We had a server outage, and we're rebuilding the site. Some of the site features won't work. Thank you for your patience.
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
latest news
best of news




A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List


IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles

CA Prisoners and Families Under Attack!!

by Kevin Wednesday, Feb. 06, 2002 at 4:39 PM



The Department of Corrections is proposing changes to the current visiting rules. These changes will negatively and greatly impact everyone visiting someone in a California State Prison. These changes are just one more drastic assault on the largely poor and people of color communities who are the victims of the Californias injustice system.


Some of the proposed changes include:

3175 (e) at the beginning and end of each visit, inmates and their visitors may embrace and/or kiss, not to exceed five seconds.

3172 (b) All inmate visitors, including minors, shall provide a completed CDC Form 106 and obtain institution/facility approval before they may be permitted to visit with an inmate.

3173 (b) all minors over the age of 7 shall present picture proof of identity before being permitted to visit (only legal Ids, as with adult visitors)

3175 (f) male inmates may not hold minor children seven years of age or older on their laps

3177. (2) Family visits shall not be permitted for inmates who are in any of the following categories: sentenced to life without the possibility of parole; sentenced to life, without a parole date established by the Board of Prison Terms; designated Close A or Close B custody; designated a condemned inmate; assigned to a reception center; assigned to an administrative segregation unit; assigned to a security housing unit; designated "C" status; guilty of one or more Division A or Division B offenses within the last 12 months; or guilty of narcotics distribution while incarcerated in a state prison.

Date and Time:
March 8, 2002 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

Department of Water Resources Auditorium
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The public comment period will close March 8, 2002 at 5:00 p.m. Any person may submit public comments in writing (by mail, by fax or by e-mail) regarding the proposed changes. To be considered by the Department, comments must be submitted to the:

Department of Corrections, Regulation and Policy Management Branch
P.O. Box 942883
Sacramento, CA 94283-0001;
by fax at (916)322-3842;
or by e-mail at pmchenry@executive.corr.ca.gov before the close of the comment period.

For more information and a copy of the proposed rule changes, go to the CDC information network website at:

Or join the visitors email group by sending email to:

Make your voice be heard against the proposed changes to current CDC visiting rules!

Join us in a protest prior to the public hearing at 8:00 AM, March 8th


Coordinated and endorsed by:

California Prison Focus
Prisoners Of Davis
Families Of Prisoners
California Coalition for Women Prisoners
Prison Reform Unity Project
Legal Services For Prisoners With Children
Californians For Parole Reform

Brief Literature Review re Prison Visiting
by Terry A. Kupers, M.D., Oct. 9, 2000

The classic study was done by Holt and Miller (1972). Among other things, they showed that California prisoners who have regular, continuing visits with (at least three) family members show a significantly lower recidivism rate when compared with those who do not have such visits throughout their prison term.

Prisoners with no visitors were six times more likely to re-enter prison during the first year of parole as those with three or more visitors. Ohlin (1954) had earlier studied prisoners released from Illinois prisons between 1925 and 1935 and showed that 75% of those who had maintained "active family interest" (i.e., maintained continuing visitation with family members) during their term of incarceration were successful on parole while only 34% of those considered loners experienced parole success. Glaser (1964) did a similar study with federal prisoners and found that 71% of the "active family interest" group were successful on parole compared with 50% of those in the "no contact with relatives" group.

According to Patton (1998), in a law review article summarizing research, "Female prisoners who have contact with their children and who complete family reunification programs which reintroduce them in a community-based setting have lower recidivism rates than female prisoners without access to their children or such programs."

Schafer (1994) conducted a survey of visitors to two men's prisons and found that successful completion of parole is significantly related to the maintenance of family ties during incarceration. I (Kupers, 1999) have written from a clinical perspective, with case reports, about the importance of quality family visitation in terms of the prisoner's mental health, his or her ability to participate successfully in prison programs and stay out of disciplinary trouble while incarcerated, and his or her potential for success at becoming a productive citizen after being released; and the negative consequences of impaired or less-than-quality visitation during incarceration.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments

© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy