Bill Overview
Title: Dignity Act
Description: This bill provides for visitation between federal prisoners who are primary caretaker parents and their family members, in accordance with specified procedures.
Sponsors: Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]
Target Audience
Population: Federal prisoners who are primary caretaker parents and their family members
Estimated Size: 20000
- The bill pertains to federal prisoners who are primary caretaker parents.
- Not all federal prisoners are parents, and not all parents are primary caretakers, so the impact is on a specific subset.
- The exact number of federal prisoners varies, but the BOP typically oversees around 160,000 inmates.
- Many federal prisoners have children, but not all are listed as primary caretakers before incarceration.
- Considering these factors, only a fraction of the total inmate population will be affected directly by the legislation.
Reasoning
- The policy targets a specific subset of the population: primary caretaker parents who are federal prisoners. The direct beneficiaries will be these prisoners and their family members, who will experience changes in visitation rights and potentially wellbeing.
- Given the budget constraints, the implementation needs to focus on providing additional visitation hours or improving visitation facilities within the federal prison system.
- A significant portion of the potential beneficiaries might have improved psychological wellbeing due to increased family interaction, impacting not just the prisoners but their family members as well.
- However, the scale of impact will differ broadly among individuals depending on their current circumstances, such as the distance family members need to travel for in-person visits.
Simulated Interviews
Federal prisoner (foreman before incarceration) (California)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased visitation would mean the world to me, as I miss my kids immensely.
- Current visitations are too infrequent and short, which strains our bond.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Federal prisoner (nurse before incarceration) (New York)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My biggest worry is my child forgetting me. Regular visits would reassure both of us.
- The more I can see my child, the less guilty I feel about being away.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Federal prisoner (delivery driver before incarceration) (Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe stronger family ties can support successful reintegration after release.
- Increased visitation would help reassure my child and support their emotional wellbeing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Federal prisoner (manager before incarceration) (Ohio)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Long sentences sever family connections; more visits could slow this down.
- I worry about the burden on my elderly parents who care for my kids.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Federal prisoner (engineer before incarceration) (Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 2
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Visitation policy changes might mean I see my kids become adults from behind bars.
- Regular interaction is crucial for my children's development and my mental health.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Federal prisoner (care worker before incarceration) (Florida)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My hope is that improved visitation will help heal our relationship.
- Active involvement in my children's lives is my biggest motivation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Federal prisoner (business owner before incarceration) (New Jersey)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 18.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- For someone in for the long haul, connections to family are critical for wellbeing.
- Frequent visits may not change my sentence, but they change my outlook on life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Federal prisoner (teacher before incarceration) (Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 9.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- School-aged children need stability; seeing their parent often is part of that.
- The policy would assure me that my child knows I am involved in their life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Federal prisoner (administrative assistant before incarceration) (Georgia)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My child's formative years are passing by, and I feel distant.
- Frequent visits could help in keeping our bond strong.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Federal prisoner (technician before incarceration) (Michigan)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The potential new policy encourages me, as it would allow more meaningful interactions with my kids.
- Having a stable and visible parent in their life, even from prison, feels crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $8000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $8500000)
Year 3: $5100000 (Low: $3000000, High: $8600000)
Year 5: $5200000 (Low: $3100000, High: $8800000)
Year 10: $5500000 (Low: $3300000, High: $9200000)
Year 100: $7000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $11500000)
Key Considerations
- Determining the specific number of inmates qualifying as 'primary caretaker parents' is crucial.
- Infrastructure requirements for increased visitation access need to be evaluated.
- Estimation accuracy for ongoing operational costs post-implementation.
- Potential social benefits from improved familial relationships among inmates.
- Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms will be necessary to assess long-term policy effectiveness.