Mass incarceration, public health, and widening inequality in the USA
Abstract
In this Series paper, we examine how mass incarceration shapes inequality in health. The USA is the world leader in incarceration, which disproportionately affects black populations. Nearly one in three black men will ever be imprisoned, and nearly half of black women currently have a family member or extended family member who is in prison. However, until recently the public health implications of mass incarceration were unclear. Most research in this area has focused on the health of current and former inmates, with findings suggesting that incarceration could produce some short-term improvements in physical health during imprisonment but has profoundly harmful effects on physical and mental health after release. The emerging literature on the family and community effects of mass incarceration points to negative health impacts on the female partners and children of incarcerated men, and raises concerns that excessive incarceration could harm entire communities and thus might partly underlie health disparities both in the USA and between the USA and other developed countries. Research into interventions, policies, and practices that could mitigate the harms of incarceration and the post-incarceration period is urgently needed, particularly studies using rigorous experimental or quasi-experimental designs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Attempts to achieve health equity may fail in the absence of large-scale decarceration.
“Attempts to achieve health equity may fail in absence of large-scale decarceration – the reversal of mass incarceration by minimizing the incarcerated population.8”
From Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review (2022) · cites this paper as [8]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 102 · Cited by 885
- Authors
- Wildeman, C., & Wang, E. A.
- Affiliations
- Cornell University (US)
- United States Department of Justice (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wildeman, Christopher
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-04
- Volume
- 389
- Issue
- 10077
- Pages
- 1464-1474
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W2604936718
- Cited by
- 885
- References
- 102
- Citations by year
- 2026: 65 · 2025: 89 · 2024: 102 · 2023: 108 · 2022: 118 · 2021: 154 · 2020: 108 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 19
- FWCI
- 20.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Lancet (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Office of Justice Programs
- Bureau of Justice Assistance
- National Institute of Justice
- National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
- Bureau of Justice Statistics
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Keywords
- mass incarceration, health disparities, racial disparities, African Americans, children of incarcerated parents, mental health, physical health, community health, prison policy, United States
- MeSH terms
- Black or African American, Family, Female, Humans, Life Expectancy, Male, Mental Health, Prisoners, Prisons, Public Health, Socioeconomic Factors, United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review