Abstract
This book, also known as The French Prison Study, examines the experiences of 58 long-term prisoners, using surveys along with in-depth interviews, during custody and after release. The author, Lila Kazemian is a Persian–Canadian criminologist who teaches at a university in New York. The purpose of the book is, ‘to shed light on some of the transformation experienced that may emerge from time spent in prison and to conceptualise the process of desistence and positive growth in the context of incarceration’. (p. 52) The author aims to ‘provide insights for academic research, policy, practice and for those directly impacted by imprisonment’ (p. 6).
The book is well written and carefully researched; using concepts such as adversarial growth and by applying the contrasting definitions of desistence narrative and persistence narrative, Kazemian presents an optimistic view of human nature and argues how, even in the least auspicious circumstances, prisoners can make constructive use of their time in custody. She describes this process lyrically as the ‘lotus phenomenon’, stemming from the Buddhist tradition in which ‘the lotus flower represents a symbol of growth in the face of adversity and suffering. The lotus flower grows and flourishes in muddy water’ (p. 97).
Kazemian explains how the absence of a ‘culture of research’ in French Prisons, resulted in her having problems with access and attempts to restrict the range of her interview questions (p. 20). This meant she eventually gained entry to only one of the three prisons originally planned, as well as having to reduce the sample from over 400 to 58 (p. 23). As a consequence, Kazemian uses her survey data, mainly for descriptive purposes and has to draw heavily on the narrative accounts gained through her use of semi-structured interviews, for most of her evidence (p. 25). The lack of a wide evidence base presents a problem for Kazemian in validating her principal tenet, about the potential for positive growth. ‘Although this trend may not be captured in aggregate analyses, individual stories paint a different picture’ (p. 210). It is notable that contact is made with participants both during the custodial phase and post release, however the limitations of the sampling become even clearer, when we consider that most of the narrative accounts, appear to be based on only two rounds of interviews (p. 23).
Kazemian carried out the fieldwork herself, excerpts from the accounts given by prisoners are often vivid, and it is clear the author is skilled at obtaining detailed and sensitive information from her subjects. While listening to prisoners describing traumatic childhood experiences, she discusses the dilemma of remaining objective but also human (p. 31). There is a tendency however for the author to accept at face value what she is told and I found some of the accounts given unconvincing. Perhaps this reflects my own lack of understanding of the researcher’s role, but from a practitioners point of view, I was uncomfortable about the lack of challenge to what the author was sometimes being told. The clearest example of this was the following: ‘The intent to persist in offending was not always deliberate. In fact, only two individuals in the sample expressed a strong commitment to reoffend, which highlights that a very small proportion of prisoners maintain a conscious intent to harm’ (p. 154.). I would also have been interested to know how the author as researcher, dealt with the ethical dilemma, when one of the participants reported having ‘consensual’ sexual relations with a female officer (p. 45).
Kazemian is illuminating about some of the distinctive cultural and historical characteristics of the French criminal justice system. For example, ‘in order to ensure equality before the law’ (p. 18), the French government refrains from publishing official prison statistics on diversity, an omission that seems shocking at a distance. Kazemian points out that the unintended consequence of this is that it ‘prevents the detection of discriminatory treatment on the basis of ethnicity, race or religion’ (p. 18). She also usefully discusses the mixed results on the use of conjugal visits and makes interesting comments about the role of financial restitution. The French Prison Study is a largely self-reported account of the experience of long-term prisoners, both during custody and post release, its strength is that it provides some of these individuals with a voice that would otherwise remain unheard. The theoretical and methodological material covered will be of value and interest to academics and perhaps policy makers, but probably less so for practitioners.