This document summarizes a research paper examining the similarities faced by veterans and ex-offenders during the re-entry process. It begins by outlining the adjustment difficulties that veterans experience when returning home, such as PTSD, anxiety, and substance abuse. It then notes that ex-offenders face similar challenges with reintegration, though they lack resources like health insurance and savings that veterans receive. The literature review finds studies have examined these populations independently but not comparatively. The document reviews prevalence data on parolees and deployed veterans, environmental similarities between the military and prison systems, and adjustment difficulties commonly faced by both groups. The aim is to identify interventions that could benefit individuals from either population.

1. Social Work Research – Professor M. Ragonese
10/10/12
Hillel Greene
Examining the Similarities of Negative Adjustment by Veterans and Ex-
Offenders in the Re-Entry Process
Research Problem:
The distress veterans encounter when returning home and re-integrating into society
have been well documented (Doyle & Peterson, 2005; Ritchie,2005; Zajtchuk,1995).Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder is much discussed (Riggs &Sermanian,2012), but a soldier's return
home can also be accompanied by anxiety, adjustment disorder, psychotic behavior, and
substance abuse, among other issues (Marshall, Prescott, Liberzon, Tamburrino, Calabrese,
&Galea, 2012; Wain, 2005). While these problems arise from internal feelings,the complications
grow when interpersonal/relational situations are introduced. Interpersonal relationships between
returning veterans and spouses for example may be particularly troubled; extended separation
can lead to growing apart, infidelity, and divorce. Such conditionscan result in strained parent-
child relationships with behavioral and adjustment problems becominga byproduct contained
within the next generation(Galovski& Lyons, 2004).
Of significant concern are the high levels of stress and severe adjustment veterans face
as they attempt to re-enter society,whichhave led them to experience depression and trigger
suicide in increasingly higher numbers(National Guard, 2012; Zoroya, 2012). Prisoners recently
released from custody have also been observed to be at higher risk for suicide than the general
population (Konrad et al. 2007; Pratt, Appleby, Piper, Webb, Shaw, 2010).Thetroubles soldiers
and ex-offenders face when re-integrating into society are quite similar (connecting with family,
obtaining steady employment, substance abuse issues, loss of a peer group). Soldiersreturn with

2. 2
health insurance via the VA, hopefully have some savings due to paychecks accumulated while
serving abroad where they had minimal expenses, possess valuable skills and confidence, and
encounter supportive family members and a society appreciative of their service, with support
groups in place for camaraderie.Conversely,ex-offenders have no insurance in place upon their
release,often suffer from a host of medical issues, and are forced to navigate the bureaucracy of
the Medicaid system (Mellow, Schlager, and Caplan, 2008). They are normally lacking in
education, have had little chance to save up any money (even if they were in a paying prison job
the salary rate is notoriously low), and may have limited housing options(Baillargeon, Hoge, and
Penn, 2010).Despite these differences, the two populations encounter similar challenges as they
attempt to reenter society and continue with their lives.
Social Workersare committed to enhancing human wellbeing and helping to meet the
basic needs of all people. Attention to environmental forces that create and contribute to
problems in living is specifically identified by the NASW in the Code of Ethics(2008) as a
function of our profession. As both the military-industrial complex and the criminal justice
system continue to grow with few signs of reform, an obligation exists for researchers to focus
on alleviating the challenges individuals face as products of these systems. The perpetual
reproduction of experiences with such adverse consequences requires that researchers examine--
in the hopes of determining and eliminating--the causes of the issues that individuals face upon
their re-entry into society. Documenting the parallel difficulties faced by the two populations,
this paper will examine and compare their re-entry processes, noting the barriers and supports
both returning soldiers and ex-offenders face when returning home, with the aim ofidentifying
interventions that may be effective when applied to an individual from either group.

3. 3
Literature Review:
Though one group is often vilified by society, and another is lionized, a review of the
literature shows that prisoners and soldiers are quite similar in many respects. Recent research
(Doyle & Peterson, 2005; Ritchie, 2005; Zajtchuk,1995) has documented the troubles veterans
face when attempting to transition to civilian life. Similarly, ex-offenders returning home from
prison have been shown to encounter difficulty as they attempt to reintegrate into
society(Baillargeon, Hoge, and Penn, 2010;Mellow, Schlager, and Caplan, 2008). The
similarities extend not only to the troubles they face when attempting to reintegrate back into
their home lives with loved ones and peers, but also to the environments that isolated them from
the rest of society in the first place. The experiences that each group undergo marks them
uniquely, and with stereotyped beliefs about the two populations becoming more prevalent in our
culture via portrayals in the media, may cause them to internalize a stigmatized label. While
much research has been done on these two distinct populations independently, this review has
found no studies comparing the two populations, the environments that shape them, how they
cope with their struggles and the negative effects incurred during their respective reentry
processes, or how they may come to view themselves as a result of their similar experiences.
This study proposes that an examination of these populations together can be beneficial by
exploring these aspects with an aim to identify effective interventions that can have a positive
impact when applied to the alternative population. Programs and treatments for these populations
target similar problems and either might benefit from an approach meant for the other;
additionally, the comparison study may result in ideas for new interventions with both groups in
mind.

4. 4
Prevalence:
Recent records (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2010) indicate that the number of adult
offenders on parole or other post-prison supervision in the United States increased slightly (up
0.3 percent), reaching about 840,700 parolees at year end. Approximately 13 percent of parolees
were reincarcerated at some time during that year (BJS, 2010) and many incidents of parolees
violating their conditions of release, including re-arrest, and abuse of drugs or alcohol, do not
automatically result in revocation or reincarceration. Few parolees complete their supervision
terms without an infraction of a technical violation and despite assistance upon their release,
parolees encounter significant problems with substance abuse, employment, housing, depression,
aggression, and interpersonal relations (Bahr, Harris, Fisher, Armstrong, 2010; Baillargeion,
Hoge, Penn, 2010; Boxer, Middlemass, &DeLorenzo, 2009).
Since October 2001, approximately 1.64 million U.S. troops have deployed as part of
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistanand Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)
(Adamson et al. 2008). Deployments for these operations have been longer, used a higher
proportion of the armed forces, commonly involved redeployment, and provided infrequent
breaks between deployments (Hosek, Kavanagh, and Miller, 2006). The advances made in
medical technology and military hardware translates to a greater number of servicemembers
surviving experiences that would have led to death in prior wars (Regan, 2004; Warden, 2006).
These experiences can last years due to multiple deployments and involve frequent exposure to
threatssuch as improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and attacks from supposed allies (green on
blue attacks) which require a vigilant awareness of possible threats in one's surroundings.
While advances allow more soldiers to return with fewer physical injuries, many return
with hidden wounds, mental health conditions and impairments to reintegration resulting from

5. 5
military experiences. Nearly 20 percent of military service members who have returned from
Iraq and Afghanistan — 300,000 in all — report symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder
(PTSD) or major depression, yet only slightly more than half of those have sought treatment
(Adamson et al. 2008; Wain et al. 2005). Certain literature (Galovski& Lyons, 2004; Khaylis,
2011) has demonstrated the tendency of veterans to use negative coping mechanisms to deal with
such symptoms. Future research focused on dealing with the stigma veterans' associate with
seeking mental health treatment could help alleviate some of the barriers they face when
returning home. The combined number of individuals these phenomena affect seems to be
growing and would dictate that further research in this area is imperative.
Environmental Similarities:
The military and prison are both systems of rules and regulations; life is structured to a
point where routine almost becomes instinct. The shared living quarters lead to the formation of
strong bonds between unit members (some of whom may know each other from previous periods
of deployment or incarceration). While passing downtime via gambling, talking and socializing,
a sense of unity emerges against an explicit or subconsciously designated enemy, thereby
promoting even greater cohesion amongst members of these two populations. Additionally, the
social structure and atmosphere is highly affected by the fact that both populations are
predominantly male. More impactful than other parts of these highly regulated, testosterone-
laden systems, is the fact that both soldiers and prisoners reside in dangerous environments
where they could encounter a life-threatening attack at any moment – such circumstances can
lead to a level of hypervigiliance which produces an anxiety and ripeness for PTSD (Boxer,
Middlemass, &DeLorenzo, 2009; Manderscheid, 2007; Wain et. al. 2012).

6. 6
Adjustment Difficulties:
As noted above (Adamson et. al. 2008), PTSD seems to be a pervasive diagnosis in
veterans returning from deployment and recent literature has indicated that PTSD symptoms are
predictive of alcohol abuse (Marshal, 2012), associated with greater marital distress (Riggs,
Byrne, Weathers, & Litz,1998), and lead to higher rates of intimate partner violence (Taft, Street,
Marshall, Dowdall, Riggs, 2007) and higher rates of divorce (Prigerson,
Maciejewski&Rosenheck, 2001). Additionally, studies of children of veterans with PTSD show
they experience greater rates of behavioral problems, academic difficulties, and social
impairments (Harknass,1991; Jordan,1992). Further stress is added to the family when
employment is factored in – previous literature documents soldiers' difficulties coming back to
work (Manderscheid, 2007), concerns with finances (Doyle & Peterson, 2005), and spouses'
feelings of sole responsibility for meeting financial needs of the family (Solomon et al.,1992;
Solomon, Kotler, and Mikulincer,1998). While much literature (Dettbarn, 2012;Mental Health,
2012) has discussed the prevalence of mental health disorders within the prisoner population, a
significantly smaller amount of attention has been devoted to the damaging effects incarceration
can have on the psyche. Existing research (Woolddredge, Wolff et al., & O'Donnell and Edgar as
cited in Boxer, Middlemass, &DeLorenzo, 2009) would indicate that between 10 to 20% of the
prison population experience physical victimization, thereby creating an environment with an
ever-present threat of physical harm. These encounters with violent victimization and trauma
inducing conditions while incarcerated very well could lead to elevated anxiety for a significant
number of prisoners.
Securing full-time employment continues to be one of the most formidable tasks ex-
offenders face when returning to society (Travis, Solomon, Waul, 2001), and previous research

7. 7
records their difficulty engaging with family (Phillips and Lindsay, 2011; Kleis, 2010).Turney,
Schnittker, and Wildeman (2012) documented that recent paternal incarceration increases a
mother's risk of a major depressive episode and her level of life dissatisfaction while a majority
of domestic violence crimes are committed by those who have previously been arrested, with a
significant number having previously violated community supervision (Feder& Henning, 2004).
Exposure to parental incarceration is also associated with higher rates of maladjustment in
children. Similar to the children of certain soldiers mentioned above who experience behavioral
issues, the offspring of incarcerated parents are more likely than their peers to drop out of school
(Trice and Brewster, 2004) and to be arrested (Murray and Farrington, 2005).Ex-offenders also
cite staying away from negative influences, and abusing drugs or alcohol (Bahr, Harris, Fisher,
Armstrong, 2010) as common issues during community supervision.
Studies (Phillips and Lindsay, 2011) characterize the use of drugs and alcohol as
coping mechanism for ex-offenders in the reentry process and indicate that the onset of
alcohol/substance abuse has been shown to parallel the onset of PTSD in combat veterans
(Gaylord, 2006; Bremner, Southwick, Darnell, Charney,1996). Moreover the level at which one
engages in self-destructive behavior correlates to the severity of one's PTSD symptoms
(Galovski& Lyons, 2004).
Theory:
Modified labeling theory (as described in Winnick& Bodkin, 2008) presumes stereotyped
beliefs are pervasive, and even shared by those so labeled. To account for or manage a highly
discredited status, those labeled will adopt some sort of stigma management strategy, including
hiding the discredited status (secrecy), avoiding social interaction (withdrawal), and education

8. 8
(preventative telling). Some ex-offender's deal with their label as an "ex-con" by immediately
owning up to their status; rather than a boss or new personal contact finding out about their
conviction somehow, they will preventatively inform them about their crime or parole status with
the belief that their honesty and forthrightness will be proof of their reform. While this method of
stigma management could result in immediate rejection and further stigmatization, it also gives
the individual greater prospects than withdrawal, which keeps one positioned outside the
opportunity structure, and secrecy which increases tension and precludes close personal
relationships. In modified labeling theory, secondary deviance, such as an arrest or substance
abuse while on parole, is not a direct result of the internalization of the negative label, but rather
an indirect result of coping or stigma management which make deviant behavior more likely (for
example, a parolee who avoids talking to his child's mother might put additional stress on the
relationship, thereby prompting further arguments and her reporting any non-compliance by the
ex-offender to police or parole). Phillips and Lindsay (2011) studied the struggles of those who
were not successful during reentry to identify how these parolees coped when faced with an
impediment to their success reintegration. They identified avoidance as the predominant method,
in which people seek to evade the precipitators of stress with methods such as abusing
substances, avoiding stressors, such as family and treatment, isolating oneself from friends or
family, and engaging in high risk sexual behavior. While avoidance may produce positive
outcomes shortly after applying the strategy, it is associated with negative long-term outcomes
(Suls& Fletcher, 1985).
Ex-offenders' internalization of society's label as pariahs leads them to anticipate
rejection and believe they will be better off if they can hide their status or withdraw from social
situations where their presence may create a negative reaction. Veterans of OIF and OEF may be

9. 9
experiencing modified labeling theory in similar ways for various reasons; encountering
tremendous fanfare and proclamations of heroism may reinforce the military culture into which
they were indoctrinated, which trains them to think they should be able to withstand any amount
of pressure and manage any challenge. This mindset increases the stigma surrounding obtaining
mental health treatment and may result in a soldier who is suffering from PTSD, depression or
another disorder, to resort to alternative coping mechanisms. Alternatively, the increased reports
by news media and scholarly journals has drawn attention to the numbers of soldiers returning
from deployment with PTSD and other issues – an individual may seek to avoid being
collectively diagnosed with a group of cohorts simply due to his/her veteran status with a label
that society has characterized as damaged. As with ex-offenders, coping by avoidance may lead
veterans to further isolation and secrecy, the maintenance and stressors of which compel them to
cope via maladaptive mechanisms (e.g. lashing out at family, drug/alcohol abuse, etc.).
Rational for Research:
The similarities in environment and perpetual reproduction of experiences resulting in negative
adjustment requires that researchers examine--in the hopes of determining and alleviating--the
causes of the issues that individuals face upon their reentry into society. Ex-offenders'
internalization of society's label as pariahs leads them to anticipate rejection and believe they will
be better off if they can hide their status or withdraw from social situations where their presence
may create a negative reaction. Veterans of OIF and OEF may be experiencing modified labeling
theory in similar ways for various reasons; encountering tremendous fanfare and proclamations
of heroism may reinforce the military culture into which they were indoctrinated, which trains
them to think they should be able to withstand any amount of pressure and manage any
challenge. This mindset increases the stigma surrounding obtaining mental health treatment and

10. 10
may result in a soldier who is suffering from PTSD, depression or another disorder, to resort to
alternative coping mechanisms. Alternatively, the increased reports by news media and scholarly
journals has drawn attention to the numbers of soldiers returning from deployment with PTSD
and other issues – an individual may seek to avoid being collectively diagnosed with a group of
cohorts simply due to his/her veteran status with a label that society has characterized as
damaged. As with ex-offenders, coping by avoidance may lead veterans to further isolation and
secrecy, the maintenance and stressors of which compel them to cope via maladaptive
mechanisms (e.g. lashing out at family, drug/alcohol abuse, etc.). This study proposes
exploratory research to examine and compare the reentry processes, with particular attention to
the barriers and supports both returning soldiers and ex-offenders encounter when returning
home, seeking to determine if they are negatively affected by their label. It will consider
approaches that may allow for other means of coping with an aim of identifying treatment
models that would be effective when applied to both populations. Research questions will
include: Do veterans associate a level of stigma with their label which precludes them from
obtaining mental health treatment? If so, is it due to a feeling of invulnerability inculcated by
military culture, or their anticipation of being classified as part of a damaged population? Do
veterans, like ex-offenders, incur problems during reentry due to developing maladaptive coping
mechanisms due to avoidance and secrecy? Would the preventative education strategy
successfully used by many ex-offenders produce positive results for veterans or would they feel
further stigmatized? Are there coping mechanisms veterans have used successfully during
reentry which ex-offenders might attempt to use? These questions indicate further research is
needed in this area and that these populations could benefit from being studied in conjunction.
What is Negative Adjustment?

11. 11
Merriam-Webster defines adjusted as having achieved an often specified and usually harmonious
relationship with the environment or with other individuals. A negative adjustment therefore
would involve a person with a disharmonious relationship with their environment and/or other
individuals. The literature documents individuals from these populations having issues in their
personal lives regarding employment, substance abuse, a predilection for risk-taking behavior,
their personal behavior within the family unit, and how the family unit is affected by the person's
behavior. These categories are explored below with operationalized definitions as indicators of
negative adjustment.
Variables:
Population:
In attempting to examine the difficulties faced by veterans and ex-offenders for this study we
must first look at the existing literature to see how previous researchers have defined these
populations and measured their adjustment to reentering society. The term veteran can apply to
individuals associated with a host of many different branches of service and time periods. For the
purposes of this study, U.S. military servicemembers who were deployed overseas since 2001,
with Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) or Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) will be focused on
based on their recent experiences and the possible therapeutic implications this study may find
for this population which continues to struggle with issues of readjusting to society. Most studies
involving ex-offenders utilize individuals on parole, or those reentering society from prison,jail,
or another detention facility of some kind. Participants of this study will be on federal
supervised release following a custody term in the Bureau of Prisons. As these populations are
both heavily compromised of men, the study will focus on recruiting men over the age of 18.
Reentry is often referred to as the process after which prisoners are released and return back to

12. 12
the community, for the purposes of this study it will be expanded to refer to the time period
veterans return home from deployment.
Employment:
As mentioned above, securing and maintaining full-time employment continues to be a major
challenge for both ex-offenders face and veterans,(Travis, Solomon, Waul, 2001; Manderscheid,
2007). Concerns with finances (Doyle & Peterson, 2005), and spouses' feelings of sole
responsibility for meeting financial needs of the family (Solomon et al.,1992; Solomon, Kotler,
and Mikulincer,1998) has been documented as well. As such, the variable for participants'
employment status will be considered with unemployment for a period over 6 months or having
worked numerous jobs since the start of reentry with each lasting on average less than 3 months,
as measures of indicators of negative adjustment.
Personal Behavior within Family:
The most notable effects currently being reported regarding veterans returning from Iraq and
Afghanistan are portrayed as symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Adamson et.
al. (2008), notes that PTSD seems to be a pervasive diagnosis in veterans returning from
deployment and recent literature has indicated that PTSD symptoms are associated with greater
marital distress (Riggs, Byrne, Weathers, & Litz,1998), lead to higher rates of intimate partner
violence (Taft, Street, Marshall, Dowdall, Riggs, 2007) and higher rates of divorce (Prigerson,
Maciejewski&Rosenheck, 2001). Previous research (Phillips and Lindsay, 2011; Kleis, 2010)
similarly records the difficulty ex-offenders encounter engaging with family upon returning
home.Turney, Schnittker, and Wildeman (2012) documented that recent paternal incarceration
increases a mother's risk of a major depressive episode and her level of life dissatisfaction while
a majority of domestic violence crimes are committed by those who have previously been

13. 13
arrested, with a significant number having previously violated community supervision (Feder&
Henning, 2004). In order to measure any stress in the relationship between the participant and his
spouse, researchers would include reports of withdrawal by participant from family activities,
and changes in marital status such as divorce or separation, complaints by participant's spouse of
decrease in their own mental wellbeing or abuse by the participant (physical, verbal or
emotional), and conversely, reports of feeling supported by loved ones.
Effects on Family:
The presence of children in the home adds an additional factor to measure in the participant's
reintegration into the family unit. The offspring of incarcerated parents are more likely than their
peers to drop out of school (Trice and Brewster, 2004) and to be arrested (Murray and
Farrington, 2005).Similarly, studies of children of veterans with PTSD show they experience
greater rates of behavioral problems, academic difficulties, and social impairments
(Harknass,1991; Jordan,1992). Measurement of academic or behavioral problems being
experienced by participant's children would include drug or alcohol use, arrest, formal discipline
by school officials (including academic probation for poor grades), and an uncharacteristically
negative attitude toward other family members/withdrawal from family activities.
Substance Abuse:
Ex-offenders advise that abuse of drugs or alcohol (Bahr, Harris, Fisher, Armstrong, 2010) is a
common recurring problem during community supervision. Phillips and Lindsay, (2011)
characterize the use of drugs and alcohol as coping mechanism for ex-offenders in the reentry
process and research that indicates that the onset of alcohol/substance abuse has been shown to
parallel the onset of PTSD in combat veterans (Gaylord, 2006; Bremner, Southwick, Darnell,
Charney,1996), is indicative that soldiers may similarly be using alcohol to cope with PTSD

14. 14
symptoms. As such, abuse of alcohol or prescription medication (having 5 or more drinks per
occasion at least once per week/taking medication that was prescribed for someone else or taking
one's own prescription in a manner or dosage other than what was prescribed), and use of any
illegal drug would be included as a measure of negative adjustment under this study's variables.
Predilection toward Risk:
Ex-offenders also cite staying away from negative influences as an issue during community
supervision (Bahr, Harris, Fisher, Armstrong, 2010) as association with others who have been
previously incarcerated can often lead to poor decision making and a groupthink mentality
leading to adverse consequences. Veterans are not as notorious for criminal behavior when they
are in one another's company as ex-offenders, however Killgore et al. (2008), found that soldiers
who saw combat were more likely to engage in risky behavior upon their return from
deployment. This finding, coupled with the idea that only a fellow soldier can truly understand a
veteran's experiences, may lead to evidence of cohorts of veterans engaging in various dangerous
activities and risky behavior that has negative costs similar to the groups of ex-offenders. The
final determinant of negative adjustment will be the participant's self-report of association with
cohorts previously convicted of a felony, involved in criminal activity, or consistently (at least
once a month) engaged in risky behavior (driving while under the influence, promiscuous sexual
behavior without protection, fighting, carrying a weapon, regular gambling(weekly), arrest,
incarceration, and hospitalization – depending on circumstances).
Methodology:
As no research has yet been undertaken comparing this populations, this study would use a
mixed methods approach seeking to administer surveys and perform qualitative interviews as
needed for follow-up purposes with a minimum of ten and as many as twenty participants from

15. 15
each population over the course of six weeks in order to determine if further studies with larger
groups are warranted.
Participants:
Criteria for ex-offenders would include a term of imprisonment of at least 6 months and veterans
would need to have been deployed overseas for at least the same amount of time. Participants
from both populations would have begun the reentry process at least 6 months prior to the
interview in order to provide adequate time for assessment.
Data Collection:
Possible participants will be screened at a local parole office and veteran's hospital (permission
to be obtained by administrators) following which interviews will take place either immediately
onsite or at a time and place convenient to the interviewee. If needed, additional participants may
be collected via snowball sampling. Upon IRB approval, the Coping Inventory for Stressful
Situations (Endler& Parker, 1999) would be purchased and administered to determine if
participants are coping via avoidance or other methods, and a customized questionnaire
(attached) would be utilized to assess level of difficulty participants have experienced in
adjustment.
Analysis:
Participants of the study would need to indicate a moderate level of difficulty in adjustment in at
least 2 out of the 5 variables defined above (employment, personal behavior within family,
effects on family, substance abuse, and predilection towards risk) or severe difficulty in one
variable on the attached survey to qualify as experiencing a negative adjustment during reentry.
This data would be broken down into the two populations and compared with one another to
measure where each is having issues adjustment issues, the possible causes, and the supports

16. 16
each have received to evaluate where further resources should be focused for future research and
programming.
As such, it is this researcher's contention that this study will appropriately measure trouble in
reintegration based on the previous literature with a definition of negative adjustment
incorporating the factors of employment status, home life, abuse of alcohol and illegal
substances, and association with peer groups in which they engage in self-destructive behavior as
explained above. Follow-up qualitative interviews of veterans who have experienced little issue
in adjusting upon their return may help shed light on how they have avoided the pitfalls into
which their comrades are becoming increasingly entrenched. Such information on positive
supports or coping strategies may also be helpful for ex-offenders returning to society from long
periods of incarceration who have a history of failing to positively reintegrate during reentry.
Simultaneously, the previous research and continued study of ex-offenders, who have long-
suffered negative effects due to ill-repute, can possibly benefit veterans who are currently
experiencing their own epidemic of stigmatization and assist them in obtaining the interventions
needed to make their safe return home successful.

17. References:
Adamson, D., Burnam, M., Burns, R., Caldarone, L., Cox, R., D'Amico, E., Diaz, C.,Eibner, C.,
Fisher, G.,Helmus, T., Tanielian, T., Karney, B., Kilmer, B., Marshall, G., Martin, L., Meredith,
L.,Metscher, K., Osilla, K.,Pacula, R., Ramchand, R., Ringel, J., Schell, T.,Sollinger, J., Jaycox,
L., Vaiana, M., Williams, K., and Yochelson. M.,(2008) Invisible Wounds of War: Psychological
and Cognitive Injuries, Their Consequences, and Services to Assist Recovery. Santa Monica, CA:
RAND Corporation.
Bahr, S., Harris, L., Fisher, J., &Armstrong, A. (2010). Successful Reentry: What Differentiates
Successful and Unsuccessful Parolees? International Journal of Offender Therapy and
Comparitive Criminology, 54(5), 667-692.
Baillargeon, J., Hoge, S., and Penn, J., (2010).Addressing the Challenge of Community Reentry
Among Released Inmates with Serious Mental Illness.American Journal of Community
Psychology, 46, 361-375.
Bureau of Justice Statistics.(2010) Probation and Parole in the United States, 2010. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Boxer, P., Middlemass, K., &DeLorenzo, T. (2009).Exposure to Violent Crime During
Incarceration: Effects on Psychological Adjustment Following Release. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 36(8), 793-807.
Bremner, J., Southwick, S., Darnell, A., Charney, D. (1996). Chronic PTSD in Vietnam Combat
veterans: course of illness and substance abuse. American Journal of Psychiatry, 153(3), 369-
375.
Doyle, M., & Peterson, K. (2005). Re-entry and reintegration: returning home after combat. The
Psychiatric Quarterly, 76(4), 361-370.
Ending Emotional Suffering Frequent Cause for Suicides, (2012) National Guard.
Endler, N., & Parker, J. (1999).CISS: Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations manual (2nd
ed.).
North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems.
Henning, K., &Feder, L. (2004). A Comparison of Men and Women Arrested for Domestic
Violence: Who Presents the Greater Threat? Journal of Family Violence, 19(2), 69-80.
Galovski, T. and Lyons, J., (2004).Psychological sequelae of combat violence: A review of the
impact of PTSD on the veteran’s family and possible interventions, Aggression and Violent
Behavior, 9(5), 477-501.
Harkness, L.(1991). The effect of combat-related PTSD on children.National Center for PTSD
Clinical Newsletter. 2, 12-13.
Hosek, J., Kavanagh, J., and Miller, L. (2006).How Deployments Affect Service Members. Santa
Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

18. 18
Humber, N., Hayes, A., Senior, J., Fahy, T., & Shaw, J. (2011).Identifying, monitoring and
managing prisoners at risk of self-harm/suicide in England and Wales.Journal Of Forensic
Psychiatry & Psychology, 22(1), 22-51.
Jordan, B.K., Marmar, C.R., Fairbank, J.A., et al.(1992). Problems in families of male Vietnam
veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder.Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology, 60, 916-
926.
Khaylis, A., Polusny, M., Erbes, C., Gewirtz, A., Rath, M. (2011). Posttraumatic stress, Family
Adjustment, and Treatment Preferences Among National Guard Soldiers Deployed to OEF/OIF.
Military Medicine, 176(2), 126-131.
Killgore, W., Cotting, D., Thomas, J., Cox, A., McGurk, D., Vo, A., Castro, C., Hoge, C. (2008).
Post-combat invincibility: violent combat experiences are associated with increased risk-taking
propensity following deployment. Journal Of Psychiatric Research, 42(13), 1112-1121.
Kleis.K. (2010).Facilitating Failure: Parole, Reentry and Obstacles to Success.Dialectical
Anthropology, 34(4), 525-531.
Konrad, N., Daigle, M.S., Daniel, A.E., Dear, G.E., Frottier, P., Hayes, L.M., Sarchiapone, M.
(2007).Preventing suicide in prisons, Part 1: Recommendations from the international association
for suicide prevention task force on suicide in prisons.Crisis, 28, 113–121.
Manderscheid, R. (2007). Helping Veterans Return: Community, Family and Job. Archives of
Psychiatric Nursing, 21(2), 122-124.
Marshall, B. L., Prescott, M. R., Liberzon, I., Tamburrino, M. B., Calabrese, J. R., &Galea, S.
(2012). Coincident posttraumatic stress disorder and depression predict alcohol abuse during and
after deployment among Army National Guard soldiers. Drug & Alcohol Dependence, 124(3),
193-199.
Mental health illness rife in prison. (2012). Australian Nursing Journal, 20(2), 34-35
Mellow, J., Schlager, M. D., &Caplan, J. M. (2008).Using GIS to evaluate post-release prisoner
services in Newark, New Jersey.Journal Of Criminal Justice, 36(5), 416-425.
Murray, J., & Farrington, D. (2005). Parental imprisonment: Effects on boys’ antisocial
behaviour and delinquency through the life-course. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
46, 1269–1278.
Philips, L. & Lindsay, M. (2011). Prison to Society: A Mixed Methods Analysis of Coping with
Reentry. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55(1), 136-
154.
Pratt D., Piper M., Appleby L., Webb R., Shaw J. (2006). Suicide in recently released prisoners:
a population-based cohort study. Lancet, 368:119-123.

19. 19
Prigerson, H., Maciejewski, P.,&Rosenheck, R. (2001). Combat trauma: trauma with highest risk
of delayed onset and unresolved posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, unemployment, and
abuse among men. Journal of Nervous Mental Disorders, 189, 99-108.
Regan, T. Report: High survival rate for US troops wounded in Iraq. Christian Science Monitor,
November 29, 2004.
Riggs, D. S., &Sermanian, D. (2012). Prevention and Care of Combat-Related PTSD: Directions
for Future Explorations. Military Medicine, 14-20.
Ritchie, E.(2005).Combat Psychiatry: From the Battle Front to the Home Front.The Psychiatric
Quarterly, 76(4), 341-342.
Suls, J., & Fletcher, B. (1985). The relative efficacy of avoidant and non-avoidant coping
strategies: A meta-analysis. Health Psychology, 4, 249-288.
Travis, J., Solomon, A., Waul, M. (2001). From Prison to Home: The Dimensions and
Consequences of Prisoner Reentry. Urban Institute Justice Policy Center.
Trice, A. D., & Brewster, J. (2004).The effects of maternal incarceration on adolescent children.
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 19, 27–35.
Turney, K., Schnittker, J. and Wildeman, C. (2012), Those They Leave Behind: Paternal
Incarceration and Maternal Instrumental Support. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74: 1149–
1165.
Solomon, Z., Kotler, M., &Mikulincer, M. (1988). Combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder
among second-generation Holocaust survivors: Preliminary findings. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 145(7), 865-868.
Solomon, Z., Waysman, M., Levy, G., Mikulincer, M., Benbenishty, R. Florian, V., &Bleich, A.
(1992). From front line to home front: A study of secondary traumatization. Family Process, 31,
289-302.
Taft, C., Street, A., Marshall, A., Dowdall, J., Riggs, D. (2007). Posttraumatic stress disorder,
anger, and partner abuse among Vietnam combat veterans. Journal of Family Psychology, 21,
270-277.
Travis, J., Solomon, A., &Waul, M. (2001).From Prison to home: The dimensions and
consequences of prisoner reentry. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Wain, H., Bradley, J., Nam, T., Waldrep, D., &Cozza, S. (2005). Psychiatric Interventions with
Returning Soldiers at Walter Reed.Psychiatric Quarterly, 76(4), 351-360.
Winnick, T. & Bodkin, M. (2008).Anticipated stigma and stigma management among those to be
labeled "edx-con".Deviant Behavior, 29,295-333.
Zajtchuk, R. (1995). Textbook of Military Medicine.Washington DC: TMM Publications