This time of year, holiday cards and packages are being sent between loved ones far and wide. But they aren’t reaching some of their intended recipients.

For those already living in environments designed for isolation, small instances of social connection like these are even more vital to their mental and physical health—not only during the holiday season but year-round. For people in prison, research indicates that community supports are integral to their well-being during and after incarceration, and can ultimately increase public safety.

Given the relationship between social bonds and positive postrelease outcomes, facilitating outside contact for those who are incarcerated is in society’s best interest. Unfortunately, many methods of contact (such as phone calls and visits) are not feasible for some. And though some facilities are equipped to receive secure electronic mail, these messages can be monetized and regulated such that not all incarcerated people can benefit. That leaves written mail as the most reliable and accessible form of communication.

Physical mail provides tangible links to family and friends: smelling a loved one’s perfume, holding the same paper they held, feeling the crayon marks of your daughter’s drawing, or seeing your loved one’s photograph every day. Many people who are incarcerated say physical mail reminds them they are more than just a number. 

Despite the benefits, some states’ new policies are effectively banning physical mail from correctional facilities, diminishing access to important social connections for those in prison.

The problems new mail policies present

All states have longstanding policies governing what incarcerated people can receive by mail, and corrections officials have the right to open and inspect nonlegal correspondence. New policies further reduce incoming letters to digital scans while originals are withheld from their intended recipients and destroyed.

Though some facilities scan mail in-house, scanning, processing, and storing is typically contracted to a private third-party company, usually out of state, which heightens privacy concerns.

Although printed copies are sometimes an option, scans are available electronically via public kiosks or tablets, which can be a barrier for people with visual disabilities. Incarcerated people are three times more likely to have a visual impairment than those not in prison.

Incarcerated people report mail scans being delayed for months past their postmark or of such low quality that writing and details—such as loved ones’ faces—are obscured.

Contraband doesn’t usually come through the mail

New mail policies were devised to combat the introduction of drugs into correctional facilities— primarily liquid K2, a synthetic and highly dangerous form of marijuana that can be transferred via a sheet of paper and thus sent to incarcerated people in physical mail. But it’s unclear whether K2 or other drugs are entering facilities at a rate that offsets the loss of physical mail for the entire incarcerated population.

In 2019, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice received 42,000 letters—of 7.5 million—containing “uninspectable or suspicious” substances, including tape, glitter, stickers, perfume, and lipstick. Of the 2.1 million contraband items recovered in Florida prisons between January 2019 and April 2021, only 1.7 percent were found in mail. (In fact, studies indicate that most contraband enters prisons via correctional staff (PDF), who can become compromised in part because of their low pay.)

Although most of these mail policy changes are so new they haven’t been evaluated, investigators found that contraband levels inside Texas prisons actually increased after implementing mail scanning policies and eliminating visitation during the pandemic, suggesting no significant link between physical mail and increases in contraband.

Further, as the drug tests typically used on mail have been investigated for returning large numbers of false-positive results, the true prevalence rates of drugs being conveyed are unknown.

Despite the lack of evidence, many states have adopted these new policies for at least some of their facilities, though the full reach of these policies is unknown. With a recent pilot in federal facilities, practitioners fear a vast expansion of scanned-mail policies.

So far, the evidence doesn’t support banning physical mail

Although prisons should take reasonable precautions to prevent the introduction of liquid K2 and other dangerous drugs, there is no evidence that eliminating physical mail is an effective solution. And the lack of physical mail may increase people’s social isolation and could have long-term consequences.

To reduce harms caused by these policies, policymakers, researchers, and corrections officials can consider the following strategies: 

• Halt the expansion of scanned mail practices at the local level. State and local policymakers could consider legislation to protect postal mail in prisons and safeguard families’ connections to loved ones.

Texas has leveraged its administrative code to protect communications for those currently incarcerated and could serve as a model for other jurisdictions.

In 2019, the Colorado Department of Corrections removed its blanket ban on original mail when it came under scrutiny for violating the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of those who were incarcerated. Individual prisons can also implement policies that do not include digitized mail or similar practices.

• Research the implications of digitized and scanned mail.Researchers have not yet studied the direct effects of these relatively new policies on contraband or on the mental health of those currently incarcerated and desistence once released. Compiling a list of states that have adopted these new mail policies is a crucial first step toward assessing their footprint and efficacy.

• Identify more reliable methods to test incoming correspondence for drugs.

Given the issues with some tests, corrections officials could adopt more reliable detection methods. However, these advanced technologies can be expensive and their use can depend on a facility’s specific needs and the feasibility of implementation.

• Collect data to ensure contraband interdiction strategies are evidence based, timely, and reliable. Prison administrators should implement evidence-based strategies for the type of contraband they are trying to intercept, and monitor and adjust their approaches as contraband introduction methods evolve. Researchers can also evaluate the efficacy of such strategies and weigh their benefits with the detriments of reducing contact between incarcerated people and their loved ones.

• Identify secure ways to allow original materials to reach people who are incarcerated. Some facilities are working with third-party providers (such as Flikshop and Pigeonly) to allow postcards and photos to be sent to incarcerated people without the scanning process. Though incarcerated people are still unable to receive an original drawing, this method does preserve high-resolution color images and messages.