Formerly imprisoned polydrug users’ narratives about unemployment

ABSTRACT

Background: Understanding how formerly imprisoned drug users perceive the possibilities and problems associated with entering the job market is important as it could help the reintegration of these individuals into society. The aim of this study was to explore formerly imprisoned polydrug users’ narratives about unemployment.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 former prison inmates with extensive prior drug use. The interviews were coded and analysed using a categorical-content, narrative analysis approach.

Results: The interviews revealed that although the respondents did not regard themselves as having been unemployed, some mentioned stress during periods in which they lacked a legal occupation. The participants also talked about the importance of being committed to one’s work and described that it was not only employment in itself that was important, but also being able to value or appreciate their employment. Most respondents argued that they had never been dismissed from work because of their drug use, but descriptions of workplace deviance were common in the interviews, e.g. stealing, selling drugs, burglary, using drugs at work.

Conclusions: The respondents seemed to lack an identity as either unemployed or employed, which may constitute a problem when they enter the job market in the future.

KEYWORDS:

• Unemployment
• polydrug use
• ex-prisoners
• narrative analysis

Introduction

Many studies have shown that employment has positive effects on the reintegration of offenders into society (e.g. Hirschi, 2002; Visher, Debus-Sherrill, & Yahner, 2011). For example, employment can lead to an increased feeling of responsibility, personal worth, independence, dignity and of having a stake in society (Eley, 2007). Laub and Sampson (2003) argue that job stability is strongly related to resisting involvement in crime in at least four ways in particular. Firstly, stability and commitment at work and mutual ties between workers and employers increase informal social control and result in less involvement in crime. Secondly, full-time employment in particular leads to a meaningful change in “routine activities” since it reduces exposure to criminal opportunities and therefore reduces the probability of criminal behaviour. Full-time legal employment gives structure to an individual’s time and provides fewer opportunities for offending. Thirdly, employers can provide direct social control by keeping their employees in line. Fourthly, work can give an individual a sense of identity and provide meaning in life (Laub & Sampson, 2003).

One major barrier faced by many former prisoners entering the labour market is a past history of drug use. Having a history of drug use may cause difficulties for an individual attempting to enter the labour market as a result, for example, of concentration problems, poor timekeeping or absenteeism (Kemp & Neale, 2005). For those on prescribed medication, daily visits to the pharmacy might also affect an individual’s work performance (Neale, 1998). Individuals with ongoing or previous heroin use might have chaotic lifestyles that are incompatible with a full-time job (Kemp & Neale, 2005). Stephens (1991) argues that the more individuals become involved with illicit substances, the more they become alienated from conventional activities. In this way, these individuals begin to interact more with other drug users and, in so doing, lose contact with families and friends who do not use drugs (ibid.). Another study, by MacDonald and Pudney (2000), found that the use of opiates, cocaine and crack cocaine were all associated with an increased risk of unemployment. A study by Klee, McLean, and Yavorsky (2002). (2002) showed further that employers regarded former drug users as unreliable, untrustworthy and unsafe.

Although the relationship between employment and crime is a relatively well-explored area of research, few qualitative studies have focused on how formerly imprisoned drug users perceive and interpret the importance of having a job and how they view being unemployed following their release from prison. The aim of this study is to explore formerly imprisoned polydrug users’ narratives about unemployment. The study directs a particular focus at how the study participants perceive the situation of being without a job, whether being employed creates a sense of meaningfulness and whether using drugs and/or engaging in crime is related to their periods of unemployment.

Material and methods

Sample

The data on which this study is based are comprised of semi-structured interviews with 22 formerly imprisoned polydrug users in Sweden. The participants (five women and seventeen men) were interviewed in 2015 and their ages ranged from 26 to 61 (average = 43). Four respondents were born abroad, the remaining eighteen in Sweden. In total, fourteen respondents said that they had spent a total of three years or more in prison and five said that they had been in prison for in excess of ten years. The shortest total period of imprisonment described by a respondent was four months and the longest period was 14.5 years.

The procedure for identifying respondents for inclusion in the study was as follows. The chairpersons of different regional departments of an NGO working with the reintegration of former prisoners in Sweden were contacted by telephone in order to seek assistance in recruiting respondents. When a chairperson agreed to participate in the recruitment process, an e-mail was sent explaining the aim of the study together with a letter requesting informed consent to be given to potential respondents. All interviews were conducted in a private room at the facilities of the NGO with only the interviewer and the respondent present.

The interviews were semi-structured and followed a relatively spontaneous interview procedure (see Kvale & Brinkmann, 2014). Thus topics were not followed sequentially but used as a guideline for the aspects that should be included in the interview. Interview themes covered working life prior to the first prison sentence, working life subsequent to their most recent sentence, previous education, thoughts about being unemployed/employed and ideas about the future. After the interview, each respondent was given a cinema ticket.

The emphasis was directed at maintaining a conversational style and the interviewees were encouraged to mention any other issues they felt were important (see Dell & Papagiannidou, 1999). Interviewees were also given a long time to answer, but no difficulties were encountered in getting respondents to talk. The interviews lasted between half an hour and one hour.

Ethical approval was obtained from the Uppsala Regional Ethical Review Board in May 2015 (Dnr 2015/057). All respondents gave their informed consent to participate in the interviews. The ethical rules followed by the study are in accordance with Swedish regulations, e.g., that the integrity and personal information of the individual must be protected, and for this reason the real names of the informants, their age and the town/city in which the interviews took place have all been withheld.

Analysis

All interviews were audio-recorded with the participants’ permission and then transcribed verbatim subsequent to each interview. The transcribed interviews were then analysed using the narrative analysis approach. According to Bruner (1991) our experiences and memory are organized in the form of narratives that constitute a version of reality, which are culturally transmitted. Goffman (1961) argues that an individual constructs a picture of his past, present, and future which is selective, generalized, and distorted, and which is adjusted to fit with society’s fundamental values. According to Goffman there are two types of stories. First, there are “success stories” in which an individual can present a picture of his present situation as being a result of good personal characteristics having guided him in the past, and in which a successful future is expected. Second, there are “tragic stories”, in which the individual regards reality as boring and disheartening, and in which he does not see himself as being responsible. According to Goffman, prison inmates, alcoholics, and prostitutes are among the groups who are most likely to describe themselves in tragic terms.

The material was coded and analysed by means of a categorical-content approach to narrative analysis (Lieblich, Tuval-Mashiach, & Zilber, 1988). One of the aims of this approach is to break the text into small units of content and to then subject them to either descriptive or statistical treatment. In many respects, the categorical-content approach to narrative analysis is similar to text content analysis (Lilja, 2013). In this study, three main categories were identified: (1) Being without a job, (2) The importance of having a job and (3) The relationship between drug use and unemployment.

Results

Being without a job

Interestingly, most respondents did not say that they had been “unemployed”, despite the fact that most had not had a legal occupation for more than a few years in their lives. Some laughed when they were asked “Have you ever been unemployed?” Others did not understand the question and none of the interviewees spontaneously mentioned the terms “unemployed” or “unemployment” before the question was asked. Although the respondents did not regard themselves as being unemployed, some mentioned that they had felt stressed when their employment ended. One example of this feeling of stress can be seen in the following narrative from one of the respondents about how he had felt on the day, a week prior to the interview, when he had been dismissed from work and was looking for a new job. That day he had difficulty in not going back to a life of crime:

“Well, like last week I was going around somewhat randomly, I went to some places and then to some companies where they sell motorcycles and stuff like that. As I am drinking coffee with my girlfriend down the city centre, a van arrives – this was by the end of last week – she is talking but I’m just drifting away. I don’t notice it myself. – I’ll be back in a minute, I tell her. – I’m just going out for a cigarette. So I walk up to the van to have a look and, damn it, there is only one man inside. The door is open. All I have to do is take the bags. … – Come on, let’s go, I say. – What happened, she said. Well, I don’t know. I saw the possibility. Last day at work. We are having coffee. I have some thousands on my account and I know there’s four million in the car. And it feels stupid just to leave it. But then we went home and had a coffee and had dinner. And so it all just went away. And I was exhausted. Headache. And like, sweating. I thought I was having a fever. It’s all so powerful.” (Respondent 21)

Since the respondents did not define themselves as unemployed it was not surprising that many had never applied for employment via the Swedish Public Employment Service (Arbetsförmedlingen). Among the explanations they mentioned as to why they had not applied for work through the Employment Service were that there was “no point” going there, it was “not possible to get a job there”, “I did not have time to go to the Service, being a full-time criminal and abusing cocaine” or “I have never had any offers of work from the Employment Service”. The following is a typical example of this view that there was no point applying for work through the Employment Service:

“You know before you go there that you will not get anything. You don’t have any particular education. Well, I haven’t been trained for anything. What kind of job will you get then? Then I haven’t cared.” (Respondent 14)

The importance of having a job

In contrast to the findings described by Laub and Sampson (2003), the respondents in the current study argued that a legal income was not one of the most important reasons for having a job. Those who were employed at the time of the interview argued that they were paid much less than before they had been sentenced to prison or that they earned much less than the money they obtained from drug dealing or from burglaries. However, although the respondents argued that earning a legal income was not an important factor in relation to not engaging in crime, obtaining money legally was described as being better than obtaining it by illegal means because such money was “deserved”, “my money” or “clean money”. One respondent explained that he previously did not understand why he should seek legal employment because of the pay there.

“If you could have heard me a couple of years ago I would have said something like this: Why the hell should I wake up early in order to go to work at eight o’ clock in the morning and work until five in the evening every day to get a salary of about fifteen thousand a month when I can get that fifteen thousand in two days? … But today I choose to live on fourteen thousand and am damn satisfied. I am satisfied with what I have. I deserve this. It is my money. I wouldn´t be feeling like this if I had stolen the money from you. Then it wouldn’t be my money. Then I would have felt remorse even though I would have had a lot of money.” (Respondent 15)

The participants also talked about the importance of being committed to one’s work. Several interviewees indicated that it was not only employment in itself that was important, they also had to value or appreciate their employment. One respondent explained that when he was “a criminal” he regarded having a job as something negative, something that was connected with those who live a law-abiding life. However, he said he had changed, and that he now viewed employment in a more positive light:

“It is not difficult to build everything up with a new job, new home, new car, driving licence, a nice girl. It is possible; it may take only a week. If you are going to commit yourself to it, so to speak. But before I hadn’t valued it because I had been so busy looking for excitement. I was not aware of this at the time.” (Respondent 21)

As has been noted by Brown, Spencer, and Deakin (2007), many respondents in the current study reported having difficulties in accepting that they had to apply for low-status work and that they could not make use of their previous qualifications. Several said that it was difficult to accept that you have to live on less money when you have a legal income than when you have an illegal income. However, there were also those who had no difficulty in accepting that they could not get the same type of work as they’d had prior to their convictions. For example, one respondent who had worked as a bartender while she was using cocaine said that she would never want to go back to that kind of work because “it is not an environment in which addicted people should work”. Another respondent, who had worked as a nurse and had then been given a prison sentence when he was detected stealing narcotics from the hospital at which he was working, explained that it was important to be realistic and to apply for jobs for which their sentences did not constitute an obstacle, for example, not in child care, security, bookkeeping:

“I mean you have to show a little imagination … If you have had a prison sentence maybe you should be realistic … and find a place where it is an asset; well at least not an obstacle. … Maybe you shouldn’t get an education to become a nanny or pre-school teacher or something like that. Maybe you shouldn’t plan to work in the security business or work with accounting or that kind of thing. You have to be realistic. So of course it [the prison sentence] limits you.” (Respondent 16)

The relationship between drug use and unemployment

Most respondents argued that they had never been dismissed from work because of their drug use. When they had left their jobs, many described a similar story about how these had ended. Firstly, they went on sick leave. Then they did not go back to work but phoned their employers to say they wanted to quit or they simply did not return to their jobs. Some respondents explained that they were so desperate for drugs that they had just walked out one day. One respondent, for example, said: “I said I was going for lunch, but I never came back.” Others said that they “just didn’t show up” or that the job “fizzled out”.

Descriptions of workplace deviance were common in the interviews, e.g. stealing, selling drugs, burglary, using drugs at work. Some of the interviewees argued that they had not wanted to commit crimes or use drugs at their workplace and had therefore committed these offences in the evening and at weekends while working throughout the week. Other respondents mentioned that they had worked at certain types of workplace simply because they were places where it was easier to commit offences or to use drugs. For example, one interviewee said that he worked on a ship because it was easier to sell drugs there. Another respondent talked about having been a driving a taxi and having gone back to the homes of those who had just been his passengers and broken in to their apartments:

“I started to commit crimes when I was driving a taxi because the salary was not enough. So, when I took people to the airport I knew that their house was likely to be empty and I went back there and broke in.” (Respondent 9)

Most respondents said that they had used drugs at work more than once, usually amphetamines, cocaine and/or hashish. Some explained that keeping their job became a problem when they started combining amphetamines with other drugs, particularly heroin or benzodiazepines. Sometimes they blamed their drug use on having to work hard. For example, one respondent said that he started to drive a taxi and that he “began to believe that in order to do my work I needed to take amphetamines”. Interestingly, although drug use at work seemed to be common and although several mentioned that they had taken drugs at work, only a few remarked that their employers had found out that they were taking drugs.

Discussion

In many respects, the results of this study are consistent with the findings from previous research in this area. For example, this study showed that having a job was an incentive for not committing crimes, which has also been reported in previous research (e.g. Gill, 1997; Laub & Sampson, 2003). Several respondents explained that employment was a major factor in their not committing offences, and some said that having a job was part of a ‘normal lifestyle’. Another similarity with previous research (e.g. Laub & Sampson, 2003) was the opinion that employment could provide a sense of identity and meaning in life. Thus, getting a job could be a ‘turning point’, providing the individual with a new meaning in life. However, it is important here to stress that employment is probably only one among several ‘turning points’ towards a conventional lifestyle. Other turning points, which were also mentioned by the respondents in this study, may be finding a partner or adopting religious beliefs.

In contrast with the findings of previous research, the current study found that money in itself was not perceived as being important; instead it was argued that ‘legal money’ was better or was regarded as being of greater value than illegal money. In contrast to the findings of Brown et al. (2007), who reported that most of their respondents said that they could not obtain a job with the same status and income as they’d had prior to their sentences, the respondents in the current study said that they did not think that their prison sentences had influenced the likelihood of them obtaining employment. There may be at least two reasons for this. Firstly, criminal record checks might not yet have become a standard procedure for employers in Sweden. It was only in 2001 that it became mandatory in Sweden for employers to check the criminal records of teachers and childcare workers prior to employing them (Backman, 2012). Secondly, applying for work at times appeared to be more of a theoretical idea among the respondents rather than something to which they had given practical consideration. This might explain why some respondents had the notion that they would have no difficulty when applying for jobs, since they had as yet never had to face this situation.

If we were to relate the respondents’ narratives about unemployment to Goffman’s (1961) idea of different types of stories, it could be argued that the respondents described their previous work situations mostly in terms of what Goffman has labelled ‘tragic stories’. Most participants argued that they had failed in the context of working life and that this was one reason why it was difficult for them to find work. However, in contrast to Goffman, who argues that in tragic stories, the individual does not see himself as responsible, those who were interviewed in the current study often talked about their own responsibility and the reasons why they had not had stable jobs. One problem, however, seems to be that the respondents lack an identity as either unemployed or employed, and although all of them stated that they were neither committing crimes nor taking drugs, it appears that they have retained an identity as criminal and/or drug users, which may become a problem when they apply for work in the future.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

The author reports no conflicts of interest. The author alone is responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the participants for contributing to this research by sharing their experiences.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Högskolan i Gävle;

Appendix

Table A1. Respondent profiles.

Participant	Age	Gender	Drugs mostly used by the informants
1	42	Male	Alcohol, amphetamines, heroin, cannabis
2	51	Female	Alcohol, cannabis, benzodiazepines, tramadol
3	27	Male	Alcohol, amphetamines, cannabis, benzodiazepines, heroin
4	34	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, benzodiazepines, amphetamines
5	46	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines
6	50	Female	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, heroin
7	31	Female	Alcohol, benzodiazepines, cannabis, ecstasy, cocaine, heroin
8	31	Male	Alcohol, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, heroin
9	57	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines
10	36	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, benzodiazepines, amphetamines
11	45	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, heroin
12	58	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, heroin
13	46	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, heroin
14	36	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines
15	42	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, heroin
16	41	Male	Alcohol, benzodiazepines
17	33	Female	Alcohol, cocaine, heroin
18	61	Female	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines
19	26	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, heroin
20	62	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines
21	49	Male	Alcohol, cannabis, amphetamines, cocaine
22	49	Male	Alcohol, amphetamines