Death in Prison: increasing transparency on next of kin notification and disposition of remains.

Yoshiko Iwai, Michael Forrest Behne, Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein
Author Information
  1. Yoshiko Iwai: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, 340 MacNider Hall Campus, 333 South Columbia Street, Box 7240, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7240, USA. yoshiko_iwai@med.unc.edu. ORCID
  2. Michael Forrest Behne: Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  3. Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein: Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Policies for next-of-kin (NOK) notification and disposition of remains surrounding death are unclear across the United States' (US) carceral systems. The goal of this study was to collect data on carceral system policies pertaining to NOK notification and disposition of remains for individuals who are incarcerated. We collected publicly available operational policies for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 50 state prison systems, and the Washington D.C. jail for a total of 53 systems.
RESULTS: Approximately 70% of systems had available policies on NOK notification and disposition of remains. Few systems had information on time constraints for NOK notification, notifying parties or designated contacts person, and ultimate disposition of unclaimed remains. Several systems had no accessible policies.
CONCLUSIONS: Across the US, carceral systems vary in policies for notifying NOK after the death of an incarcerated individual and their processes for the disposition of remains. Carceral and health systems should work towards standardization of policies on communication and disposition of remains after death of an individual who is incarcerated to work towards equity.

Keywords

References

  1. JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Mar 1;6(3):e232047 [PMID: 36884254]
  2. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Aug;227(2):343-345.e2 [PMID: 35378097]
  3. AMA J Ethics. 2017 Sep 1;19(9):894-902 [PMID: 28905730]
  4. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2021 Jul 8;7(1):50 [PMID: 34238928]
  5. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018 Dec;66(12):2382-2388 [PMID: 30300941]
  6. AMA J Ethics. 2019 Jul 1;21(7):E617-624 [PMID: 31333179]
  7. Contraception. 2021 Dec;104(6):618-622 [PMID: 34400155]
  8. PLoS One. 2022 Sep 16;17(9):e0274703 [PMID: 36112653]
  9. Health Justice. 2014 Mar 25;2:6 [PMID: 25642407]
  10. Health Serv Res. 2007 Aug;42(4):1758-72 [PMID: 17286625]
  11. J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Apr;35(4):1328-1329 [PMID: 31388906]
  12. Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Sep 1;138(3):330-337 [PMID: 34352850]
  13. JAMA. 2007 Aug 22;298(8):894-901 [PMID: 17712073]
  14. Int J Prison Health. 2021 Dec 27;: [PMID: 34939768]
  15. Lancet Public Health. 2021 Oct;6(10):e703-e704 [PMID: 34115973]
  16. Am J Public Health. 2009 Apr;99(4):666-72 [PMID: 19150898]
  17. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2019 Apr;36(4):321-325 [PMID: 30428682]
  18. Breastfeed Med. 2021 Sep;16(9):710-716 [PMID: 33835854]

Grants

  1. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  2. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0systemsdispositionremainspoliciesnotificationNOKdeathcarceralincarceratedUSavailablePrisonsnotifyingindividualworktowardsDeathBACKGROUND:Policiesnext-of-kinsurroundingunclearacrossUnitedStates'goalstudycollectdatasystempertainingindividualscollectedpubliclyoperationalFederalBureauImmigrationCustomsEnforcement50stateprisonWashingtonDCjailtotal53RESULTS:Approximately70%informationtimeconstraintspartiesdesignatedcontactspersonultimateunclaimedSeveralaccessibleCONCLUSIONS:AcrossvaryprocessesCarceralhealthstandardizationcommunicationequityPrison:increasingtransparencynextkinCommunicationNext-of-kinPrison

Similar Articles

Cited By