“Inmate-on-inmate sexual offending is much less pronounced in states that allow conjugal visitation,” the study concluded. The FIU study was conducted over a three-year period, from 2004-2006, in the five states that provided conjugal visits at that time: California, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York and Washington. In spite of the report’s findings, two states recently announced that they are discontinuing their conjugal visitation programs. “Our findings propel the idea that sexual violence can be attenuated given appropriate policy initiatives,” stated the authors of the 2012 study, Stewart D’Alessio, Jamie Flexon and Lisa Stolzenberg. Research Finds that Conjugal Visits Correlate with Fewer Sexual AssaultsĪ study conducted by researchers at Florida International University (FIU) found that state prison systems that permit conjugal visits report fewer rapes and sexual assaults than those where such visits are prohibited – a finding that the researchers said tends to dispute the theory that sex offenses are crimes of power rather than a means of sexual gratification. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED).Share: Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on G+ Share with email

CASE LAW IS CITED, AND FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. LITIGATION REMAINS MINOR BUT IS INCREASING AND WITH NEW AND CONVINCING EXPERT TESTIMONY, RIGHTS TO CONJUGAL VISITS IN PRISON MAY BE ESTABLISHED. THEY ALSO NEED TO CONVINCE PENAL ADMINISTRATORS THAT THEIR FEARS OF PUBLIC OPPOSITION ARE MISTAKEN SO THAT COURTS WILL FIND IT EASIER TO RECOGNIZE A LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE PRISON SYSTEMS TO PROVIDE CONJUGAL VISITS. PROPONENTS OF CONJUGAL VISITATIONS HAVE EMPHASIZED PUBLIC EDUCATION CONCERNING THE EFFECTS OF DENYING SUCH VISITATIONS. IT IS LIKELY TO BE DIFFICULT, ONCE THE EFFECTS OF SEXUAL DEPRIVATION ARE ESTABLISHED, FOR THE STATES TO SUCCESSFULLY ASSERT INTERESTS THAT OUTWEIGH THE RIGHTS AND INTERESTS OF THE PRISONERS. STUDIES AND EXPERT TESTIMONY TO THE PHYSICAL AND PYSCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF SEXUAL DEPRIVATION ARE ESPECIALLY RELEVANT. THE MOST COMMON ARGUMENT AGAINST DENIAL OF CONJUGAL VISITATION IS THAT FOUNDED UPON THE CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT CLAUSE OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT. THE CASE FOR CONJUGAL VISITS HAS BEEN BASED ON THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAIM, WHICH DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN MARRIED PERSONS WHO ARE INCARCERATED AND PRISONERS WHO ARE UNMARRIED, WITH AUTHORITY FOR ARGUING THAT THE RIGHT TO MARITAL INTIMACY IS A FUNDAMENTAL, PROTECTED RIGHT RAISING A STRICTER EQUAL PROTECTION SCRUTINY. PROGRAMS FOR CONJUGAL VISITS IN MISSISSIPPI, CALIFORNIA, AND NEW YORK SHOW PRISON ADMINISTRATORS' FEARS CONCERNING CONJUGAL VISITS TO BE LARGELY UNFOUNDED AND BASED MORE UPON ADMINISTRATIVE INERTIA THAN ON WELL-FOUNDED PENOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES. STUDIES ILLUSTRATE THE SEVERE IMPACT PROLONGED DEPRIVATION OF INTIMATE AND SEXUAL CONTACT CAN HAVE ON THE PERSONALITY STRUCTURE OF THE INMATE, INFLICTING CONSIDERABLE PSYCHOLOGICAL PAIN AND RESULTING IN A POTENTIALLY CRIPPLING DISABILITY UPON RELEASE FROM INCARCERATION.

Conjugal visits in prison