CHILDHOOD and INCARCERATION SPECIAL REPORT LIVING CONDITIONS of CHILDREN and YOUTH with INCARCERATED PARENTS in ARGENTINA Originally Published As

CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION SPECIAL REPORT LIVING CONDITIONS OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH WITH INCARCERATED PARENTS IN ARGENTINA Originally published as:

Cadoni, L., Rival, J.M., y Tuñón, I. (2019). Infancias y encarcelamiento. Condiciones de vida de niñas, niños y adolescentes cuyos padres o familiares están privados de la libertad en la Argentina. Documento de trabajo. 1ª ed. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Educa, 2019.

Edición para Fundación Universidad Católica Argentina - ISBN 978-987-620-381-4

“The authors of this publication cede their rights to the University, in a non-exclusive manner, to incorporate the digital version in the Institutional Repository of the Universidad Católica Argentina as well as other databases that it considers of academic relevance. Likewise, the Universidad Católica Argentina authorizes Church World Service (CWS-LAC) to disseminate them.” The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Universidad Católica Argentina or Church World Service.

“Los autores de la presente publicación ceden sus derechos a la Universidad, en forma no exclusiva, para que incorpore la versión digital de los mismos al Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Católica Argentina como así también a otras bases de datos que considere de relevancia académica. Asimismo, la Universidad Católica Argentina autoriza a Church World Service (CWS-LAC) a la difusión de los mismos.” Lo publicado en esta obra es responsabilidad de los autores y no compromete la opinión de la Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina y Church World Service (CWS-LAC).

Graphic Design of the original version in Spanish María Nazarena Gómez Archeaga

Photos Marisa Montes

For this English version produced by CWS after the Spanish version was published:

Design David Bianco | MoquoDesign.com

Translation Mariana Morán

Edition and Adaptation Aaron Tate INDEX //

The incarceration of adults in a household 17 Access to health and inclusion PAGE constitutes an adverse childhood in social security 04 experience // Ianina Tuñón 19 Education 21 Child labor 22 Upbringing and socialization opportunities PAGE Making visible the impacts of prison on children’s 24 Vulnerability to negative upbringing styles lives, one more effort // Matín Coria 05 25 Socialization opportunities deficit

PAGE PAGE 07 Introduction 26 Final thoughts

Children with incarcerated family members: PAGE PAGE Subjects of law or innocent and invisible victims of 27 Methodological Annex 08 penal system?

PAGE Annex II: Pairing or matching by closest PAGE How many children of incarcerated parents 29 neighbors 10 are in Argentina? PAGE The survey: Serie Bicentenario 2010-2016 PAGE 31 Fact sheet 11 Who are the CIP? PAGE PAGE How does family imprisonment affect 32 Bibliography 14 children and adolescents? PAGE 14 Poverty, unsatisfied basic needs and food security 34 Links of interest

OBSERVATORIO DE LA DEUDA SOCIAL ARGENTINA (ARGENTINA SOCIAL DEBT CHURCH WORLD SERVICE (CWS-LAC) OBSERVATORY) Latin America and the Caribbean Office Research Director Regional Director Agustín Salvia J. Martín Coria Institutional Management Director Program Officer for the Protection of the Rights of Juan Cruz Hermida the Child Luciano Cadoni Study Coordinator Ianina Tuñón Consultant Juan Martín Rival Collaborators Sol Medina Fernández Natalia Ramil (Press)

Authors: Luciano Cadoni, Juan Martin Rival, and Ianina Tuñón THE INCARCERATION OF ADULTS IN A HOUSEHOLD CONSTITUTES AN ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCE

Ianina Tuñón Coordinator of the Barómetro de la Deuda Social de la Infancia (ODSA-UCA).

Each year, as part of the Observatorio de la be the result of living in environments with Deuda Social Argentina (ODSA, according to constant stress, low quality of attachment, and its Spanish initials), a new contribution is sought abusive, hostile or depressive parental figures. to help define the problem of child poverty In particular, the imprisonment of a parent puts from a human rights perspective. On this at risk the development of secure attachment occasion, together with Church World Service relationships, since the child’s main figure of in Latin America and the Caribbean (CWS- attachment is taken away from them; this is LAC), we present this report on the special especially true in cases where the mother, situation of children who have experienced the and primary caregiver, is incarcerated (Felitti incarceration of an adult household member. et al., 1998; Hillis et al., 2010; Causadias and Undoubtedly, the incarceration of an adult Coffino, 2014). Unfortunately, there is a lack of household member represents an adverse research on this topic, which limits our ability to childhood experience affecting the upbringing understand what aspects of child development and socialization of children. The literature on are impacted--and to what extent they are the issue identifies the imprisonment of a child’s impacted by the incarceration of a household parent as a specific “social disadvantage” that member. What would be the impacts of can increase social inequality. Some research the incarceration of parents on children’s shows the economic effects of incarceration development, access to opportunities, and on families, but there is much less evidence human and social resources? regarding the medium- and long-term The present study is exploratory and consequences on child development. Other descriptive but nevertheless profound in studies indicate that the incarceration of a terms of comparing a population of children parent causes dysfunctionality within the who have experienced the imprisonment of household that can negatively affect children. an adult household member compared to a Studies also warn about the appearance of population of peers who haven’t experienced antisocial behaviors in children, which may such a situation.

4 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION MAKING VISIBLE THE IMPACTS OF PRISON ON CHILDREN’S LIVES, ONE MORE EFFORT

Martín Coria Regional Coordinator for Church World Service in Latin American and the Caribbean

Prepared with ODSA of the Universidad are women) experience both new and pre- Católica Argentina, this document on the existing vulnerabilities and increased risks living conditions of Argentine children with an in access to food, decent housing, quality incarcerated household member is a valuable, education, the right to play, and protection timely and necessary contribution to the against all forms of violence. efforts being carried out--both in Argentina This working document gives indications, and in other Latin American countries--in which should be deepened in future studies, defense of the rights of these children, who that living conditions of thousands of have thus far been virtually invisible both to Argentine children are worsened when they authorities and specialists. live in households where one of the household The “children of prisoners” (in this members is incarcerated. document called CIP – children (and youth) The first achievement to highlight from this with incarcerated parents) are innocent. They work is that it covers all the households with have not committed any crime, and they have children who experience the incarceration of the same rights to grow up and develop fully a household member (the majority of whom as any other boy or girl. However, from the are males, primarily fathers, brothers, uncles, moment that the penal system becomes a and grandfathers). So, in accordance with part of their lives, many of these children and the recommendations made by the United their caregivers (the great majority of whom Nations Committee on the Rights of the

5 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION Child (CRC) in 2011, this document reinforces mothers and/or fathers, will impact children the idea that a child-centric look at the for the rest of their lives. Thus, we can speak growing phenomenon of incarceration (both of children impacted by the present and of fathers and mothers) is not only possible past imprisonment of a family member. We but also urgent. have learned this from the body of research A second achievement is that many of the but also from the hundreds of children with household living conditions that the study whom we have worked in these years, from examines are the same as those that children the members of the Relatives of Detainees themselves have indicated are important Civil Association (ACIFAD) and its president, to them during different regional, national Andrea Casamento, whom, by the way, we and local consultations carried out as part thank for her careful reading and accurate of the work of the Regional Platform for comments during the review of this document. the Defense of the Rights of Children with To conclude, we would like to emphasize Incarcerated Parents (NNAPES, according that this joint effort by academia and civil to its initials in Spanish). These factors are society to generate information and analysis poverty, food, education, mental health, and about the situation of Argentine children social participation, among others. living in households with an incarcerated Estimating the number of children who household member in no way replaces live in a household with one of its members the obligation of the national government incarcerated at the time of the Observatorio and the provinces to produce useful and de la Deuda Social Argentina (ODSA) is a necessary information on the subject and--in major contribution to raising awareness of the words of the Committee on the Rights of the issue in the country. As the authors and the Child--make this information available in the children themselves state, it is important an appropriate format so that it can provide to keep in mind that the consequences of the necessary support for these children. incarceration of a family member, especially

6 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION INTRODUCTION

When you see it all happening, you feel a lot of anxiety, and it’s a mess, and you don’t know what’s going on, and you don’t know why your dad is there, and you’re so small, and you have to try to understand it all so quickly. Or like my brother, who had to suddenly mature and somehow fulfill the role of a dad…”

“ Argentine teenager, 19 years old (2016)

This work attempts to be a first quantitative the other hand, there has been an unprecedented overview of the living conditions of children with escalation of imprisonment rates worldwide, but incarcerated parents (CIP) and to contribute to the especially in our region, during this same historical question about the impact that the incarceration has period. The number of incarcerated people, with or on children. This report is based on microdata from without a judicial sentence, is increasing. And as a the Barómetro de la Deuda Social Argentina (2014- result, there are an increasing number of families 2016) conducted by the Observatorio de la Deuda with one of their members incarcerated, and of Social Argentina. children who grow up with their father, mother or The study is framed at the intersection of two family member imprisoned. global processes, which may appear to be unrelated.1 These children are “the invisible victims” of On the one hand, the paradigm of childhood has imprisonment or “the collateral convicts,” as they been changing over the last three decades, with have been called by the Quaker United Nations an increased emphasis on the integral protection Office. of childhood and understanding children as rights- This problem was also identified by the United holders and States as guarantors of those rights. On States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

1 A SHARED SENTENCE the devastating toll of parental incarceration on kids, families and communities, 2016, Annie Casey Foundation, available at https://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-asharedsentence-2016.pdf

7 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION (CDC) and Kaiser Permanente Health Plan (1998) as America. That study analyzed how, as stated in one of the adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). a presentation made during the Day of General A 2017 study in Argentina classified the ACEs into Discussion of the Committee on the Rights of the seven categories, three of which are related to Child in 2011, the children of prisoners are “the abuse (physical, sexual, and psychological) and four invisible victims of crime and the penal system, their of which are related to dysfunctional family dynamics childhood forever changed by both their parent’s (violence against the mother, living with a chemical- crime and the state’s response to it in the name of dependent adult, living with an adult with mental justice” (page 11). Regarding children’s lives after the illness or suicidal behavior, and having an adult incarceration occurs, the study confirms “the rights family member incarcerated) (Albamonte, 2017). of these children are neglected when their parents Vergara (2017) explains that “while ACEs occur are incarcerated, and this worsens the situation of before the age of 18, their effects can last throughout social exclusion in which most of them live. Families life and can even affect the next generation. Adverse in this situation face increased financial strains which experiences put our youth, and the next generation, forces many children to assume different roles in at risk of developing many of the following conditions order to fulfill the family needs” (page 5). According and problems: alcohol and drug abuse, depression, to “Invisible No More,” these children “miss out on heart, lung or liver diseases, sexually transmitted the health, educational and social activities that are disease, domestic violence, etc.” essential to their development” (page 5). Finally, the To conclude, he states that “the greater the study concludes that there is a clear increase in the number of adverse experiences in childhood, the violation of the rights of these children as a result of greater the risk that children will suffer from these the incarceration of the adult. physical and mental-health problems, even before However, there has been no quantitative study starting adolescence. The mere presence of an ACE or research that would provide an overview of suggests that there is a high probability that others these impacts or that would demonstrate to what exist and, as a consequence, children may suffer extent incarceration in the household affects the from multiple problems.” development of children and their ability to exercise “Invisible No More” (Saavedra et al., 2013) was their rights. one of the first writings on the topic made in Latin

CHILDREN WITH INCARCERATED FAMILY MEMBERS: SUBJECTS OF LAW OR INNOCENT AND INVISIBLE VICTIMS OF PENAL SYSTEM?

Although the number of people incarcerated of children with incarcerated family members. Thus, grows every year, and the United Nations Committee the most relevant recommendations2 are following: on the Rights of the Child devoted its Day of General Discussion in 2011 to analyzing specifically the impact that the imprisonment of a relative has on the life of Effects on children of the incarceration of children, the phenomenon continues to be invisible parents in the public agenda. “The Committee recommends that State parties The objective of the Day of General Discussion ensure that the rights of children with a parent in was to provide a normative and practical orientation prison are taken into account from the moment to the States and other responsible actors regarding of the arrest of their parent(s) and by all actors the protection, promotion and fulfillment of the rights involved in the process and at all its stages…”

8 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION Finances Training of professionals “Considering that incarceration can remove “The Committee recommends that profession- eligibility for State financial and other support, als working with and for children at all stages and that this can have negative impacts on the of the criminal justice process, as well as other children of those incarcerated, the Committee professionals such as teachers and social workers recommends to State parties that the removal who may come into contact with such children, of support should be decided on an individual be trained to appropriately provide any needed basis and that the best interests of the child(ren) support to children with incarcerated parents.” should be a primary consideration when making such decisions.” This problem has been addressed for some time now, with a certain amount of work and analysis, For children living with an incarcerated mother especially at the regional and international level3. “The Committee recommends that State parties This last section demonstrates that the Committee ensure the provision of sufficient and quality so- on the Rights of the Child itself assumes that CIP cial services, including health and educational have the same rights as any child, in addition to facilities, for children living with an incarcerated the fact that the penalty imposed on the adult mother.” cannot and should not affect their development and exercise of rights. It is expected that the results and findings Respect for the views of the child presented below will generate a better “The Committee recommends that State par- understanding of the problem. ties and relevant actors take into full account the rights of the child to have his/her view taken into account in all decisions affecting the child.”

Information sharing “The Committee recommends that State parties collect and maintain records of the number of children of incarcerated parents, both those ac- companying parents into detention and children who remain on the outside during a parent’s detention, and make such information available in a format and in such ways as will help the provision of such support as is needed to the children.”

2 Based on the document 2011CRCDGDReport, prepared by the Committee on the Rights of the Child after the Day of Ge- neral Discussion 2011. All the information and documents about the DGD are available at https://ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/ CRC/Pages/Discussion2011.aspx

3 Some of those resources can be found at: http://www.osborneny.org/resources/see-us-support-us-toolkit/ https://youth.gov/youth-topics/children-of-incarcerated-parents or at https://nrccfi.camden.rutgers.edu/

9 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION HOW MANY CHILDREN OF INCARCERATED PARENTS ARE IN ARGENTINA?

It should be noted that, at the time of this writing, population projections based on the Population there is no official data on the number of CIP, a fact of Census of 20106. profound relevance that stands in opposition to the recommendations of the United Nations Committee Estimation of the scope and magnitude of the on the Rights of the Child4. This lack of information population of CIP makes it harder to properly evaluate the issue and First, we calculated the ratio of CIP to the total therefore makes it impossible to fully implement population of children aged 0 to 17 years old. Since it beneficial programs and activities. is a statistically small phenomenon (close to 1%) and The few available resources that address the we worked with a cross sectional random sample, problem are different academic investigations which producing a high level of variability from one year allow for an estimation of the scope and magnitude to the next,7 we decided to use the three samples of the population of CIP. The first of these sources together, obtaining an average ratio of 1.12% of CIP comes from the aforementioned research, where it (See table A1-Annex). was estimated that there were between 67,000 and Secondly, we estimated the population from 84,000 CIP in Argentina in 2014 (Gurises Unidos/ 0 to 17 years old in this situation, based on the CWS, 2014, page 20). Considering more up-to-date national population projections of the 2010 National prison statistics5 and the results of the 2014 convicted Population Census. As it was not disaggregated by prisoners survey, carried out by the Center for the simple ages, the estimates for the group of 15 to 19 Study on Violence and Insecurity of the National years old was multiplied by 0.6 (See table A2-Annex). University of Tres de Febrero (Bergman et al, 2014), it can be estimated that there are currently between Finally, we multiplied the proportion of CIP at the 132,000 and 143,000 CIP in Argentina. national level (1.12%) to the population estimate for In order to better determine the number of CIP in that age group, obtaining an estimate of 146,112 Argentina, we opted to make a new estimate based CIP at the time of the 2018 ODSA survey (See table on the information provided by the Argentina Social A3 -Annex). Debt Survey (ODSA 2014, 2015 and 2016) and the

4 In Argentina, the only official information available is the number of children who live with their mothers in prison.

5 The recent report of SNEEP (Sentence Execution Statistics National System) says that there are 85,283 incarcerated persons in Argentina.

6 INDEC “Población por sexo y grupos quinquenales de edad. Años 2010-2040” at https://www.indec.gob.ar/bajarCua- droEstadistico.asp?idc=3637AEB99A04077CE724E3BA7204F0378412E66C6A766CB3F0196914AC48422A4A9EB1EA9 37ED324, consulted on 09/14/2018.

7 The ODSA observed a value of 1.21% in 2014, 0.61% in 2015, and 1.53% in 2016.

10 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION Children living in a household with at Figure 1 least one adult member incarcerated.

1,12% 2018 COIP

98,88% THERE WERE APPROXIMATELY Children living in a home without incarcerated 146,112 CIP AT THE TIME OF THE members 2018 ODSA SURVEY.

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

WHO ARE THE CIP?

Who are the CIP? That is, who are the children who urban areas, 42.2% reside in middle or lower-middle live in a household with an incarcerated adult or rela- income areas, and 6.8% reside in middle or high in- tive, and what are the characteristics of these house- come areas. holds? In order to characterize the CIP, we used the sample of such cases identified in the Argentina Social Debt Survey (ODSA) from 2014-2016. Figure 1.1 CIP by age Among the CIP surveyed, 29% are in early child- As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 hood (0 to 4 years old), 43% are between 5 and 12 years old. years old and 27% are adolescents. As expected, there are nearly equal percentages of females (51.6%) 32,3% and males (48.4%). 0 to 4 CIP reside primarily in the main urban centers, with more than a third (38.5%) living in Greater Bue- 43,5% nos Aires8, 9.3% in Greater Rosario, 5% in Greater 5 to 12 Córdoba, 5.6% in Greater Mendoza, and 41.6% living in the rest of the country’s urban centers. 24,2% In terms of their socio-residential condition--that 13 to 17 is, the environment or urban space in which CIPs grow and build their social relationships—21.7% re- Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la side in shanty towns, 29.2% reside in low-income Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

11 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION Regarding the composition of households where Figure 1.2 CIP by gender the CIP reside, four out of ten reside in single-parent households (39.8%) while six out of ten belong to As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 two-parent households (60.2%). years old. In relation to the socio-occupational situation of CIP household members, the great majority work in more informal employment9. Specifically, 37.9% 51,6% belong to informal workers’ sectors, 55.3% belong Female to an integrated worker sector, 6.2% belong to non- professional middle sectors, and only 0.6% belong 48,4% to professional middle sectors. That is, there is a Male predominance of worker sectors (informal and integrated). Finally, the educational level10 of CIP households is generally low, with almost half (48.8%) having a low educational level, 30.4% having a medium-low edu- Figure 1.3 CIP by place of residence cational level, 15.5% having a medium educational level and only 5.6% having a high educational level. As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 The characterization of CIP that emerges from years old. the information collected in the Argentina Social Debt Survey coincides with what different qualitative studies have outlined about the households of CIP. 41,6% Along these lines, it is found that---like households Rest of urban centers in general from which most incarcerated people come--the great majority of the CIP households are characterized by low educational level, high level of 38,5% Greater Buenos Aires labor informality, and precarious socio-residential environments. 9,3% 5,6% 5,0% Greater Rosario Greater Mendoza Greater Córdoba

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

8 This includes the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and the Buenos Aires’ Conurbation.

9 By socio-occupational strata we understand the households class position through the occupational condition, type and qualification and the maximum educational and social protection levels reached by the primary income-generator in the household.

10 The household educational level refers to the average years of schooling for parents or head of household (when parents are absent). Completing only primary school is designated as very low level, completing primary but not secondary is designated as low level, completing secondary is designated as medium level, and attending college or university is designated as medium-high.

12 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION THERE IS A CLEAR GAP WITH REGARD TO THE EDUCATIONAL LEVEL NEGATIVE PARENTING STYLES, AS CIP OF CIP HOUSEHOLDS IS EXPERIENCE HIGHER LEVELS OF VERBAL GENERALLY LOW AND PHYSICAL ABUSE THAN THEIR PEERS

Figure 1.4 CIP by socio-residential condition Figure 1.6 CIP by socio-occupational strata

As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 years old. years old.

42,2% Middle or lower-middle 55,3% income Integrated worker

29,2% 37,9% Low-income Informal worker

21,7% 6,8% 6,2% 0,6% Shanty towns Middle or high income Middle non-professional Middle professional

Figure 1.5 CIP by household composition Figure 1.7 CIP by household educational level

As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 years old. years old.

60,2% 48,4% Two-parent household Low

30,4% 39,8% Medium- low Single-parent household 15,5% 5,6% Medium High

Fuente: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

13 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION HOW DOES FAMILY IMPRISONMENT AFFECT CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS?

This study does not attempt to fully answer this process,11 according to a series of structural variables very important question, but it does provide initial (see table A4). analysis to understand and/or confirm the various Two groups of 161 cases were obtained, one made impacts that the incarceration of a family member up of CIP and another group of “similar” children has on children. and adolescents who live in households without That is why, following the research designs of incarcerated members. impact studies and to neutralize the effect of other Once the groups were formed, an analysis was variables, a control/comparison group (called group made of each group’s access to resources and deficits B) was created through a Closest Neighbors Matching in the exercise of rights.

POVERTY, UNSATISFIED BASIC NEEDS AND FOOD SECURITY

First, an analysis compared the living conditions of CIP with those of their peers in group B regarding At least when my dad was at home, the vulnerability to childhood poverty among the I didn’t ask for anything. But now, children of both groups. “ Almost all the reports, studies and research that sometimes we don’t have enough to address the issue demonstrate that the incarceration eat, we grab a milk or a tea with bread, of a household member has a negative effect on the we eat and go to bed.” family economy. Argentine child, 12 years old (2017) 12

11 The Closest Neighbors Matching process was done using the statistical software STATA.

12 These are testimonies collected in different activities and research projects by CWS-LAC and/or one of its partners. More testimonials are available at http://nnapes.org/multimedia-producciones-de-la-plataforma

14 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION And suddenly there is no money and I have to put up with my peers making fun of me because I always wear the same clothes. It’s an uncomfortable and ugly feeling that’s really scary.” “ Argentine teenager, 19 years old (2016)

A document produced by the Annie E. Casey needs, there are no significant differences between Foundation (2008), which cites Garfinkel, Geller and the groups;13 more than one third of children in both Cooper (2007), concludes that “parental incarceration groups live in homes with unsatisfied basic needs. creates additional challenges for children and families At the same time, 37.9% of CIP experience food often resulting in financial instability and material insecurity, a situation that occurs among 30.4% of hardship, with financial problems the most severe for children in group B.14 (See figure 2.1) already-vulnerable families and caregivers” (page 1). The study “Invisible No More” also describes how “the incarceration of a parent makes it more difficult for the remaining caregivers to provide children with such basic necessities as food, shelter, and education” They used to go to school and now they don’t. (page 15). “Sometimes I can’t support them; I don’t have enough The current study found that seven of ten CIP reside and I have to say ‘we don’t have anything.’ That is part of in households that are below the poverty line (68.9%) and 16.1% are below the indigence line, compared the situation that we are living...” with 57.1% and 19.9%, respectively, for children in group B. When considering the unsatisfied basic Argentine mother (2017)

13 This is the result of the use of structural household variables for the matching process.

14 The negative economic impacts of incarceration on a household are the result of loss of income (in cases where the incarcerated household member previously was employed) as well as new expenses related to the legal process and the costs of supporting the incarcerated person in prison (food, clothing, transportation and lodging expenses while visiting the incarcerated family member).

15 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION If a person is incarcerated, the state should financially “help his family so that they have, at least, some support”.

Uruguayan young boy (2015) 37,9 %

It is therefore clear that CIP are more exposed to poverty due to insufficient income than their peers in group B, with two out of every three CIP of CIP experience being in situations of poverty. This is not the case food insecurity for unsatisfied basic needs, which affect one third of children in both groups. However, CIP are more exposed to food insecurity than their peers who don’t have incarcerated relatives.

FIGURE 2.1 Living conditions. CIP vs Group B.

As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 years CIP No CIP

68,9

57,1

36,6 36,0 37,9 30,4 19,9 16,1

Poverty Indigence Unsatisﬁed Basic Needs Food Insecurity

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

16 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION ACCESS TO HEALTH AND INCLUSION IN SOCIAL SECURITY

What’s missing is support. When I was a kid, I would have liked having a professional person who could guide me and take care of me and who knew about these things.” “ Argentine teenager, 19 years old (2016)

Similar to the study by EAN, the publication “A and prescription drug abuse compared with peers Shared Sentence” explains that “having a parent without a PI [parent incarceration] history” (page 5). incarcerated is a stressful, traumatic experience of In addition, a high number of CIP do not have the same magnitude as abuse, domestic violence and adequate access to public services (Figure 2.2). It is divorce, with a potentially lasting negative impact on estimated that two out of three CIP (67.7%) don’t a child’s well-being” (page 3). have health insurance coverage and are treated in A new study published by Nia Heard-Garris et al. public hospitals, compared with only 60.9% of the in Pediatrics (2018) found that “young adults with MI children of Group B. (mother incarceration) and FI (father incarceration) had significantly higher odds of forgone health care.” In addition, it was identified that “young adults with MI or FI history had significantly higher adjusted odds of smoking cigarettes, drinking problems,

“I think there should be psychological support for all of this. I never had it...” Argentine young girl, 17 years old (2015)

17 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION The family salary benefit, which allows workers to get a “bonus” for each of their children, is only provided to regular employees and not available to those engaged in informal work. Since CIP households have more people working informally, four out of five CIP are excluded from the family salary benefit (81.4%) as opposed to only 70.2% of their peers in I’ve been trying to process social assistance for group B. In addition, it was found that 60.2% of the “seven years now. I explained the whole situation, CIP have social protection through a public (non- that I’m in charge of my brothers and that I’m contributory) program, compared to 43.5% of the not the mother but I need help. I’m the sister and children in group B. In conclusion, dependence on social programs is greater among CIP than among although I’m not the mother I have a direct link. I their peers in the comparison group. need help. I need to be listened to at least.” It is very important to note that most CIP depend on public (non-contributory) programs, and this is Caregiver, 25 years old, Argentina (2017) consistent with the fact that they live in households with unregistered workers. Furthermore, when the mother is the one who is incarcerated, the impact on children’s lives is much greater as the children may stop receiving some social assistance that is only collected by mothers.

FIGURE 2.2 Health coverage and social security access. CIP vs Group B.

As a percentage of children between 0 and 17 years old. CIP Non CIP

81,4

67,7 70,2 60,9 60,2

43,5

Lack health coverageLack Family Salary BeneﬁtDependence on Public (Non-Contributory) Programs

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

18 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION EDUCATION

After they took him away, I had to leave school because no one could take care of my sisters. My mom had to start working. I went to school in the morning, and they went to school in the afternoon, so I preferred for my sisters to go to school instead of me “ Argentine teenager, 17 years old (2015)

As a result of the regional consultation “The Voices There is also a consensus that teachers and school and Perceptions of Children with an Incarcerated officials may not fully understand the issue and may Adult Referent, a Contribution to the Global Study further stigmatize CIP (Dallaire, Ciccone and Wilson, of Incarcerated Children,”15 it was concluded that 2010, McCrickard and Flynn, 2016, Morgan, Leeson “the need for children to work, the lack of routines and Carter Dillon, 2013). and authority at home, and the limited capacity of the education system to welcome children with an incarcerated parent or guardian all contribute to increasing absenteeism and dropping out.” Those children who do attend school often hide Sometimes I sat at the back of the classroom their situation from classmates and teachers, due to “because many people don’t want to sit with shame or fear of ridicule and stigmatization, making you if your mom or dad is incarcerated. And it impossible for such children to receive the help the teacher never came to ask me, ‘How is they need. On the other hand, even when teachers are aware of the situation they may not have the your dad? Do you need help? Do you need necessary tools or knowledge to adequately deal with something?’ Nobody ever helps you. the problem, as indicated by “Serving Children of Incarcerated Parents,” a case study on the experiences of school counselors (Brown, Barrio Milton, 2018). Argentine teenager, 17 years old (2015)

15 The regional consultation was supported by the Violence Against Children Special Representative Office of the UN General Secretary.

19 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION Of those school-age children (4 to 17 years old) with an incarcerated household member, 13.6% don’t attend any educational establishment, 19.2% attend but are overage for their grade level, 23.5% repeated a grade, and 8.3% required school support during the previous 30 days. Among children without incarcerated parents (group B), 11.1% don’t attend, 12.7% attend but are overage, 15.8% repeated a grade, and only 2.8 % required school support during % % the previous month. 13,6 11,1 Clearly, educational development is one area CIP Non CIP where family incarceration has a great effect on children, so it is recommended to go into detail about don’t attend this issue in future research. school at all

FIGURE 2.3 Access to education. CIP vs Group B.

As a percentage of children between 4 and 17 years old. CIP Non CIP

23,5

19,2

15,8 13,6 12,7 11,1

8,3

2,8

Attend educational RepeatedReceived school Doesn't attend any establishment with over-age support educational establishment

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

20 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION CHILD LABOR

We started doing everything my father did. We did everything ourselves with my sister. “ Uruguayan teenager, 16 years old (2015)

Although there is no significant difference between CIP and non-CIP when it comes to child labor, it should be noted that among these children almost one in eight (13.8%) perform economic activities (work in exchange for tips or money) and/or intensive domestic activities. 13,8%

I was fourteen. My aunt started working and I “had to wash. I started to do things I had never done, because I was twelve or thirteen years of CIP between 5 and 2 years old and my mom was still cutting my toenails. old perform economic activities Then I had to start cooking, washing, taking (work in exchange for tips care of my brother and my cousin, cleaning or money) and/or intensive the whole house… domestic activities.

Argentine young woman, 21 years old (2017)

21 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION FIGURE 2.4 Children and labor. CIP vs Group B.

As a percentage of children between 5 and 17 years old. CIP Non CIP

13,8 12,8 12,8 12,8

3,7

0,9

Intensive domestic Economic activities (in Economic activities (in activities exchange for tips or exchange for tips or money) money) and/or intensive domestic activities

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

UPBRINGING AND SOCIALIZATION OPPORTUNITIES

When a member of the household is incarcerated, It affects not only their home living conditions, but there are adjustments and changes in the family also their ways of socializing, since their participation dynamics both for adults (mainly women) and for in cultural, recreational and/or sports activities can children. While one of the primary changes is a be suspended. However, for many of these families, reduction in the economic resources of the household, the urgent needs and problems that come with the other changes include the redistribution of family incarceration of a loved one push other concerns— roles, the modification of the housing arrangements, such as their children’s socialization—to the or even home relocation. This impacts many children. background, either intentionally or through omission.

22 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION I used to study theater. When I was a girl, I was always playing, singing, dancing, acting and things like that. I would have liked to be an actress too. And that would have helped me. But then I stopped doing all those things

“ Argentine young woman, 21 years old (2017)

I ended up living with my grandmother and then, when I started to have some differences with her, I decided to live alone in my grandpa’s apartment. And since it was empty, I came to live with G., who was small, and also with T., who lived with me for a long time, and he still does…

“ Joven argentina, 25 years old, 2017

That is why it is important to analyze the effect that among 24.3% of children without incarcerated family incarceration has on the CIP’s upbringing and relatives. In conclusion, very high upbringing and socialization processes. stimulation opportunities deficits were discovered, To analyze the upbringing environments and but there were not significant differences between the socialization opportunities of the CIP, several children with or without incarcerated family members. indicators were examined (figures 2.5, 2.6 and 2.7). Some indicators relate to emotional and intellectual encouragement in the first years of life and family education styles. Others relate to socialization opportunities in non-formal training and recreation spaces, sports, physical, artistic and cultural areas, and the exposure time to screens (Tuñón, 2017). First, stimulation opportunity deficits were analyzed Birthdays are terrible. We always used to among children up to 12 years of age. Sharing a “celebrate her birthday with her friends, until this sleeping bed creates sleep problems and prevents happened. Now we don’t to avoid the children children from having appropriate rest, and it is also an asking, “Where’s your dad?” Life in general goes indicator of a lack of privacy and autonomy (Tuñón, by, but I had to start missing some moments. Or 2017). While four out of ten CIP (40.2%) share a bed, only 36.9% of their peers in group B do so. In we celebrate her birthday with girls only, so that addition, almost half of all children (both CIP and father’s absence goes unnoticed. group B) usually don’t share stories or oral histories Argentine mother, 36 years old (2017) in the family and don’t have children’s books at home. More than one in four CIP (26.2%) usually don’t celebrate their birthdays, a situation that occurs

23 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION FIGURE 2.5 Stimulation opportunities deficit. CIP vs. Group B.

As a percentage of children between 0 and 12 years old. CIP Non CIP

50,8 47,5 49,2 40,2 36,9 47,5

26,2 24,3

Shares sleeping Usually doesn't share Doesn't have Usually doesn't bed family stories children's books at celebrate birthdays home

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

Vulnerability to negative FIGURE 2.6 upbringing styles. CIP vs Group B. VULNERABILITY TO NEGATIVE As a percentage of children between UPBRINGING STYLES 0 and 17 years old.

As a percentage of children between 0 and 12 years old. CIP Non CIP

Analysis was conducted of the exposure of children 37,3 to abuse as a form of discipline. Specifically, two dimensions were analyzed: verbal aggressions (insults as a form of discipline, calling children “clumsy, 23,6 stupid, useless”) and physical aggressions (hitting, slapping, etc.). When comparing CIP and their peers without incarcerated parents, CIP were found to have 13,0 a greater exposure to negative upbringing styles. 5,6 Specifically, while 13% of CIP are exposed to verbal aggression and 37.3% to physical aggression, only 5.6% of group B experience verbal aggression and Verbal agressionPhysical agression 23.6% experience physical aggression.

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observa- torio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

24 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION SOCIALIZATION OPPORTUNITIES DEFICIT

Finally, an analysis was done regarding the artistic or cultural activities outside of school. The socialization and interaction opportunities outside third was overexposure to screens, which describes the home among children from 5 to 17 years old. children who were exposed to screens for more than As children play independently and interact with two hours a day. their peers, they develop more independent social Physical activity opportunities deficit is higher relationships with adults, make their own decisions among CIP (78.4%) than among their peers in and, in that process, gain self-confidence (Tuñón, group B (66.3%). The incidence of cultural activity 2017). opportunities deficit was very high in both groups of Three indicators were analyzed. The first was children, with only one in nine children doing cultural physical activity opportunities deficit, which pertains or artistic activities outside of school. Regarding to children who don’t do physical activity or sports overexposure to screens, 70.4% of CIP spend more outside of school. The second was cultural activity than 2 hours a day in front of screens compared to opportunities deficit, meaning children don’t do only 56.7% of group B.

FIGURE 2.7 Socialization opportunities deficit. CIP vs Group B.

As a percentage of children between 5 and 17 years. CIP Non CIP

88,1 89,9 78,9 70,2 67,0

55,6

Physical activity deﬁcit Cultural activity deﬁcit Overexposure to screens

Source: EDSA-Bicentenario (2010-2016). Observatorio de la Deuda Social Argentina. UCA.

25 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION FINAL THOUGHTS

In conclusion, there are around 146,000 children greater levels of verbal and physical abuse than their living in a household with an incarcerated family peers. Regarding socialization opportunities, there member and directly experiencing the effect of the are greater deficits in physical activity and higher penal system. levels of screen exposure among CIP. These children are more likely to experience In conclusion, there is sufficient evidence to affirm poverty and food insecurity. The poverty rate among that having a household member incarcerated has a children with an incarcerated family member (CIP) is negative impact on the living conditions of children. 68.9%, compared with 57.1% of the control group. Specifically, it increases the possibilities of them Likewise, while 37.9% of CIP’s households suffer food experiencing poverty and food insecurity, decreased insecurity, only 30.4% of the control group are food access to health coverage, greater difficulties during insecure. When such basic needs are unmet, it also school, increased exposure to negative parenting makes it difficult for children to exercise the rest styles, and less opportunities for socialization. This of their rights, such as enjoying good health, fully is especially true given that many of the children were accessing education, and having a full life. considerably vulnerable prior to the incarceration of Regarding access to health coverage and social a household member. security inclusion, there is a greater deficit of health Finally, it should be mentioned that the ODSA and coverage among CIP, and a greater number of its human and social development indicators were them only have access to public health services. not designed with the objective of measuring gaps CIP households bear the negative consequences of in the population of CIP, and therefore there remains informal work, such as exclusion from the family salary a need for additional research. bonus, since informal work is more common among Children with incarcerated household members CIP than the control group (81.4% compared with face constant stigmatization in different areas of 70.2%). In addition, CIP households are more likely their lives, and this can result in them feeling shame, to depend on non-contributory social protection showing anger, being defiant, and having increased programs. tendencies towards violent behavior (Allard, 2011). The greatest statistical differences found between At the same time, according to Murphey and Mae CIP and the control group were those related to Cooper (2015), “having an imprisoned parent is an education. Among school-age children, it was found example of a loss that is not socially approved or that 19.2% of CIP are overage for their grade level (often) supported, which may compound children’s and 23.5% of CIP repeated a grade level, compared grief and pain, leading to emotional difficulties and to only 12.7% and 15.8% of the control group, problem behaviors.” As indicated in “Children Need respectively. Further, 8.3% of CIP required school Dads Too” (Rosenberg, 2009), “For those children support during the previous month, while only 2.8% who are separated from their imprisoned parent, the of their peers in the control group needed such effect of separation can be greater than for those services. Finally, among school-age children, 13.6% who lose or are separated from their parent in other of CIP don’t attend school at all, compared with 11.1% ways… There is also a demoralization connected of children in the control group. It can be concluded with imprisonment that is not found in other forms of that belonging to a household with incarcerated involuntary separation, and children may be fearful members has a negative effect on the educational for their parent in jail.” opportunities and development of children. That is why thirty years after the adoption of the In terms of child labor, there are no significant Convention on the Rights of the Child, and eight statistical differences between children who reside years since the Committee on the Rights of the Child in homes with incarcerated members and those who issued recommendations on the subject, it is of the do not. utmost importance to make children with incarcerated When it comes to the upbringing of children household members a priority for childhood and deficits in high stimulation opportunities, there specialists, professionals and researchers—especially are not significant differences between CIP and those that work with vulnerable children—and that the control group. However, there is a significant these people incorporate the above-mentioned gap related to negative parenting. CIP experience concerns into their work.

26 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION METHODOLOGICAL ANNEX

ANNEX I: Estimation of the number of CIP in The number of children living in households with Argentina incarcerated members was calculated based on the The way in which households with CIP were identified total population of children and adolescents from 0 and surveyed in the Argentina`s Social Debt Survey to 17 years of age. Since the percentage of CIP in (ODSA) has some methodological implications to the overall population is statistically small (close to consider: 1%) and we worked with a cross sectional random sample, which produces a high level of variability All children residing in a household with at from one year to the next,20 we averaged three years least one incarcerated household member were of data, with the conclusion that 1.12% of children identified as CIP, regardless of the type or nature and adolescents belong to households with at least of the link between the child and the incarcerated one incarcerated member (See table A1). person. To estimate the magnitude of the population from 0 to 17 years old, we used the national population If there was not an incarcerated household projections of the 2010 national census. Since it was member, then children living in that household not disaggregated by simple ages, the estimation were not labelled as CIP. Due to this methodology, for the group of 15 to 19 years old was obtained by it was impossible to identify children as “CIP” multiplying it by 0.6 (See table A2). who had an incarcerated family member who had resided in another household or children who had moved to another household following the incarceration of a family member.

20 In the 2014 Survey, the observed value was 1.21%, in 2015 it was 0.61% and in 2016 it was 1.53%.

27 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION TABLE A1 Children belonging to households with at least one incarcerated member.

Is any member of the household currently or has been incarcerated or in a juvenile correction? 2014 2015 2016 TOTAL

N 139467 70651176582386700 Yes, currently % 1,21 0,61 1,53 1,12

N 388419 375392 559353 1323163 Yes, previously incarcerated but not currently % 3,43,3 4,83,8

N 10904299109874691071285232604621 No, never % 94,8 95,3 92,5 94,2

N 74901101560130287306747 No response % 0,70,9 1,10,9

N 11507086 11535072 11579074 34621231 TOTAL % 100,0100,0 100,0100,0

Source: Data based on Encuesta de la Deuda Social Argentina 2014-2016. ODSA-UCA.

TABLE A2 Total projected population between 0 and 17 years old according to age groups. Total of the country. Years 2010-2018.

YEAR AGE GROUP 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

0 - 4 3.571.540 3.622.962 3.671.0113.712.6113.745.299 3.764.7363.757.709 3.748.846 3.738.229

5 - 9 3.507.135 3.507.340 3.511.823 3.522.7213.541.2753.570.085 3.621.52133.669.575 .711.205

10 - 14 3.541.954 3.530.131 3.521.389 3.515.301 3.510.9723.508.531 3.508.70733.513.167 .524.036

15 - 17* 2.135.888 2.144.183 2.144.7122.139.692 2.131.995 2.123.7782.116.757 2.111.568 2.107.943

TOTAL 12.756.517 12.804.616 12.848.935 12.890.325 12.929.541 12.967.130 13.004.694 13.043.156 13.081.413

Source: Calculation based on “Population by sex and five-year age groups, years 2010-2040” INDEC.

28 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION Estimation of children and adolescents (0 to 17 years old) belonging to households TABLE A3 with an incarcerated member by year.

YEAR

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total population 0 to 17 12.756.517 12.804.616 12.848.935 12.890.325 12.929.541 12.967.130 13.004.694 13.043.156 13.081.413 years old

Population 0 to 17 years old belonging to 142.483 143.020 143.515 143.978 144.416 144.836 145.255 145.685 146.112 households with an incarcerated member

Source: Estimation based on the micro-data of the EDSA 2014-2016, and the INDEC population projections 2010-2040.

ANNEX II: PAIRING OR MATCHING BY CLOSEST NEIGHBORS

In order to analyze the impact or effect of family Through this process we obtained two groups incarceration on the development of CIP, we compared of 161 cases/children, one made up of children them to children with similar social characteristics and adolescents residing in a household with an who didn’t have an incarcerated household member. incarcerated member and another group of “similar” To follow the research designs of impact studies and children and adolescents from households without to neutralize the effect of structural variables--such incarcerated members. Once formed, we analyzed as their residence conditions or the home to which access to services and exercise of rights among they belong—for each member of the target group children and adolescents of the two groups. (children with incarcerated household members) we looked for a child who was similar in multiple characteristics, but that did not have an incarcerated household member. The latter group of children formed the control group called “group B.” The method used to make both groups homogeneous was the Closest Neighbors Matching,17 and it utilized a series of structural variables (See table A4).

17 This pairing by Closest Neighbors was done using the STATA statistical software.

29 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION TABLE A4 Structural variables used for pairing.

Variable Description Categories

Survey - 2014 Year of the study - 2015 year - 2016

- Male Gender Gender of the child - Female

- 0 to 4 Age Ages divided into three groups: - 5 to 12 0 to 4 | 5 to 12 | 13 to 17 group - 13 to 17

School age (age adjusted to (Values from 0 to 17) Age birthday month)

Residence in Shanty towns versus formal - Shanty towns shanty towns urban centers - Formal urban centers

Socio-occupational Socio-occupational level - Marginal worker strata level of the head of divided into four groups - Integrated worker strata - Middle non-professional and household professional strata

Household’s Maximum educational attainment of parent - Very low educational or head of household (where parents are - Medium-low level absent). - Medium - Medium high

- Non-single-parent home Household type Type of household: Recoded home’s type - Single-parent home

- Greater Buenos Aires Place of Greater Rosario Population grouped in 5 categories Greater Córdoba residence - Greater Mendoza - Other urban centers

30 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION THE SURVEY: SERIE BICENTENARIO 2010-2016 FACT SHEET

DOMAIN Urban areas with 80,000 inhabitants or more in the Republic of Argentina. Representative of the population composed of private households in homes located in urban centerswith 80,000 or more inhabitants. Timely sample households: approximately 5,712 cases per year.

POPULATION The total number of children (age 0 to 17 years old) surveyed in 2014, 2015, and 2016 was 4,929, 4,634, and 5,325, respectively.

SAMPLE Longitudinal multipurpose. Not proportional post-calibrated. 952 census radios. Urban agglomerates grouped into 3 large conglomerates according to their size: 1) Greater Buenos Aires: Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and Buenos Aires Province (Northern Area, West Area and Southern Area)18; 2) Other Metropolitan Areas: Greater Rosario, Greater Córdoba, San Miguel de Tucumán and Tafí Viejo, and Greater Mendoza; and 3) Other urban areas: Mar del Plata, Greater Salta, Greater Paraná, Greater Resistencia, Greater San Juan, Neuquén-Plottier-Cipolletti, Zárate, La Rioja, Goya, San Rafael, Comodoro Rivadavia and Ushuaia-Río Grande. Multistage, with a first stage of conglomeration and a second stage of stratification. The selection of the samples within each agglomerate and stratum is random and weighted by the number of households in each radius. The quarters inside each sample point and the homes of each quarters are randomly selected through systematic sampling, while the indicators of the children within each household are relieved for the total of members aged 0 to 17 based on the interviews with the mother, father or adult referent. Socio-economic stratification carried out by classification and management of census radios, according to the average level of education of the head of household in each census radius. Calibration by age, sex, activity status and population in shanty towns and informal neighborhoods.

DATE OF Fourth quarter of 2014-2015, third quarter of 2016. PRODUCTION

SAMPLE ERROR +/- 1.3%, with an estimate of a population proportion of 50% and a confidence level of 95%.

18 The Buenos Aires Metropolitan Area is made up of the 15 communes of the City of Buenos Aires and 30 partidos of the Conurbano Bonaerense (Suburban belt that surrounds the City of Buenos Aires), 24 belonging to the Conurbano in its classic definition and 6 partidos of the third urban belt: The Northern Conurbano area is made up of the partidos of Vicente López, San Isidro, San Fernando, Tigre, San Martín, San Miguel, Malvinas Argentinas, José C. Paz and Pilar. The Western Conurbano area is made up of the partidos of La Matanza, Merlo, Moreno, Morón, Hurlingham, Ituzaingó, Tres de Febrero, Cañuelas, General Rodríguez and Marcos Paz. The Southern Conurbano area is made up of the partidos of Avellaneda, Quilmes, Berazategui, Florencio Varela, Lanús, Lomas de Zamora, Almirante Brown, Esteban Echeverría, Ezeiza, Presidente Perón and San Vicente.

31 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albamonte, L., et al (2017) Crianza con ternura: aspx. – Last visit: December 2018. experiencias adversas de la niñez y fortalezas familiares Felitti et al., (1998). Relationship of Childhood Abuse and durante la niñez y su relación con factores de riesgo para la Household Dysfunction to Many of the Leading Causes of salud. 1a ed. – Avellaneda : Undav Ediciones. Death in Adults. The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Allard P. (2011). “When the cost is too great: The emotional Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol 14, n°4, and psychological impact on children of incarcerating their p 245-258. parents for drug offences”. Justice Strategies. Available Garfinkel, I., Geller, A., y Cooper, C. (2007). “Parental at https://justicestrategies.org/sites/default/files/ Incarceration in Fragile Families: Summary of Three Year publications/Allard_When%20the%20Cost%20is%20 Findings”. A report to the Annie E. Casey Foundation Too%20Great%2010%2012%2011%20JS%20Web%20 (unpublished); Hairston, C. Finney. (2007). Disponible en Version.pdf - Last visit: December 2018. https://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-childrenofinc Annie Casey Foundation (2016) “A SHARED SENTENCE arceratedparentsfactsheet.pdf. Last visit: December 2018. - The devastating toll of parental incarceration on kids, Hillis et al., (2010). The Protective Effect of Family families and communities”. Available at https://www.aecf. Strengths in Childhood against Adolescent Pregnancy and org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-asharedsentence-2016.pdf - Its Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences. Perm J., vol 14, Last visit: December 2018. n°3, p 18-27. Bergman, M. (2014). “Delito, Marginalidad y desempeño Heard-Garris N, Winkelman T.N.A., Choi H, et al. (2018) institucional en la Argentina: resultados de la encuesta de “Health Care Use and Health Behaviors Among Young presos condenados” Marcelo Bergman; Diego Masello; Adults With History of Parental Incarceration”. Pediatrics.; Christian Arias. –1a ed.– Sáenz Peña: Universidad Nacional 142(3):e20174314, Available at: http://pediatrics. de Tres de Febrero. aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/142/3/ Brown E., Barrio Minton C. (2018), “Serving Children of e20174314.full.pdf - Last visit: December 2018. Incarcerated Parents A Case Study of School Counselors’ Murphey D. y Mae Cooper P. “Parents Behind Bars, What Experiences”. Available at https://journals.sagepub. Happens to Their Children?” ChildTrends. Available at com/doi/full/10.1177/2156759X18778811 - Last visit: http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/BTB_23_4K_6. December 2018. pdf - Last visit: December 2018. Causadias, J. y Coffino, Ba. (2014).El apego, la conducta UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on antisocial y el encarcelamiento: Una perspectiva del Violence Against Children (2017). Regional consultation desarrollo. 10.13140/2.1.4159.9045. preliminary results leaflet “Las voces de las niñas, niños Committee on the Rights of the Child, (2011), “Report y adolescentes con un padre, madre o tutor privado de and Recommendations of the Day of General Discussion on libertad”. Available at: https://violenceagainstchildren. “Children of Incarcerated Parents””. Available at https:// un.org/sites/violenceagainstchildren.un.org/files/ ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRC/Pages/Discussion2011. nnapes_triptico_espaaol_final.pdf

32 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION Saavedra, E., Lappado, P., Bango, M. y Mello, F. (2013). “Invisibles: ¿hasta cuándo? Una primera aproximación a la vida y derechos de niñas, niños y adolescentes con referentes adultos encarcelados en América Latina y el Caribe.” Estudio de caso: Brasil, República Dominicana, Nicaragua y Uruguay. Gurises Unidos/CWS. Available at http://www.cwslac.org/docs/Invisibles_hasta_cuando. pdf

Sentence Execution Statistics National System, (2017), “Informe Anual República Argentina” - Dirección Nacional de Política Criminal en materia de Justicia y Legislación Penal, Subsecretaría de Política Criminal, Secretaría de Justicia, Ministerio de Justicia y Derechos Humanos. Last visit: December 2018.

Rosenberg J. (2009). “Children Need Dads Too: Children with Fathers in Prison”. QUNO.

Tuñón, I. (2017). Evolución de indicadores de desarrollo humano y social en la infancia en perspectiva de derechos humanos (2010-2016). Documento estadístico. Baróme tro de la Deuda Social Argentina. Serie del Bicentenario 2010-2016. 1ª ed. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Educa. Disponible en: http://wadmin.uca.edu.ar/public/ ckeditor/2017-Observatorio-Evolucion-indicadores-desa rrollo-humano-y-social.pdf.

Vergara, Carlos, (2017). ¿Qué son las experiencias adversas en la infancia y cómo influyen en la salud mental en la adultez? Available at https://www. actualidadenpsicologia.com/experiencias-adversas- infancia/ - Last visit: November 2018.

33 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION LINKS OF INTEREST

Regional Platform for the Defense of the Rights of Children with Incarcerated Family Members http://nnapes.org/news

Asociación Civil de Familiares de Detenidos de Argentina (ACIFAD). http://www.acifad.org

National Resource Center on Children and Families of the Incarcerated, Rutgers University – Camden. https://nrccfi.camden.rutgers.edu/resources/library

2011 Day of General Debate of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRC/Pages/Discussion2011.aspx

The Osborne Association. http://www.osborneny.org/resources/see-us-support-us-toolkit/

Children of Prisoners Europe (COPE). https://childrenofprisoners.eu/resources/

34 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION BARÓMETRO DE LA DEUDA SOCIAL DE LA INFANCIA

35 CHILDHOOD AND INCARCERATION