Since the early 1970s, and during the following four decades, sentencing policy reforms in federal and state correctional facilities across the United States of America have resulted in rapid increases in the number and proportion of elderly prisoners. Hitherto, elderly people had been regarded as the victims of crime, rather than criminals themselves, but the ‘truth-in-sentencing’ law, and ‘three strikes', plus life sentences (often without parole) and longer sentences for recidivists implemented in the 1980s and 1990s, meant that the ‘forgotten minority’ (Ham Reference Ham1976) of older inmates was now becoming significantly more noticeable (Chap. 1). With this realisation came the observation that there was a lack of fit between the elderly and the policies, programmes and procedures in prisons.
Although there have been advances in the literature on older inmates, nationally and abroad, early scholarly research contains inconsistencies and, at times, a lack of knowledge (Kerbs Reference Kerbs, Rothman, Dunlop and Entzel2000). It relies too much on small and random samples that are unrepresentative, includes findings that cannot be generalised or which compromise external validity, has the wrong sample size, or use cross-sectional data which cannot be tracked to show progression (Kerbs Reference Kerbs, Rothman, Dunlop and Entzel2000).
Senior Citizens Behind Bars, however, takes a longitudinal approach in its quantitative evidence-based examination of the problems which arise as a result of the complex and multiple needs of elderly prisoners – usually defined as 50 years old and over, or 55 and over (Aday Reference Aday1999) – from the time of sentencing, during incarceration and following release into free society. The chapters are chronologically arranged to reflect this progression, and are written by academics from a number of disciplines: anthropology, clinical social work, criminal justice, criminology, geriatric research, gerontology, justice studies, mental health and sociology.
The chapters cover themes such as evidence-based policies and practices (Chap. 1, John J. Kerbs and Jennifer M. Jolley); sentencing policy and prison demographics (Chap. 2, Kathleen Auerhahn); biological, psychological and sociological needs (Chap. 3, Margaret E. Leigey); social programming and activities (Chap. 4, Ronald H. Aday and Jennifer J. Krabill); the care of elderly female prisoners (Chap. 5, Jennifer M. Jolley, John J. Kerbs and John F. Linder); the rights of prisoners and the law (Chap. 6, Naoki Kanaboshi); integration with, or segregation from, the younger inmates (Chap. 7, Anita N. Blowers, Jennifer M. Jolley and John J. Kerbs); desistance from criminal activity (Chap. 8, John J. Kerbs and Jennifer M. Jolley); end-of-life care (Chap. 9, John F. Linder); re-entry of older prisoners into the community (Chap. 10, Kristie R. Blevins and Anita N. Blowers); and considerations for the future (Chap. 11, John J. Kerbs and Jennifer M. Jolley).
No two prisoners are exactly alike, but regardless of ‘type’ or rates of recidivism, they share many common conditions or illnesses, and basic needs, including physical and mental health care, and safety – particularly from victimisation by abusive and predatory inmates.
Through the examination and analysis of a number of disciplines such as gerontology, psychology, sociology and penology, the authors aim to inform prison staff (officers and management), policy makers, academics and parole officers that, given the ‘stacking’ of so many older prisoners (Chap. 1) and the soaring costs they incur, there is a very real need for the development and implementation of age-related policies and strategies that fit with the needs of elderly prisoners: accommodation into established practice and procedures, structure of buildings, treatments and social activities, all of which were designed for younger, healthier inmates (Chap. 4).
Failure to address the differences between the needs of younger and older prisoners could be regarded as being inhumane – cruel and unusual punishment that not only compromises the physical and mental health, welfare and continued safety of all prisoners, staff and the general public, but also violates the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution (Chap. 6).
The main criticism of the book is the repetition of the discussions regarding the age at which prisoners are defined as ‘elderly’, and their physiological/chronological age. Perhaps this information could have been given as an introduction to the section in Chap. 1 entitled Overview of Chapters, and the relevant authors identified. The inclusion of several in-text references in paragraphs can make the information seem rather disjointed at times. The use of endnotes instead would be less distracting. It is strange that homelessness is not mentioned by all the authors who write about lifestyle prior to incarceration, as it plays a significant role in health and rates of recidivism. Although the book is based on quantitative data, some use of qualitative or observational research may have helped to illustrate personal in-cell difficulties.
