Criminology Research Project Inc.

I am constantly ask, why does a woman marry a man locked up in prison, some serving a life-without-parole sentence?  At first this may be a good question and the answer could be, “It’s crazy.”  However, first, it happens regularly.  Second, let’s take a look at a thing or two.

Most people believe that if a woman marries a prisoner there must be something wrong with her, a mental or emotional disorder of some kind.  The tendency is to think right away that it’s the “bad boy” syndrome where the woman is attracted to this personality or way of life.  Then there is the belief, even though incorrect, that these women lack self-esteem or have issues of insecurity that cause them to gravitate to men in situations that confine their movement, thus, their ability to be unfaithful.  Some even believe, again a mistaken idea, than no one else must want these women and in desperation she clings to the first man who shows them an ounce of love and affection. 

The reasons why women marry men behind bars have birthed many theories, speculation abounds, and has been talked about for as long as I can remember.  Articles have been written, as have books, all generally featuring women from abused and dysfunctional backgrounds who weren’t able to rise above circumstances, such as a  troubled childhood and family, coupled with a traumatic youth.  The false idea is that these various possibilities opened them up to a relationship as troubled as the experiences they had previously endured.  The stereotype associated with women who marry man behind bars is that they’re trailer trash, uneducated, dependent upon the welfare system, typically minority, old, fat, ugly, etc.  There’s a long list of “this is why she married a convict” reasons.

These assumptions, speculations, and theories, while applicable in some cases, are far from the truth.  Prison wives today are progressive, educated, professional, resilient, self-sufficient, secure, confident, well-spoken and classy.  They marry men behind bars for love and because they believe in the men they have chosen to spend their lives with.  These women have ample options.  Many have been in so-called “normal” marriages prior to their marriage to an inmate.  Stereotypes no longer apply to this unique group of women.  This is a new breed of prison wives, women with diverse interests, special talents, and a variety of skills and experiences who chose to take the path that leads to a different kind of love journey not because of desperation or low self-esteem, and certainly not because no other man would have them.  They chose this path because they love and because they believe in themselves and the men they love enough to give them and this kind of relationship a chance.  They have examined the “good” and the “bad” associated with being married to an inmate from every angle: their man is in prison because he committed a crime, etc.  They concluded that despite the act(s) that resulted in their loved one having been incarcerated, the good in them far ourweighs the bad that they did and deserve a second chance.

At present, Criminology Research Project, Inc., is dealing with a marriage such as this that involves a very intelligent, successful, strong willed, family supported and highly educated free world woman.  She merely fell in love with an inmate, came to know him over a period of several years, and reached the conclusion that “he” was the man of her dreams.  It will, no doubt, dissappoint many that “know” this marriage will ultimately fail.  I, personally, don’t think that it will.

I had over a two hour discussion with Kathie just today and found out things I didn’t know.  Everything I learned about her was positive.  She understood the drawbacks of marriage to “her man” long before she took her vows and is accepting these various drawbacks very well.  She told me, “I fall more in love with my husband with every passing day.”  I have no doubt that what she is saying is the truth.

Why do I believe that what she is saying is true?  Let me count them:  she backs her feelings with action, she uses her husbands last name, she mkes him part of her live in so many ways.  She makes sure he knows how much the weekly grocery bill is, consults him on getting her car repaired, seeks his advice on spending money and values his advice and opinions.  She is making sure that he, Heath, stays abreast of family life and does not become institutionalized.  In short, Kathie is making sure that Heath is, indeed, a member of the family…his and her family.

Is Kathie’s marriage to her inmate husband creating problems for her?  You had better believe it is.  Only yesterday her former husband had her served with a legal document indicating that he is taking her to court to gain sole custody of their two minor children on the single ground that, “you have to be mentally unstable to marry a mass murderer.”  There is no other evidence, not a single shred.  There are, nevertheless, many examples of Kathie’s being a competent Mom, of being mentally stable and more than marginally capable of properly raising her two young children.

The former husband, in my opinion, posses very few traits that make him a father worthy of sole custody of his children.  I will withhold specifics at the moment as litigation is pending.  I will, however, be more specific once the litigation is past and a final decision by the Court has been handed down.  In fact, I will published the Courts “official document” on this site so that you may read, evaluate and draw your own conclusion.  I don’t expect anyone to take my word as the sole determing factor, indeed I hope that you don’t.  Expect and demand facts, evidence and proof.  Believe me I will make every effort to present each of these three elements and make them known to you, our reader.

The fact is, it is most difficult to remove a minor child from the custody of it’s maternal parent.  Past and present case law proves this.  If you hve any doubts I invite you to go to your local law library and do research.  In fact, the Court has a tendency to bend over backward to leave custody with the mother even when, at times, I question if to do so is actually in the best interest of the child.  One example that comes to mind is a case where the mother was a prostitute and the father filed for sole custody.  A full background investigation revealed that the mother was doing everything right in raising her child, she just prostituted.  The Court ruled that there was no evidence that she had ever engaged in sex in the presence of her child and, therefore, this one questionable act of, shall we say “immorality” did not constitue her being an unfit mother.  The investigation revealed that she was a loving parent, provided adequately for her child in every respect both physically and emotionally and went out of her way to provide everything the child needed plus much of what the child just wanted.  Today, this child of several years ago is grown, well-rounded and is living a successful life.  The prostitution evidence was nothing more than a “bump in the road” if even so much as that.

It is important to remember that the sole concern of the Court is the best interests of the child, nothing more.  In the current case that Criminology Research Project, Inc., is involved, there is not a shred of evidence that Kathie is unstable, unfit or lacking in any of the traits that make one a competent, loving, caring and capable mother.  Will she retain sole custody on her court date?  The likelyhood is statistically probable…an outstanding “Yes.”

Kathie has had the usual ups and downs but has handled each in a mature and proper manner.  Under stress she has performed well.  In my opinioin she will weather the storm like a trooper, will continue to be maintain sole custody of her two children, will raise them properly and will, one day, see them grow into adulthood as successful, well-rounded members of society.  I have very little doubt that this will become reality but we will “wait a time with patience” and watch.  I have no crystal ball only years of research to back my opinion.

Kathie understands that a court proceeding is adversarial, I have told her this.  When she appears at her hearing, a prelude to an actual court appearance, she knows that she will be dragged over the coals, made to look horrible and, most definitely be accused of haing a lack of stability.  The opposing attorney’s job is to represent the best interest of his/her client.  In this case the attorney’s client is Kathie’s former husband.  Kathie is prepared and her attorney will prepare her even more.  Come the day in October when she comes face-to-face with her former husband she will present herself great.  She will come across professionally, competently and will demonstrate the potential that she has.  She will win!

I could not adequately end this blog without admitting that a large percentage of inmate marriages fail.  This is a proven fact.  Nevertheless, there are many exceptions…Kathie’s marriage to her present inmate husband is one of these.  Kathie, as well as her inmate husband, fully understand that their marriage is not typical.  They understand the pitfalls of such a relationship and are more than prepared to take each as it comes.

As a minister I have performed prison marriages only after extensive marital counseling in which I covered the “ups” and “downs” that will come and should, therefore, be expected.  Kathie had her new husband are prepared, willing, and ready for any and every eventuality.  Yes, they understand the road will be rough at times, an unforgiving society will make sure of this.  Both understand that there will be times of disagreement, equally they understand that each disagreement can be successfully worked out as long as both have a true desire to take the steps to do so.  I believe, after my investigation and after coming to know both Kathie and Heath, that both have this “true desire.”

Times change, folkways and mores come and go.  Today, prison marriages are more common than ever and are increasing at an astounding rate.  Too, the percentages of success are increasing.  This is 2009, it’s time for society to accept change, afterall change is coming whether some like it or not.  There was a time when women could not vote, a time when interacial dating and marriage was illegal, a time when the sale of alcohol was prohibited, a time when blacks were not allowed to attend white schools.  These changes in folkways and mores have become reality, so will the acceptance of prison marriages.  There will never be total acceptance of any of these changes in folkways, mores and laws. Ignorance, low socioeconomics and a lack of education will make sure of this.  For the enlightened these changes will be accepted and will become a part of our culture as “status quo” is not stagnant.  Status quo changes slowly but it does change.  The conservative element of our society sees to this as is apparent when one reads the daily newspaper or tunes in to the nightly news.    Thte nature of our access to media even suffered during change.  I remember when Ted Turner was laughed at and called “stupid” for his idea of founding an around-the-clock cable news network.  He, for whatever reason, chose the name Cable News Network or CNN for short.  Due to “status quo” it took time for CNN to be accepted by mainstream society and in it’s infancy operated at a deficit.  Today CNN is the world leader in total news media and is well respected and watched to the dismay of NBC, CBS, ABC and practically all newspapers.  Those that laughed at Ted Turner’s “far out” idea of creating his own total news cable network are silent. 

Believe me, Kathie’s attorney is not going to sit through her hearing like a potted plant.  Kathie’s best interests will be protected just as her former husband’s will be.  This is how it should be as it is the nature of our judicial system.

You will be hearing more about Kathie.  She will have her own statement to make following the handing down of the Court’s final decision.  You will read it first on Criminology Research Project’s web-site.  Her present husband, Heath, will have his own statement as well.  You, the reader, will have your opportunity to send your personal message to both Kathie and Heath.

For now, while awaiting the October date for Kathie’s hearing, CRP will continue it’s research and will provide professionally research facts for her attorney to present should he/she choose to do so.  Providing professional research is the goal of Criminology Research Project, Inc., and we will not fail in this case.  CPR has never taken a skewed approach to it’s research, never will.  The theory of “letting the chips fall where they may,” is our philosophy.  Any other product of research cannot be deemed to be labeled “professional.”

I encourage you, the reader, to make a comment.  Every comment is important to CRP with a final summary of these comments appearing at a later date.  Please, think about the subject of this blog, determine the difference between “opinion” and “fact.”  Only by doing this will you gain insight as to reality and, thus, become a better informed citizen.

Thanks from Kathie, Heath, and the people at CRP for taking time to read this rather lengthly thesis.  Thanks for choosing our site as your source of documentable and accurate research findings.  One of our several goals is to always present factual research, nothing more, nothing less. There will be times when you agree with our research findings and there will be times when you have difficulty accepting them.  This is the nature of professionally conducted research.