The Topic Of Research Interest I Have Selected Is Aging ✓ Solved

The topic of research interest I have selected is the aging

The topic of research interest I have selected is the aging prison population. I suggest researching this because: (a) growing numbers of incarcerated individuals are entering the penal system at a more mature age; (b) mandatory minimum sentencing results in lengthy sentences; and (c) I am intrigued by the circumstances and actions resulting in incarceration. I am drawn to a constructivist philosophical orientation and recommend a mixed-methods design combining qualitative, action-based approaches with quantitative measures to validate observations and generalize findings.

Paper For Above Instructions

Abstract

This paper proposes a mixed-methods research design to study the aging prison population in the United States from a constructivist philosophical orientation. The study aims to understand why an increasing share of inmates are older at entry or aging in custody, the lived experiences and health and social needs of older prisoners, and the policy implications of mandatory minimum sentencing that extends incarceration into later life. Combining in-depth qualitative inquiry with population-level quantitative analysis will generate contextualized, actionable knowledge for practitioners and policymakers (Burkholder et al., 2016; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).

Background and Rationale

The U.S. prison population is aging due to demographic trends, harsher sentencing policies, and longer stays (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2016; The Sentencing Project, 2018). Older inmates present distinct medical, mental health, and reentry needs, increasing correctional costs and challenging standard correctional practices (Aday, 2003; Williams et al., 2012). Understanding the phenomenon requires not just counts, but interpretive insights into how aging intersects with crime histories, sentencing trajectories, and institutional environments. A constructivist stance foregrounds how incarcerated older adults, correctional staff, and families co-construct meanings around aging, punishment, and care; this epistemology guides qualitative inquiry while acknowledging that quantitative patterns must be validated and generalized (Burkholder et al., 2016).

Research Questions

Primary questions:

• What factors explain the increasing number of older prisoners entering and remaining in custody?
• How do older incarcerated individuals experience aging within prison settings with respect to health, sociality, identity, and access to services?
• What are the policy and practice implications of mandatory minimum sentencing and long-term incarceration for aging populations?

Philosophical Orientation and Methodology

Guided by constructivism, the study privileges participants’ meanings and social interactions as data sources, treating knowledge as negotiated rather than solely discovered (Burkholder et al., 2016). To produce both rich contextual knowledge and generalizable evidence, a convergent mixed-methods design will be used, collecting qualitative and quantitative data concurrently and integrating findings at the interpretation stage (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).

Quantitative Component

Objectives: (1) document trends in the age composition of correctional populations over the past two decades, (2) model correlates of becoming an “older inmate” (e.g., age at first offense, sentence length, offense type, parole eligibility), and (3) estimate healthcare and custodial cost differentials by age cohort.

Data sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics datasets, state corrections administrative data, and national surveys such as the National Inmate Survey. Analysis will employ descriptive trend analysis, multivariate logistic and survival models to examine time-to-release and recidivism conditional on age, and cost modeling to estimate fiscal impacts (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2016; The Sentencing Project, 2018).

Qualitative Component

Objectives: capture lived experiences of aging behind bars, staff perspectives on care and management, and family-member narratives of aging and reentry. Methods include in-depth semi-structured interviews with older incarcerated individuals (n≈40–60 across facilities), focus groups with correctional healthcare providers and custodial staff (n≈6–8 groups), and participant observation of daily routines in prison units that house older inmates. Sampling will be purposive to ensure diversity by gender, offense type, and facility security level.

Interview protocols will explore aging identity, access to medical and social supports, experiences of stigma, institutional adaptations, and perceptions of sentencing fairness. Constructivist analysis using thematic coding and constant comparison will generate grounded understandings that complement quantitative trends (Burkholder et al., 2016).

Integration and Triangulation

Results from both strands will be merged through side-by-side comparison and joint displays to identify convergence, complementarity, and divergence (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). For example, quantitative evidence of rising older-prisoner proportions will be interpreted alongside qualitative narratives explaining pathways (late-life offending vs. long sentences) and perceived policy drivers (mandatory minimums).

Ethical Considerations

Research with incarcerated older adults requires enhanced protections: voluntary informed consent procedures adapted for correctional contexts, confidentiality safeguards, and independent review by IRBs with prisoner representatives. Special attention will be paid to capacity, coercion risks, and referrals for unmet healthcare needs identified during interviews (Williams et al., 2012).

Potential Implications and Knowledge Translation

Findings will inform correctional healthcare planning, sentencing reform debates, and reentry programming tailored to geriatric needs. Policy briefs, stakeholder workshops with corrections administrators, and academic dissemination will translate evidence into actionable recommendations such as geriatric screening protocols, compassionate-release policies, and community-based alternatives for older offenders (Aday, 2003; The Sentencing Project, 2018).

Conclusion

A mixed-methods, constructivist study of the aging prison population will combine statistical clarity with rich interpretive insight to produce socially relevant knowledge. By integrating voices of those aging in custody with population-level analyses, the research can better inform humane, cost-effective policies that respond to the distinct needs of older incarcerated people and promote public health and justice system sustainability (Burkholder et al., 2016; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).

References

• Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., & Crawford, L. M. (2016). The scholar-practitioner’s guide to research design. Laureate Publishing.
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Aday, R. H. (2003). Aging prisoners: Crisis in American corrections. Carolina Academic Press.
• Williams, B. A., Goodwin, J. S., Baillargeon, J., Ahalt, C., & Walter, L. C. (2012). Addressing the aging crisis in U.S. criminal justice health care. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60(6), 1150–1156.
• Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2016). Older prisoners in the United States, 1993–2013. U.S. Department of Justice.
• The Sentencing Project. (2018). Aging behind bars: The growing geriatric prison population. The Sentencing Project.
• Pew Charitable Trusts. (2012). Aging prisoners and policy responses. Pew Center on the States.
• Maschi, T., Morgen, K., & Zgoba, K. (2013). The aging prisoner: Challenges for social work practice. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 56(6), 500–517.
• Ahalt, C., Williams, B., & Baillargeon, J. (2013). Geriatric conditions among older prisoners: Implications for correctional health care. Health Affairs, 32(12), 2044–2050.
• World Health Organization. (2015). Health in prisons: A WHO guide to the essentials in prison health. WHO Press.