruited from two
rehabilitation programs in urban areas, one offering
psychological counseling and job training, and another
that focuses on family reintegration and community
support.
Data Collection Methods
1.
Surveys: Participants are asked to complete a
survey that includes both closed and open-ended
questions designed to assess their social support
networks, experiences of mental health challenges,
employment status, and recidivism likelihood. Survey
items also include questions about their relationships
with family and friends, the quality and frequency of
social support they receive, and their perceptions of
reintegration challenges.
2.
Interviews: Semi-structured interviews are
conducted with a subset of participants to gather
deeper qualitative insights. These interviews explore
the nat
ure of social support in the participants’ lives,
focusing on how emotional, informational, and
instrumental support has impacted their mental health,
family dynamics, and employment prospects.
Interviews also explore the difficulties participants face
in
establishing
supportive
relationships
after
incarceration.
3.
Observational Data: Researchers observe the
interactions between participants and their social
support networks during rehabilitation sessions. These
observations allow the study to capture real-time
examples of social support exchanges and their
immediate impacts on participants’ emotional and
psychological well-being.
4.
Recidivism Data: Recidivism data is collected
from state databases to assess the rates of reoffending
among participants over the course of one year
following their release. This data is used to examine
whether the presence of robust social support
networks correlates with lower rates of recidivism.
Data Analysis
1.
Quantitative Analysis: The survey data will be
analyzed using statistical methods such as regression
analysis to identify relationships between social
support and mental health outcomes, employment
status, and recidivism rates. Descriptive statistics will
summarize the types of social support received and its
perceived quality, while correlation and regression
analyses will examine how different types of social
support predict successful reintegration.
2.
Qualitative Analysis: The interview transcripts
will be analyzed using thematic analysis, identifying key
themes related to how participants perceive their
social support networks. Special attention will be paid
to how emotional and instrumental support contribute
to participants' well-being and their ability to overcome
barriers to reintegration.
3.
Integration of Findings: The findings from both
qualitative and quantitative data will be triangulated to
provide a comprehensive view of how social support
affects post-prison outcomes. The integration will allow
for a deeper understanding of the complexities of
International Journal of Law And Criminology
3
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
support systems in the lives of former prisoners.
RESULTS
Types of Social Support
The study found that participants primarily rely on
three types of social support:
1.
Emotional Support: This is the most commonly
reported type of support. Family members and close
friends were identified as the main sources of
emotional
support,
providing
comfort
and
encouragement during the reintegration process.
Many participants reported that emotional support
was essential for coping with feelings of isolation,
shame, and guilt after prison.
2.
Instrumental Support: This type of support,
including help with housing, job placement, and
financial assistance, was less frequently available.
Social service organizations and rehabilitation
programs were identified as the main sources of
instrumental support. The lack of consistent
instrumental support emerged as a significant barrier
to successful reintegration.
3.
Informational Support: Participants reported
that social workers, rehabilitation counselors, and
community
organizations
provided
valuable
information about legal processes, job training, and
reintegration programs. However, participants noted
that they often lacked access to tailored resources that
could address their unique needs, such as mental
health support or substance abuse treatment.
Social Support and Recidivism
The study found that individuals with strong social
support networks (particularly emotional and
instrumental support) were less likely to reoffend
within the first year of release. Participants with robust
support systems reported higher levels of job stability,
better family relationships, and improved mental
health, all of which contributed to a lower likelihood of
recidivism.
Conversely, participants with limited social support
—
particularly those lacking emotional support or
experiencing negative relationships
—
were more likely
to experience relapses into criminal behavior. These
participants often faced significant mental health
challenges and economic instability, which contributed
to their vulnerability to reoffending.
Challenges in Establishing Support Networks
Many participants faced challenges in establishing
supportive relationships after their release. A
significant number of participants reported strained
family relationships and social stigma that made it
difficult to connect with others. Some individuals felt
rejected by their families, while others had lost touch
with supportive social networks during their time in
prison. Additionally, participants who had committed
more severe crimes or had lengthy sentences found it
particularly difficult to rebuild trust with others.
Impact on Employment and Family Relationships
Participants with strong emotional support networks
were more likely to secure stable employment and
engage in meaningful family relationships. Emotional
support played a critical role in reducing the
psychological barriers to employment, such as low self-
esteem
and
anxiety,
and
it
provided the
encouragement needed to maintain jobs. In contrast,
participants with less emotional support struggled to
find long-term employment and often had strained
relationships with family members.
DISCUSSION
Key Findings and Implications
This study confirms the critical role of social support in
shaping the post-prison lives of former prisoners.
Emotional support, particularly from family and close
friends, is a significant protective factor against
recidivism, promoting mental health and reduced
feelings of isolation. Instrumental support, while less
frequent, is crucial in overcoming the practical barriers
to reintegration, such as housing and employment. The
study also highlights the negative impact of social
stigma and strained family relationships on
reintegration efforts.
The findings underscore the need for rehabilitation
programs and post-prison support initiatives to focus
not only on employment and legal assistance but also
on fostering healthy social networks. By helping former
prisoners rebuild relationships with family and friends
and providing opportunities for new, supportive
connections within the community, these programs
can significantly improve post-prison outcomes.
Recommendations for Policy and Practice
1.
Strengthen Family Involvement: Programs
should actively involve family members in the
rehabilitation process to help mend relationships and
provide emotional support.
2.
Expand Social Support Programs: Social service
organizations should offer a broader range of
instrumental support services, including job placement,
housing, and financial assistance.
3.
Address Stigma: Community-based initiatives
should work to reduce the social stigma associated with
incarceration, helping former prisoners establish
meaningful relationships and community ties.
4.
Enhance Mental Health Services: Addressing
International Journal of Law And Criminology
4
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
mental health needs through counseling and therapy is
essential to reducing emotional distress that hinders
successful reintegration.
CONCLUSION
The study highlights the profound impact that social
support networks have on the post-prison lives of
individuals. It demonstrates that both emotional and
instrumental support can significantly influence mental
health,
employment
opportunities,
family
relationships, and recidivism. As such, social support is
not just a supplemental factor but a critical
determinant of successful reintegration. Ensuring that
former prisoners have access to robust support
networks is essential for reducing recidivism and
improving their chances of leading stable, productive
lives post-incarceration.
REFERENCES
Ajmal, M., & Arshad, M. (2024). Role of family and
other social institutions for restoration, reintegration,
and social support of ex-prisoners in Punjab, Pakistan.
Remittances Review, 9(1), 1406
–
1422.
Arabyat, R. M., & Raisch, D. W. (2019). Relationships
between social/emotional support and quality of life,
depression, and disability in patients with chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease: An analysis based on
propensity score matching. Annals of Behavioral
Medicine, 53(10), 918
–
927.
Bellamy, C., Kimmel, J., Costa, M. N., Tsai, J., Nulton, L.,
Nulton, E., ... & O’Connell, M. (2019). Peer support on
th
e “inside and outside”: Building lives and reducing
recidivism for people with mental illness returning from
jail. Journal of Public Mental Health, 18(3), 188
–
198.
Berghuis, M. (2018). Reentry programs for adult male
offender recidivism and reintegration: A systematic
review and meta-analysis. International Journal of
Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology,
62(14), 4655
–
4676.
Brehmer, C. E., Qin, S., Young, B. C., & Strauser, D. R.
(2024). Self
‐
stigma of incarceration and its impact on
health and community integration. Criminal Behaviour
and Mental Health, 34(1), 79-93.
Boles, W., Tatum, T., Wall, J., Nguyen, L., Van Dall, A.,
Mulhollem, C., ... & Niyogi, A. (2022). Us helping us: The
evolution of a peer support group for formerly
incarcerated people. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13,
920640.
Bowman, S. W., & Travis, R. (2012). Prisoner reentry
and recidivism according to the formerly incarcerated
and reentry service providers: A verbal behavior
approach. The Behavior Analyst Today, 13(1), 9
–
19.
Brown, K. E. (2024). Investigating key elements of peer
support programs focused on recovery and reentry in
community-based
organizations:
A
qualitative
implementation science study (Doctoral dissertation,
The Medical College of Wisconsin).
Butler, L., & Taylor, E. (2022). A second chance: The
impact of unsuccessful reentry and the need for
reintegration resources in communities. COPS
Office.
https://cops.usdoj.gov/html/dispatch/04-
2022/reintegration_resources.html
Burt, L. R. (2018). African American male ex-offenders'
perceptions of a reentry program's impact on
recidivating (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University).
Byers, T. (2020). The Impact of Caregiver Trauma on
FBMHS: The Relationship between Caregiver Adversity
and Eco-Systemic Structural Family Therapy Child Client
Outcome. Shippensburg University.
Co, J. C., Estel, J. D., Portes, P. J., & Rondina, G. B.
(2016). Bachelor of Science in Psychology. University
Press.
Christian, J. (2022). The promise and challenge of local
initiatives that support reentry and reintegration. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 701(1), 191-203.
Chouhy, C., Cullen, F. T., & Lee, H. (2020). A social
support
theory
of
desistance.
Journal
of
Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 6, 204-
223.
Devia, L. (2024). Transitioning identities: A comparative
study of the social transition to civilian life of former
armed group members reintegrating into Colombian
society (2002-2018) from a social identity perspective
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh).
Doleac, J. L. (2018). Strategies to productively
reincorporate
the
formerly-incarcerated
into
communities: a review of the literature. Available at
SSRN 3198112.
Fahmy, C., & Wallace, D. (2019). The influence of
familial social support on physical health during
reentry. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(12), 1738-
1756.
Gaines, A. C., Hardy, B., & Schweitzer, J. (2021,
September 22). How weak safety net policies
exacerbate regional and racial inequality. Center for
American
Progress.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/
weak-safety-net-policies-exacerbate-regional-racial-
inequality/
Gilchrist, L., Jamieson, S. K., Zeki, R., Ward, S., Chang, S.,
& Sullivan, E. (2022). Understanding health and social
service accessibility for young people with problematic
substance use exiting prison in Australia. Health &
Social Care in the Community, 30(6), e4735-e4744.
Goodstein, J. D. (2019). Employers and the
reintegration of formerly incarcerated persons. Journal
of Management Inquiry, 28(4), 426-430.
International Journal of Law And Criminology
5
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
Hall, S. (2023). Global lessons learned on sustainable
reintegration in rural areas. Food & Agriculture
Organization.
Halushka, J. M. (2020). The runaround: Punishment,
welfare, and poverty survival after prison. Social
Problems, 67(2), 233-250.
Hector, J., Khey, D., Hector, J., & Khey, D. (2018).
Release and Reentry. Criminal Justice and Mental
Health: An Overview for Students, 163-187.
Hinck, A. R., Hinck, S. S., Smith, J. D., & Withers, D. S.
(2019). Friends as a social support network for
prisoners
reentering
society.
Journal
of
Communication, 69, 33-48.
Hyde, J., Byrne, T., Petrakis, B. A., Yakovchenko, V., Kim,
B., Fincke, G., ... & McInnes, D. K. (2022). Enhancing
community integration after incarceration: Findings
from a prospective study of an intensive peer support
intervention for veterans with an historical comparison
group. Health & Justice, 10(1), 33.
Humanitarian Legal Assistance Foundation. (2018). Life
after jail: A forum on reintegrating former persons
deprived of liberty back to the community.
HLAF.
http://hlaf.org.ph/life-after-jail-a-forum-on-
reintegrating-former-persons-deprived-of-liberty-
back-to-the-community/
Jolly, P. M., Kong, D. T., & Kim, K. Y. (2021). Social
support at work: An integrative review. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 42(2), 229-251.
Keene, D. E., Rosenberg, A., Schlesinger, P., Guo, M., &
Blankenship, K. M. (2018). Navigating limited and
uncertain access to subsidized housing after prison.
Housing Policy Debate, 28(2), 199-214.
Kiczkowski, U. H. (2011). Successful community reentry
after incarceration: exploring intangible aspects of
social support during the reintegration process.
Columbia Social Work Review, 9(1), 73-85.
