conjugal visits ohio

Does Ohio Prisons Offer Conjugal Visits?

Does Ohio offer conjugal visits? Learn more about the prisons of Ohio on our Blog Prisonnfo

PrisonsInfo.com | We Have Information About Every US Prison

Ohio, the 7th largest state by population, operates 27 state prisons that are administered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) which has a motto of “Reduce recidivism among those we touch.”

There are 27 state prisons in Ohio and its prison system is the sixth largest in the entire United States of America. This is why ODRC is a force to reckon with, it has 12,000+ active duty personnel and 8,000+ volunteers and has a prison system spending budget of $1.8 billion which is quite higher when compared with other states.

As a professional force, ODRC ensures each inmate serves their time per the sentence they have been awarded and are given proper rehabilitation programs so that when they go back to society, they are a dedicated member and provide services for the greater good.

There are multiple correctional programs that ORDC uses and each is different depending upon the kind of prison an inmate is sent to.

Conjugal visits in Ohio: Does Ohio offer conjugal visits?

Conjugal visits are a very hot topic in the United States of America and this is why only 4 states allow them to happen. As of 2022, the State of Ohio under the force of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections does not offer conjugal visits to its inmates.

The 4 states that offer conjugal visits in the United States of America include New York, Washington, California, and Connecticut.

Interestingly the first US state to offer a conjugal visit was Mississippi, however, as time passed and the governors changed, Mississippi changed the laws, and, similar to Ohio, it also does not offer conjugal visits.

Are there any benefits for conjugal visits in Ohio?

Just like the entire subject of conjugal visits is well debated, the same goes with the benefits of conjugal visits and Ohio is no different. There is a petition on Change.Org which asks Governor Kasich to allow conjugal visits and offers several advantages. Still, so far the Governor has not allowed that to happen in his state.

Conjugal visits are said to help retain the family structures and can be helpful when a person is going back to society after serving a long sentence.

They are also believed to develop good character in an inmate due to two things: one being that conjugal visits are only offered to inmates who offer extremely good behavior therefore this gives the inmate an upper hand so that good behavior can be injected into them. Secondly, when the conjugal visit happens, it has been discovered that this adds a little hope to the inmate about their family’s past and they work even hard to be back with them once again.

However, many people believe it is unnecessary and since the purpose of the inmate is to “corrected” for the crime they have committed, giving them hopes of conjugal visits only hurts the victim more as they are not fully relieved that the deserving punishment will be given.

Therefore, everything can be added in the case of Ohio as criminals of Ohio are no different. Any decision to be made should be well reflected on the prison behavior and long term benefits for the state of Ohio which it lacks right now.

What does the Ohio law say about Conjugal visits?

As per the Lyons v. Gilligan (1974) , a sentence at the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio says that the prisoners or inmates have no constitutional rights to conjugal visits during a sentence with their spouse. The hearing also made it clear that as per US Constitution, a Conjugal visit is a privilege and is not a right.

The state of Ohio was approached by the inmates of the Marion, Ohio Correctional Institution where they brought out legal action against the state prison system of Ohio which required as per the eight amendments that conjugal visits are their right, however, the court disagreed to their statement and did not move in the direction to allow conjugal visits in Ohio.

What kinds of prisons are present in the state of Ohio?

There are 5 types of prison facilities that are present in the state of Ohio. Depending upon the nature of each prison, they are managed by a different authority and an inmate will be sent there. These prisons include:

• State Prisons: State prisons are administered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.
• County Jails: County jails are administered by the Sheriff’s office but they do seek administrator services from ODRC.
• Juvenile Facilities: Ohio has three different juvenile facilities which are operated and administered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.
• Private Facilities: As of 2022, three different private facilities are operated by private companies that exist in Ohio.
• Federal Prisons: Federal prisons in Ohio are for criminals that conduct a federal crime and are operated outside of the jurisdiction of ODRC.

What are the state prisons in Ohio?

There are 27 different state prisons in Ohio. These includes:

• Allen Correctional Institution
• Belmont Correctional Institution
• Chillicothe Correctional Institution
• Correctional Reception Center
• Dayton Correctional Institution
• Franklin Medical Center
• Grafton Correctional Institution
• Hocking Correctional Facility
• Lebanon Correctional Institution
• London Correctional Institution
• Lorain Correctional Institution
• Madison Correctional Institution
• Mansfield Correctional Institution
• Marion Correctional Institution
• Noble Correctional Institution
• Northeast Reintegration Center
• Ohio Reformatory for Women
• Ohio State Penitentiary
• Pickaway Correctional Institution
• Richland Correctional Institution
• Ross Correctional Institution
• Southeastern Correctional Institution
• Southern Ohio Correctional Facility
• Toledo Correctional Institution
• Trumbull Correctional Institution
• Warren Correctional Institution

What are the private prisons in Ohio?

There are three different private prisons in Ohio. These include:

• Lake Erie Correctional Institution:

It is a maximum and medium level security prison which is operated by CoreCivic.

The private prison can house 1,498 inmates and is located at 501 Thompson Road, Conneaut, Ohio.

• North Central Correctional Complex:

It is a maximum and medium level security prison which is operated by Management and Training Corporation.

The private prison is located at 670 Marion Williamsport Road East Marion, Ohio. It has a capacity of 2,893 inmates and was opened in 1994.

• Northeast Ohio Correctional Center:

It is a medium-security prison that is operated by CoreCivic.

The private prison has a capacity of 2,016 inmates and was opened at 2240 Hubbard Road, Youngstown, Ohio.

What are Juvenile Facilities in Ohio?

Ohio has three different juvenile facilities. These include:

• Circleville Juvenile Correctional Facility:

The facility serves male youth. It offers multiple programs in accredited high school, behavioral health services, recreation, religious services, community service opportunities, and reentry services.

• Cuyahoga Hills Juvenile Correctional Facility:

The facility serves male youth. It offers multiple programs and targets a variety of issues such as anger, aggression, violence, depression, anxiety, self-injury, sleep disturbances, and more. The goal is to ensure the male youth after servicing in this facility can go back to society and be successful in their life.

• Indian River Juvenile Correctional Facility:

The facility serves male youth and offers unique programs that include special living units, parenting programs, and staff-youth mentoring programs.

What prisons are closed in Ohio?

As of 2022, 5 different prisons are closed in Ohio. These prisons include:

• Lima Correctional Institution
• North Coast Correctional Treatment Facility
• Ohio Penitentiary Correctional Facility
• Ohio State Reformatory
• Orient Correctional Institution

Read more articles about Prisons in the United States:

• Level 1, level 2, level 3, level 4, and Level 5 Prisons In Virginia
• Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, Level 5 Prisons in Ohio
• Byrd Unit Texas: Everything You Need To Know About This Facility
• List of Maximum security prisons in the New York State
• Segovia Unit Brief Overview Visiting Hours, Inmate Phones, And Location

The Prison Direct

Complete prison Details you need to know

Does Ohio Offer Conjugal Visits

Does Ohio Offer Conjugal Visits?

Table of Contents

Introduction

Conjugal visits are special visits that are granted to inmates who are incarcerated in prison. These visits provide an opportunity for prisoners to spend time with their spouses or partners in a more intimate setting. Conjugal visits can play an important role in maintaining family relationships, reducing stress levels, and improving inmate behavior.

In this article, we will be taking a closer look at Ohio’s prison system and its policy regarding conjugal visits. Ohio is a state located in the Midwestern region of the United States, and it has a prison system that is responsible for the incarceration of tens of thousands of individuals.

Ohio State’s Prison System

Ohio has a large and complex prison system, with many different types of prisons and a high number of incarcerated individuals. According to the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, there are currently over 50,000 individuals who are incarcerated in Ohio’s prisons.

Ohio’s prison system includes both state and privately-operated facilities, and the state operates a variety of different types of prisons, including maximum security, medium security, and minimum security institutions. Ohio’s prison policies are designed to ensure the safety and security of both prisoners and staff, and they include a range of measures to prevent violence, contraband, and other forms of criminal activity.

Ohio’s Conjugal Visit Policy

Ohio’s policy regarding conjugal visits is designed to provide prisoners with an opportunity to spend time with their spouses or partners in a more intimate setting. In order to be eligible for a conjugal visit, an inmate must meet certain criteria, such as having a clean disciplinary record and not being classified as a high-risk individual.

Conjugal visits in Ohio are conducted in a secure and private setting, and they are usually limited to a few hours in duration. The exact nature of the visit will depend on the type of conjugal visit that is granted, as Ohio offers both overnight and non-overnight visits.

In general, conjugal visits are seen as a positive step in maintaining family relationships and improving inmate behavior. They can help reduce stress levels and promote a more positive outlook for prisoners, which can in turn reduce the risk of recidivism and promote rehabilitation.

Benefits of Conjugal Visits

There are many benefits to conjugal visits, both for the prisoners and their families. One of the main benefits is improved family relationships. Spending time with a spouse or partner in a more intimate setting can help to strengthen the bond between them, which can be especially important for individuals who are incarcerated for a long period of time.

In addition, conjugal visits can help to reduce stress levels for prisoners. Being in a prison environment can be extremely stressful, and spending time with a loved one can help to alleviate some of this stress. This can have a positive impact on inmate behavior and mental health, which can be beneficial for the overall functioning of the prison system.

Conjugal visits can also help to reduce the risk of recidivism, as they provide prisoners with a positive and supportive environment that can help them to reintegrate into society more smoothly. Additionally, conjugal visits can help to improve inmate behavior by providing a positive incentive for good behavior.

Drawbacks of Conjugal Visits

While there are many benefits to conjugal visits, there are also some potential drawbacks. One of the main concerns is security. Conjugal visits can provide an opportunity for criminal activity to take place, such as the introduction of contraband into the prison.

Another potential drawback is the financial cost of conjugal visits. The cost of providing secure and private facilities for conjugal visits can be significant, and this is a cost that must be borne by the state or the prison system.

There can also be logistical and coordination issues associated with conjugal visits. These visits must be scheduled and arranged in advance, and there may be difficulties in ensuring that the right individuals are able to attend.

Finally, there is a potential for exploitation and abuse during conjugal visits. In some cases, individuals may use these visits as an opportunity to engage in criminal or abusive behavior, which can have serious consequences for both the prisoner and their partner.

The Future of Conjugal Visits in Ohio

The future of conjugal visits in Ohio is uncertain, and there are currently debates and discussions taking place regarding the role of conjugal visits in the prison system. Some individuals believe that conjugal visits should be abolished, while others believe that they are an important tool in promoting rehabilitation and reducing the risk of recidivism.

Recent changes in Ohio’s conjugal visit policy have seen the introduction of stricter eligibility criteria, as well as increased security measures. These changes have been designed to address some of the security and logistical concerns associated with conjugal visits.

Despite the ongoing debates and discussions, it is clear that conjugal visits will continue to play a role in Ohio’s prison system for the foreseeable future. The exact nature of this role will depend on the outcome of current debates and discussions, as well as any future developments in Ohio’s conjugal visit policy.

In conclusion, Ohio does offer conjugal visits to eligible inmates, and these visits can play an important role in maintaining family relationships, reducing stress levels, and improving inmate behavior. However, there are also potential drawbacks, including security concerns, financial costs, and the potential for exploitation and abuse.

The future of conjugal visits in Ohio is uncertain, and there are ongoing debates and discussions regarding their role in the prison system. Despite these debates, it is clear that conjugal visits will continue to play a role in Ohio’s prison system, and they will continue to be an important tool in promoting rehabilitation and reducing the risk of recidivism.

In the end, it is important to consider both the benefits and drawbacks of conjugal visits, and to ensure that they are implemented in a way that is safe, secure, and cost-effective. By doing so, Ohio can continue to provide its inmates with the support and resources they need to succeed and reintegrate into society.

• What are conjugal visits? Conjugal visits are special visits that are granted to inmates who are incarcerated in prison. These visits provide an opportunity for prisoners to spend time with their spouses or partners in a more intimate setting.
• Are conjugal visits allowed in Ohio? Yes, Ohio does offer conjugal visits to eligible inmates.
• Who is eligible for conjugal visits in Ohio? In order to be eligible for a conjugal visit in Ohio, an inmate must meet certain criteria, such as having a clean disciplinary record and not being classified as a high-risk individual.
• What are the benefits of conjugal visits? The benefits of conjugal visits include improved family relationships, reduced stress levels, improved inmate behavior, and reduced recidivism rates.
• What are the drawbacks of conjugal visits? The potential drawbacks of conjugal visits include security concerns, financial costs, logistics and coordination issues, and the potential for exploitation and abuse.

Related Posts

Sheikh Mahra Lottery

Johnny dephillipo brother prison.

Prisons Insight

Does Ohio Prisons Offer Conjugal Visits?

March 26, 2023

Ohio is the seventh most populous state in the United States, and it has a state prison system administered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC). The ODRC’s mission is to reduce recidivism among those who have come into contact with the state’s prison system. To achieve this goal, the ODRC operates 27 state prisons across the state, making it the sixth largest prison system in the country.

The ODRC is a formidable force, with over 12,000 active duty personnel and 8,000 volunteers. The prison system also has a substantial budget of $1.8 billion, which is higher than many other states. As a professional organization, the ODRC ensures that every inmate serves their sentence as prescribed by the law and provides them with access to rehabilitation programs that help them become productive members of society upon release.

The ODRC employs a variety of correctional programs tailored to the specific needs of each prison and inmate. These programs help inmates address their underlying issues, such as substance abuse, anger management, and cognitive behavior, to reduce their likelihood of reoffending upon release.

Conjugal visits in Ohio: Does Ohio offer conjugal visits?

Conjugal visits have become a controversial issue in the United States, with only four states permitting them. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections has enforced a ban on conjugal visits for inmates as of 2022. In contrast, the states of New York, Washington, California, and Connecticut currently allow inmates to have conjugal visits.

Mississippi was the first state to introduce conjugal visits, but the laws have since changed due to shifts in leadership. Ohio and Mississippi no longer permit conjugal visits for inmates, and this trend may continue in other states.

The rationale behind allowing conjugal visits is to provide inmates with the opportunity to maintain meaningful relationships with their spouses or partners while incarcerated. Supporters argue that this promotes healthy family relationships and reduces the likelihood of recidivism. Critics, however, contend that conjugal visits are a luxury that inmates do not deserve, and that they can lead to increased contraband, security risks, and inappropriate sexual behavior.

Are there any benefits for conjugal visits in Ohio?

The benefits of conjugal visits are highly debated, and this debate extends to the state of Ohio. A Change.org petition has been circulating, urging Governor Kasich to allow conjugal visits for inmates. The petition cites several potential advantages, such as helping to maintain family structures and preparing inmates for reintegration into society.

Supporters of conjugal visits argue that they can promote good behavior in inmates. In order to be eligible for conjugal visits, inmates must exhibit exemplary behavior, which can motivate them to maintain good conduct. Additionally, the visits themselves can provide a sense of hope and motivation for inmates to work towards being reunited with their families.

On the other hand, opponents argue that conjugal visits are unnecessary and potentially harmful. Some argue that they may be seen as a reward for bad behavior, while others argue that they may give victims and their families the impression that the punishment for the crime has been lessened. There are also concerns about security risks and the possibility of contraband being smuggled in during the visits.

Ultimately, any decision about whether to allow conjugal visits in Ohio should be carefully considered in light of the potential benefits and risks. The state of Ohio must weigh the benefits of conjugal visits against potential security risks and the concerns of victims and their families. It is important to consider the long-term effects of such a decision on the state and its prison system. While conjugal visits may have potential benefits for inmates and their families, it is important to ensure that any decision made aligns with the overall goals of the prison system and serves the best interests of the state and its citizens.

What are the private prisons in Ohio?

There are currently three privately-run prisons in Ohio, each with their own unique characteristics and management. The first is the Lake Erie Correctional Institution, a maximum and medium security facility operated by CoreCivic. Located at 501 Thompson Road in Conneaut, Ohio, the prison has a capacity of 1,498 inmates.

The second is the North Central Correctional Complex, a maximum and medium security facility operated by Management and Training Corporation. Opened in 1994, the prison is located at 670 Marion Williamsport Road East in Marion, Ohio and has a capacity of 2,893 inmates.

Lastly, there is the Northeast Ohio Correctional Center, a medium-security facility operated by CoreCivic. This prison, located at 2240 Hubbard Road in Youngstown, Ohio, has a capacity of 2,016 inmates.

While these private prisons offer a different approach to inmate management compared to state-run facilities, they have also faced criticism and controversy. Opponents argue that private prisons prioritize profits over rehabilitation and safety, and may cut corners on staff training and facility maintenance in order to save money. Proponents argue that private prisons can provide cost-effective solutions to overcrowding and improve efficiency in the criminal justice system. Ultimately, the effectiveness of private prisons in Ohio remains a highly debated issue.

What kinds of prisons are present in the state of Ohio?

The state of Ohio houses five distinct types of prison facilities, each managed by different authorities depending on the nature of the prison and the inmates housed there. These types of prisons include:

In the state of Ohio, there are five distinct types of prison facilities that inmates may be sent to depending on the nature of their crimes and their sentencing. These include:

• State Prisons: Administered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, state prisons are the primary type of correctional facility in Ohio.
• County Jails: County jails are operated by the Sheriff’s office, but they do seek administrator services from ODRC.
• Juvenile Facilities: Ohio has three separate juvenile facilities that are operated and administered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.
• Private Facilities : Ohio currently houses three private facilities operated by private companies as of 2022.

Federal Prisons: Reserved for those who commit federal crimes, federal prisons in Ohio are operated outside the jurisdiction of ODRC.

What are Juvenile Facilities in Ohio?

Ohio is home to three juvenile facilities that offer specialized programs and services to male youth. These facilities include:

• Circleville Juvenile Correctional Facility: This facility provides multiple programs, including accredited high school education, behavioral health services, recreation, religious services, community service opportunities, and reentry services.
• Cuyahoga Hills Juvenile Correctional Facility: This facility provides a variety of programs aimed at addressing issues such as anger, aggression, violence, depression, anxiety, self-injury, sleep disturbances, and more. The goal is to ensure that male youth who have completed their sentences at this facility can successfully reintegrate into society.

Indian River Juvenile Correctional Facility: This facility serves male youth and offers unique programs such as special living units, parenting programs, and staff-youth mentoring programs.

What are the state prisons in Ohio?

There are 27 different state prisons in Ohio. These includes:

• Allen Correctional Institution
• Belmont Correctional Institution
• Chillicothe Correctional Institution
• Correctional Reception Center
• Dayton Correctional Institution
• Franklin Medical Center
• Grafton Correctional Institution
• Hocking Correctional Facility
• Lebanon Correctional Institution
• London Correctional Institution
• Lorain Correctional Institution
• Madison Correctional Institution
• Mansfield Correctional Institution
• Marion Correctional Institution
• Noble Correctional Institution
• Northeast Reintegration Center
• Ohio Reformatory for Women
• Ohio State Penitentiary
• Pickaway Correctional Institution
• Richland Correctional Institution
• Ross Correctional Institution
• Southeastern Correctional Institution
• Southern Ohio Correctional Facility
• Toledo Correctional Institution
• Trumbull Correctional Institution
•  Warren Correctional Institution

What does the Ohio law say about Conjugal visits?

According to the Lyons v. Gilligan (1974) case, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio ruled that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to conjugal visits with their spouses during their sentence. The court clarified that under the US Constitution, conjugal visits are a privilege, not a right.

Inmates at the Marion Correctional Institution in Ohio filed a legal action against the Ohio prison system, arguing that conjugal visits are their right under the Eighth Amendment. However, the court rejected their argument and did not take action to allow conjugal visits in Ohio.

What prisons are closed in Ohio?

As of 2022, 5 different prisons are closed in Ohio. These prisons include:

• Lima Correctional Institution
• North Coast Correctional Treatment Facility
• Ohio Penitentiary Correctional Facility
• Ohio State Reformatory
• Orient Correctional Institution

Frequently Asked Questions

What are conjugal visits.

Conjugal visits, also known as extended family visits, are private visits between an inmate and their spouse or domestic partner, during which they are allowed to spend time alone together in a designated area.

Which prisons in the US offer conjugal visits?

As of 2022, only four states in the US allow conjugal visits: New York, Washington, California, and Connecticut. Ohio is not one of these states.

What are the benefits of conjugal visits?

Proponents of conjugal visits argue that they can help maintain family structures and relationships, reduce the likelihood of sexual misconduct between inmates and staff, and promote good behavior among inmates, as conjugal visits are typically only offered to those with a good disciplinary record. They can also help prepare inmates for re-entry into society by allowing them to maintain intimate relationships with their partners or spouses.

What are the arguments against conjugal visits?

Opponents of conjugal visits argue that they are unnecessary and potentially harmful, as they may provide an undeserved privilege to inmates and may also cause distress to victims and their families. There are also concerns about security and the potential for contraband to be smuggled into the facility during conjugal visits.

Are conjugal visits a constitutional right?

No, conjugal visits are not considered a constitutional right under the United States Constitution. In Lyons v. Gilligan (1974), it was ruled that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to conjugal visits with their spouses.

Can inmates in Ohio request conjugal visits?

As of 2022, conjugal visits are not allowed in Ohio state prisons. Inmates cannot request conjugal visits, as they are not currently offered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.

conjugal visits remain a hotly debated topic in the United States, and only four states allow them. Ohio is not one of those states and currently does not offer conjugal visits to inmates. While some argue that conjugal visits can help retain family structures and promote good behavior, others believe that it is unnecessary and goes against the purpose of correctional facilities to punish and correct criminal behavior. Ohio has three private prisons and five types of prison facilities, including state prisons, county jails, juvenile facilities, private facilities, and federal prisons.

The three juvenile facilities in Ohio offer a range of programs and services to help male youth successfully reintegrate into society. The courts have previously ruled that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to conjugal visits, and Ohio has not moved in the direction to allow them. While there are pros and cons to conjugal visits, it is ultimately up to each state to decide whether or not to offer this privilege to their inmates.

• Recent Posts

• How Do Technical Masterminds Foster A Culture Of Lifelong Learning And Continuous Improvement - February 23, 2024
• How To Download Movie In Isaimini - February 21, 2024
• How Does Dotmovies Handle Content Removals And Additions? - February 16, 2024

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

prisons insight

Welcome to prisonsinsight.com , the premier website dedicated to providing valuable information and insights about the criminal justice system and the realities of incarceration.

Our team is made up of experts in the field of criminal justice, correctional facilities, and prisoner advocacy, all working together to provide the most comprehensive and up-to-date information available.

Latest news

How Do Technical Masterminds Foster A Culture Of Lifelong Learning And Continuous Improvement

February 23, 2024

How To Download Movie In Isaimini

February 21, 2024

How Does Dotmovies Handle Content Removals And Additions?

February 16, 2024

Thank you for your interest in Prisons Insights. We are committed to providing our visitors with the highest quality information and resources on issues related to incarceration, the criminal justice system, and prison reform.

123 Main Street, Suite 456, Anytown, USA 12345

Phone: +1 (555) 123-4567

[email protected]

Copyright @ 2023 prisonsinsight.com

Privacy policy

• Our Mission
• Our Sponsors
• Editorial Independence
• Write for The Crime Report
• Center on Media, Crime & Justice at John Jay College
• Journalists’ Conferences
• John Jay Prizes/Awards
• Stories from Our Network
• TCR Special Reports
• Research & Analysis
• Crime and Justice News
• At the Crossroads
• Domestic Violence
• Juvenile Justice
• Case Studies and Year-End Reports
• Media Studies
• Subscriber Account

Nine States Are Allowing Some Family Prison Visits

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, 16 prison systems continue to bar all prison visitation and 27 states have suspended normal visitation but allow visits from lawyers, reports The Marshall Project . Nine states have resumed some forms of family visitation. As of Aug. 11, at least 95,398 people in prison had tested positive for the illness, a 10 percent increase from the week before. New cases among prisoners reached an all-time high last week after slowing down in June.

The recent growth was driven by jumps in inmates testing positive in Florida, Texas, California and the federal Bureau of Prisons, as well as outbreaks in Idaho, Iowa, Oregon and South Carolina. Cases first peaked in late April, when states including Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee and Texas began mass testing of prisoners. Those initiatives suggested that COVID-19 had been circulating among people without symptoms in much greater numbers than was previously known.

Related Posts

Death of “parasite” actor highlights south korea’s hardline drug policies, mississippi regularly fails to investigate rampant abuses by sheriff’s and their departments, dc officials announce reaccreditation of scandalized crime lab, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Reporting Awards
• Events/Fellowships
• Send Us Tips
• Republish Our Stories

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

• Prisons/Jails
• Inmate Search
• Visiting Applications

Visiting an inmate in Ohio

Visiting applications and rules for visiting ohio inmates.

The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections has acknowledged the important of preserving an inmate's relationship with friends and family members through visitation.  Inmates who receive more visits have closer ties with their family and community and have a greater chance of never returning to the correctional system.  The challenge faced by prisons everywhere is in making the process of visitation understandable and accessible to everyone.  To make visiting easier, we have amassed the important information everyone needs to know when visiting an inmate in Ohio.

• All prospective visitors must start by requesting the inmate add them to their visiting list.  You will then need to fill out an Ohio Inmate Visitors Application .  If you are visiting with a minor child you must also include an Ohio Inmate Authorization for Minor Child to Visit Form .
• Once you have mailed back the application and any additional required documentation you will have to wait 4-8 weeks for the application to be processed.
• The facility will inform the inmate of your applications status, and leave it up to the inmate to inform you if you have been approved or denied.
• All visitors must bring a valid government issued identification, such as a valid photo driver's license, state ID, passport, or military ID.
• Minors, or anyone under the age of 16 must bring a birth certificate with them to visitation, and be accompanied by a parent or guardian who is also on the visiting list for the inmate.
• All visitors are searched and are required to pass through a metal detector to enter into visitation.  Your car may also be searched once it is on the property of the institution.  The facility may utilize dogs to aid in a search.
• Do not bring tobacco or tobacco related products such as a lighter or matches with you into visitation, leave these items in your car.
• Cell phones, recording devices, music devices, cameras, and electronics of any kind are prohibited from entering into the facility.
• In general, the only items you should bring into the facility are your identification, a single car key, and a small amount of money to purchase items from the vending machines.  Purses, wallets, handbags, backpacks etc. are not allowed to enter into the facility.
• If you are traveling with an infant or small child you may bring an infant carrier, but it will be searched.  Additional items you can bring in a large clear Ziploc bag include 2-3 diapers, a small amount of baby wipes, three plastic baby bottles, the factory sealed plastic baby foods, and a single pacifier.

When visiting an inmate in Ohio, some additional information you should know is:

• Most Ohio correctional facilities offer video visitation.  Video visitation is offered through a third party company called JPAY that charges a fee for the 30 minute video visit.
• Refrain from wearing excessive jewelry, hairpins, metal underwire bras, clothing with multiple zippers, and steel toed boots/shoes as these will set off the metal detector and may require a more intrusive search.
• Never enter correctional facility grounds or buildings with a weapon, or ammunition.  Additionally do not have any narcotics, alcoholic or illegal items with you.
• If the facility suspects that you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol they may deny your entrance to visitation.

Dress Code/Contact Rules for Visitors of Ohio Inmates

All prisons in Ohio follow a dress code.  The dress code is in place for the order, safety and security of visitors, inmates and staff, and is strictly adhered to.  Failure to follow the dress code will result in your visit being denied.  We suggest you always bring a change of clothes with you and leave them in your car.  This enables you to quickly change if a staff member objects to an article of clothing you are wearing and prevents you from potentially missing out on a visit.

• All visitors must wear appropriate undergarments, underwear, bra, slip etc.
• Underwear should not be visible during visits.
• No clothes should expose the midriff, back, shoulders, cleavage, thighs or sides.  Sleeveless clothing, including halter tops, tank tops, tube tops, 
• Low-cut clothing that exposes the stomach, underwear, buttocks or chest is not allowed.
• Dresses, shorts, skirts, culottes etc., must not have a hem or slit above the middle of the knee.
• Wrap skirts, dresses, and break away pants are not allowed.
• Clothing with holes, rips, or cut outs that expose skin are not allowed.
• Tight/form fitting clothing such as spandex, leggings, Lycra, including tight jeans, tight pants, leotards, unitards, or clothing that is see through, sheer or netted is not allowed.
• Excessive jewelry is not allowed, and may make the metal detector go off and require a more intrusive search.
• Clothing with gang symbols, or that is associated as gang-wear is prohibited.
• If your clothing contains offensive language or images you will not be allowed to visit.

If you have a question about visiting an inmate in Ohio, or have already visited your inmate and would like to share your experience, or know of some other useful information please leave a comment below.

• Federal Prisons
• Connecticut
• District of Columbia
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• West Virginia
• Visiting Hours
• Visiting FAQs
• Setting up a phone account
• Save money on inmate calls
• Mail Books, Letters, Photos
• Holiday/Quarterly Packages
• Inmate Funds
• Create Account/Login

Reckoning with the South

This couple wants you to know that conjugal visits are only legal in 4 states

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

Editor's note: This story was co-written by inside-outside couple Steve Higginbotham and Jordana Rosenfeld, weaving together Jordana's personal experience and reporting with letters from Steve. Together, they examine popular myths around conjugal visits, their decreasing availability, and the punitive logic behind the state's policing of sex and intimacy that stifles relationships like theirs.   Jordana's words appear below in the orange boxes on the right; Steve's are in the purple on the left.

The other day, when I told my grandmother I was researching the history of conjugal visits for an essay, she said, "Oh, like in my stories?" 

You can't talk about conjugal visits without talking about television, because television is pretty much the only place where conjugal visits still exist. A wide variety of TV shows either joke about or dramatize conjugal visits, from popular sitcoms that have little to nothing to do with prison life, like The Simpsons , Family Guy , and Seinfeld, to prestige dramas like Prison Break and Oz that purport to offer "gritty" and "realistic" prison tales. Conjugals loom large in public imagination about life in prison, which leaves people under the unfortunate impression that they are in any kind of way widespread or accessible.

Their availability has been in steady decline for more than 25 years. The mid-to-late 1990s are the often-cited high point of conjugal visits , with 17 states offering some kind of program. (Federal and maximum security prisons do not allow conjugals.) This means that at their most widespread, conjugal visits were only ever permitted in one-third of all states. 

There are only four U.S. states that currently allow conjugal visits, often called "extended" or "family" visits: California, Connecticut, New York, and Washington. Some people say Connecticut's program doesn't count though, when it comes to conjugals—and the Connecticut Department of Corrections agrees. Their family visit program is explicitly intended for the benefit of children and requires that the incarcerated person receiving visitors be a parent. Their child must attend . 

My boyfriend has been in prison for 28 years. He was 18 during the high point of conjugal visit programs. That's when the state of Missouri decided to lock him up for the rest of his natural life, effectively sentencing him to a lifetime of deep loneliness and sexual repression, not just because Missouri doesn't offer conjugal visits, but because when you are incarcerated, your body belongs to the state in every possible way—from your labor to your sex life. 

Every prison riot ever could have been prevented with some properly organized fucking.

That's my boyfriend, Steve.

Not being able to physically express love—or even lust—builds frustration that boils over in unintended ways. 

Intimacy is policed rigidly in prison, and it has certainly worsened over the years. For most people with incarcerated lovers, intimacy happens not on a conjugal visit, but in the visiting room. Visits now may start and end with a brief embrace and chaste kiss. Open mouth kissing has been outlawed. These rules are enforced with terminated visits and even removing a person from the visiting list for a year or more.

Steve and I have kissed a total of six times.

We have also hugged six times, if you don't count us posing with his arm over my shoulder three times for pictures. The kisses were so brief that I'm not sure I remember what they felt like. He told me later on the phone that he knew he had to be the one to pull away from the kiss before we gave the COs in the bubble reason to intervene because I wouldn't. He knew this, somehow, before he ever kissed me. He was right. 

When I last visited him in Jefferson City Correctional Center, Steve told me about a real conjugal visit from '90s Missouri.

Years ago, people used to mess around in the visiting room at Potosi [Correctional Center]. Everyone knew to keep their sensitive visitors away from a certain area, because there was frequent sex behind a vending machine. I can neither confirm nor deny that cops were paid to turn a blind eye to it. I met a guy recently in my wing at JCCC who said he had heard of me, and that maybe I knew his father. I did know his father. I didn't have the heart to tell him that I probably saw his conception behind a Coke machine back in 1995.

The increasing restriction of physical touch—the expanded video surveillance of visiting spaces, the use of solitary confinement for the smallest infractions, and the withering of both in-person and conjugal visit programs—reflects the punitive logic that consensual human touch is a privilege that incarcerated people do not deserve.

This is an evil proposition, and it's one that is at the core of the ongoing dehumanization of millions of people in U.S. prisons, and the millions of people like me who love them. 

One woman with an incarcerated partner put it to researchers this way: "The prison system appears to be set up to break families up." And she's right. For the duration of his incarceration, I will never be closer to Steve than the state of Missouri is. I'm reminded during each of our timed kisses: His primary partner is the state. 

The most difficult part for me about a romantic relationship with a free woman is that I feel selfish. A lot of self-loathing thoughts creep in. I want the best for her and often question if I am that "best." However, an added benefit is that we can truly take things slowly and explore each other in ways that two free people don't often experience nowadays. We write emails daily. And these are important. We vent. And listen. We continue to build, whereas many free people stop building at consummation. 

But these are the realities rarely captured in media portrayals of romantic relationships between free world and incarcerated partners. Conjugals on TV are so disconnected from what it's actually like to be in a romantic relationship with an incarcerated person: Trying to schedule my life around precious 15 minute phone calls, paying 25 cents to send emails monitored by correctional officers, finding ways to symbolically include Steve in my life, like leaving open the seat next to me at the movies. Instead, television shows depict implausible scenarios of nefarious rendezvous that often parrot law enforcement lies. When they do so, they undermine the public's ability to conceptualize that love and commitment fuel relationships like ours. 

Although contraband typically enters prisons through staff , not visitors , television shows often present conjugal visits as a cover for smuggling, like in the earliest TV plot I could find involving a conjugal visit, from a 1986 Miami Vice episode. After his girlfriend is killed, Tubbs gets depressed enough to agree to go undercover at a state prison to bust some guards selling cocaine. In his briefing on the issue, Tubbs asks how the drugs are getting into the prison. Conjugal visits and family visits are the first two methods named by the prison commissioner, never mind that I have yet to find any evidence that Florida ever allowed those kinds of visits. 

Often, the excuse for policing visits so strictly is that drugs can be exchanged. But I know that lie is used for every type of control in prison. For over a year we had NO CONTACT visits because of the pandemic. During that time, dozens of inmates [at my facility] still overdosed and had drug-related episodes that caused them to need medical attention. Those drugs certainly didn't arrive through visits. They strip search and X-ray me going to and from visits anyway.

Everything in prison now is on camera. When a drug overdose occurs, the investigators track back over footage from visiting room cameras. One officer told me that while they were investigating drugs allegedly passing through the visiting room, they saw a guy covertly fingering his wife. This has happened on more than one occasion, but most guards will have enough of a heart not to bother with violations for some covert touching that wasn't caught until the camera review. Most. Sometimes, a rare asshole will just have to assert his power and write a CDV (conduct violation).

Write-ups or CDVs are given by staff at their discretion. The threat of solitary confinement is always looming in prison. It's another clever way of withholding physical interactions with other human beings as a form of torture. Solitary confinement for anywhere from 10 days to three months is a favorite punishment for "[nonviolent] sexual misconduct. " 

There's also a persistent media narrative that prison systems offer conjugal visit programs out of genuine concern for human welfare. A brief glance at the origins of conjugal visits in the U.S. prison system quickly disproves that theory, showing that conjugal visit programs were conceived as a tool of exploitation and social control. 

Conjugal visits originated in Mississippi at the infamous prison plantation, Mississippi State Penitentiary, or Parchman Farm. Mississippi state officials opened Parchman in the early 1900s, writes historian David Oshinsky in his book Worse than Slavery: Parchman Farm and the Ordeal of Jim Crow Justice, in order to ensnare free Black people into forced labor. Mississippi, like other Southern states during Reconstruction, passed "Black Codes" that assigned harsh criminal penalties to minor "offenses" such as vagrancy, loitering, living with white people, and not carrying proof of employment—behaviors that were not considered criminal when done by white people. Using the crime loophole in the relatively new 13th Amendment, Mississippi charged thousands of Black people with crimes and forced them to work on the state's plantation. 

Parchman officials started offering sex to Black prisoners as a productivity incentive, "because prison officials wanted as much work as possible from their Negro convicts, whom they believed to have greater sexual needs than whites," Oshinsky writes.

"I never saw it, but I heard tell of truckloads of whores bein' sent up from Cleveland at dusk," said a Parchman prison official quoted by Oshinsky. "The cons who had a good day got to get 'em right there between the rows. In my day, we got civilized—put 'em up in little houses and told everybody that them whores was wives. That kept the Baptists off our backs." 

A certain kind of sexual morality has been instilled in the minds of many people with conservative religious upbringings. They naturally force this morality on people they consider children. That is how many guards see prisoners: as children.

Many states did not begin to join Mississippi in offering conjugal visits until much later in the century, when conservative governors like California's Ronald Reagan would determine in 1968 that allowing some married men to have sex with their wives was the best way to reduce " instances of homosexuality " in prisons. 

Abolitionists who wrote the book Queer (In)Justice , consider how concerned prison administrations have historically been and continue to be about queer sex in prisons. The book exposes both the deep fear of the liberatory potential of queer sexuality, and a broader reality that prisons are inherently queer places since prisons' "denial of sexual intimacy and agency is a quintessential queer experience." 

Beyond behavioral control, the rules that determine conjugal visit eligibility are always also about enforcing criminality, since the state decides what kind of charges render someone ineligible to wed or to have an extended visit. Even in the four states that allow these visits, most people with "violent" charges are only allowed to hold their lover's hand and briefly embrace at the beginning and end of visits.

We don't even have enough privacy to masturbate. 

I can be written up if anyone sees my dick, especially in the act of masturbation. I could face solitary confinement, loss of job, visits, religious programs, treatment classes, recreation, canteen spend, and school for getting written up. Conversely, I can be strip-searched at any given time and be forced to show everything.  

Living in this fishbowl has taught me there is no hiding. Too many bored eyes in the same small area to miss anything. Guards may come knocking on the door at any moment. My cellmate is often inches away from me, and it takes coordination to manage time away from each other because we eat, sleep, go to yard, and do just about everything on the same schedule. 

I choose to skip a meal occasionally and embrace the hunger, because it is much less painful than persistent relentless desire. After years of self-release in showers, in a room with snoring cellmates, or as quickly as possible when a brief moment of privacy occurs, my sex drive is all shook up. Current turn-ons could be said to include faucets running and/or snoring men.

Ultimately, this article is not about the right to conjugal visits. It's about the ways that punitive isolation and deprivation of loving physical contact have always been tactics of the U.S. prison system. 

Regardless of the quality of the representations, the prevalence of conjugal visits in movies and TV allows people to avoid thinking too hard about what it's like to be deprived of your sexual autonomy, maybe the rest of your life.

I have been locked up since I was 18, and I am 47 now. To be horny in prison for decades is painful. To the body and soul. 

There is justice as well as pleasure at stake here, and the difference between the two is slight. 

People who love someone in prison live shorter and harder lives. That we do it anyway shows the significance, centrality, and life-affirming nature of intimate relationships to those on both sides of the wall. Maybe it even points to the abolitionist power of romantic and sexual love between incarcerated and "free" people.

So, I guess we start with that thought and work from there to find a way to tear down the system.

As part of Scalawag's 3rd annual Abolition Week,  pop justice  is exclusively featuring perspectives from currently and formerly incarcerated folks and systems-impacted folks.

More in pop justice:.

Hell and High Water: From Gaza to Mississippi

'It's not a story—it's a life:' A look at Snapped, from the inside

Come on Barbie, give us nothing!

Barbie: Pretty Police

Related stories:, steve higginbotham & jordana rosenfeld.

Steve Higginbotham is a writer who spent many years narrating and transcribing materials into braille for the Missouri Center for Braille & Narration Production . He is serving a death by incarceration sentence in Jefferson City, Missouri. Jordana Rosenfeld is a journalist in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. More of her work can be found at jordanarosenfeld.com .

Map Options

Conjugal Visit Laws by State 2024

California refers to these visits as contact visits. Conjugal visits have had a notorious past recently in the United States , as they were often not allowed to see their family unless it was for brief contact or to speak with them on the phone. Conjugal visits began as a way for an incarcerated partner to spend private time with their domestic partner, spouse, or life partner. Historically, these were granted as a result of mental health as well as some rights that have since been argued in court. For example, cases have gone to the Supreme Court which have been filed as visits being considered privileges instead of rights.

The right to procreate, religious freedom, marital privacy and to abstain from cruel and unusual punishment has been brought up and observed by the court. Of course, married spouses can't procreate if one is incarcerated, and this has been a topic of hot debate in the legal community for years. Although the rules have since been relaxed to allow more private time with one's family, especially to incentivize good behavior and rehabilitation, it is still a controversy within social parameters.

In 1993, only 17 states had conjugal visit programs, which went down to 6 in 2000. By 2015, almost all states had eliminated the need for these programs in favor of more progressive values. California was one of the first to create a program based around contact visits, which allows the inmate time with their family instead of "private time" with their spouses as a means of forced love or procreation.

Washington and Connecticut

Connecticut and Washington have similar programs within their prison systems, referring to conjugal visits as extended family visits. Of course, the focus has been to take the stigma away from conjugal visits as a means of procreation, a short time, and a privilege as a result of good behavior. Extended family visits are much more wholesome and inclusive, giving relatively ample time to connect with one's family, regardless if they have a partner or not. Inmates can see their children, parents, cousins, or anyone who is deemed to have been, and still is, close to the prisoner.

Of course, there are proponents of this system that say this aids rehabilitation in favor of being good role models for their children or younger siblings. Others feel if someone has committed a heinous crime, their rights should be fully stripped away to severely punish their behavior.

On a cheerier note, New York has named its program the "family reunion program", which is an apt name for the state that holds the largest city in America by volume, New York City. NYC's finest have always had their handful of many different issues, including organized crime. The authorities are seeking a larger change in the incarceration system and want to adopt a stance that focuses more on the rehabilitation of the inmate that shows signs of regret, instead of severe punishment for punishment's sake.

Download Table Data

Enter your email below, and you'll receive this table's data in your inbox momentarily.

• Controversy and Conjugal Visits - JSTOR Daily
• Conjugal Visits - Townsquare Media

So What are the Actual Rules with Conjugal Visits and How Did They Get Their Start?

To begin with, in Britain, conjugal visits aren’t a thing, though in some cases when prisoners who have been locked up for a long period are getting close to their release date, if they are considered particularly low risk for committing crimes or going off on their merry way, they may be allowed to have family leave time for brief periods. This is time meant to help re-acclimate them to the world outside of prison and get their affairs in order, including re-connecting with family and friends, looking for work, etc.- all as a way to try to help said person hit the ground running once fully released.

Moving across the pond to the United States, first, it’s important to note that prisoners in federal custody and maximum security prisons are not allowed conjugal visits. Further, in the handful of states that do allow conjugal visits, prisoners and their guests must meet a stringent set of guidelines including full background checks for any visitors. On the prisoner’s side, anyone who committed a violent crime, has a life sentence, is a sex offender, and other such serious crimes are also not eligible. Further, in Connecticut, if an inmate is a member of a gang or even thought to be so, they are also banned from conjugal visits. On top of that, pretty much everywhere, any inmate who does anything wrong whatsoever while in prison also finds themselves either temporarily or permanently banned from such visits.

This brings us to how the whole conjugal visit thing got its start in the United States; the earliest official-ish policy with regards to allowing, in this case male, prisoners to enjoy the company of the fairer sex started in the Mississippi State Penitentiary (Parchman Farm) in the early 20th century. This was instituted as a way to get its black prisoner populace, who were used pretty literally as slave labor, to work harder while working the 20,000 acres of land at this institution. In fact, the superintendent of the prison at the time was actually a farmer himself, which is why he was hired to oversee things. As historian David M. Oshinsky, author of Worse Than Slavery: Parchman Farm and the Ordeal of Jim Crow Justice , notes, “[The Administrator’s] annual report to the legislature is not of salvaged lives. It is a profit and loss statement, with the accent on the profit.”

Prisoners who didn’t work hard could be beaten and other such “stick”-type incentives leveraged. On the other hand, prisoners who worked hard, were willing to help keep their fellow prisoners in line, etc. etc. were given various rewards. In fact, in the extreme, a prisoner who managed to kill another prisoner attempting to escape could even be rewarded with a full pardon for that and whatever crime they’d previously committed to get locked up in the first place.

Most pertinent to the topic at hand, for those prisoners who were particularly well behaved and worked the hardest, one reward they could be given was the company of a prostitute on their Sunday off-day. To help facilitate this, every Sunday a literal truck load of women would be brought in to tend to the best behaved prisoners. Later, the policy was expanded to include girlfriends and wives for the men who preferred their company.

To illustrate the thinking of the prison officials in perhaps the most offensive way possible, we have this time-capsule of a quote from one contemporary prison guard from Mississippi- “You gotta understand that back in them days n***ers were pretty simple creatures. Give ‘em pork, some greens, some cornbread, and some poontang every now and then and they would work for you.”

Moving very swiftly on from there, the effectiveness of promised sex for a male prisoner, regardless of race, if they toed the line caught on and, as the century progressed, around 1/3 of the states in the U.S. eventually adopted the practice, as well as many other countries through the 20th century also instituting similar programs.

As for that effectiveness, former warden of Great Meadow Correctional Facility in New York State, Arthur Leonardo, explains, “We don’t have much to give to people in prison. If you don’t have anything to take away from someone, you don’t have anything to take away to urge them to do the right thing.”

Illustrating the effectiveness on the prisoner’s side, one Ray Coles, whose temper resulted in an assault that saw him given a nine year prison sentence, states of the incentive the conjugal visits give him to never step out of line, “Every action or choice I make is made with my wife in mind.”

As for what actually goes on during a conjugal visit, the Hollywood idea and reality, as ever, are somewhat different. While in film and TV shows, a conjugal visit is a time to get hot and sweaty with your partner, the reality is that, while sex may or may not be involved, much of the time is spent just doing normal things with not just a partner, but kids and other family members. In fact, in New York, it’s reported that around 40% of conjugal visits don’t include a spouse or the like, rather often just children and other loved ones. For this reason, these visits are usually officially called things like “Extended Family Visits” or, in New York, the “Family Reunion Program”.

As one California inmate summed up of his extended family visit with his partner, “I got to spend 2 1/2 days one-on-one with my partner, my best friend, my confidant, my life partner. It wasn’t about the sex.”

For further context here, in the United States for most prisoners, at best during normal visitation they might be allowed a brief 2 second hug with their partner and a peck on the cheek, if the latter is allowed at all. On top of that, everything you say or do is being watched, and the time together is relatively brief.

As you can imagine from this, for many prisoners, regardless of their crime, whatever prison sentence was doled out often comes with a generally unmentioned punishment of the finishing of a relationship with their partner. Combined with limited access to phones and the extreme expense of prison and jail phone calls, this also often sees a near complete disconnect from their kids, friends, etc. while in prison.

Thus, for prisoners, while sex may or may not be involved, the reality of the extended family visit is just that- depending on the exact rules for a given prison, 6-72 hours where you can spend time with your partner, kids, and sometimes other family members or friends in a somewhat normal setting, doing normal things.

As for frequency, while in movies it’s a regular thing, and little lead up time, in reality in the United States, this may be granted at best once per month all the way up to once per year, or not at all.

Towards the end of facilitating family bonding, many prisons that allow this provide a couple bedrooms to accommodate a couple and their kids, as well as things like board games, a TV, and potentially food, though costs of things like food are footed by the inmate or their loved ones. For reference, the wife of the aforementioned Ray Coles, Vanessa, states she pays around $100 per extended family visit for things like food, which is then provided by the prison.

As for regions outside the United States, places like Canada allow for extended family visits up to 72 hours in length once every couple months, including allowing anyone with a close familial bond to take part, even friends if the authorities deem the bond strong enough. As in the United States, food and other such items are paid for by the inmate or their family or friends.

Interestingly one of the most generous of the nations when it comes to family visits is Saudi Arabia, which allows a once a month visit; but if you have multiple wives, you get once per month per wife! On top of that, beyond allowing such frequent visits, the government actually pays for the travel of those coming to see you.

Back over in the United States, at its peak in the late 20th century, extended family visits were allowed in about 1/3 of states, but began dropping precipitously starting around the 1980s and 1990s to just four states today- California, Washington, New York, and Connecticut.

This was around the same time a number of such programs designed to keep people from being repeat jailbirds were given the axe across the nation, unsurprisingly directly corresponding to the prison population in the United States absolutely exploding, in the four decades since rising an astounding 500%! For reference, before the 1980s, the growth was relatively slow and steady, more or less tied to population growth. More on this in the Bonus Fact in a bit.

As for the impetus for cutting the extended family visit programs, this is generally tied to increased public sentiment starting around the 1980s and 1990s that prisoners are there to be punished, not to be coddled, and that the program costs too much. For example, in New Mexico, who relatively recently killed the extended family visit program, it was costing taxpayers about $120,000 per year.

Now, this might sound like a lot, and if you go read the news reports, this was certainly used as the driving political rhetoric to get the program nixed by the politicians involved. However, it’s noteworthy that New Mexico reports an average cost per inmate annually is a whopping $35,540, which is pretty close to the national average of about $31,000…. Meaning the entire extended family visit program was costing about what it costs to house just over 3 of their approximately 16,000 inmates per year.

Of course this is still costing taxpayers something… except when you consider, for example, a 1982 study done on New York’s prison populace which found that prisoners who were allowed extended family visits were almost 70% less likely than other prisoners to end up back in prison within three years. This makes it potentially the single most effective recidivism program known, even soundly stomping on the second king of recidivism programs- education, which we’ll talk a bit more about in the Bonus Facts.

As to why family visits seem so effective at reducing recidivism, as the aforementioned warden Arthur Leonardo, notes, those who are able to maintain family bonds while in prison, when they get out, have “someone who loves you and will help you, and in the case of children, people who depend on you…”

Going back to the reality of an extended family visit, it’s usually required that partners and the inmates be tested for STDs and come out clean before being allowed to have their little rendezvous. Further, the prisoners themselves are strip searched both before the extended family visit and after. Should they test positive for drug or alcohol use after, they are then banned from future visits indefinitely, and those who brought in the contraband may also be banned from taking part again.

On top of that, those that are visiting the prisoners must be cleared as well, though strip searches, at least in the United States, are not allowed on the visitors, so contraband may occasionally be smuggled in in certain orifices or the like. To try to get around this in, for instance California, inmates and their families are searched regularly during the extended family visits, usually at a rate of about once every four hours.

This brings us to what you can bring for an extended family visit. Well, not much- mostly just things like clean linens, certain toiletries, strictly regulated clothing, and the like. No cell phones, no electronic devices, and really not much of anything else. Even things like family pictures are pretty strictly regulated in number, type, and size. Going back to clothing, one Myesha Paul, wife of California inmate Marcello Paul who is in prison for robbery, states, “They don’t want you to have anything that’s form fitting… although we come with hips and all that, so it’s kinda hard to find what don’t fit around, you know? I just buy some men’s sweat pants and make it work.”

If you go look at the California regulations on this, they also have strict regulations when it comes to colors of clothing, for example no blue denim or forest green pants, no tan shirts, no camouflage, nothing strapless, no skirts or dresses or non-capri shorts- the list goes on and on.

Myesha also helpfully describes what a real extended family visit is like, stating, “We sat outside and played dominoes on Saturday. After that we went in and watched TV, watched movies.” And while she states her and her husband do have sex during the visit, as is almost universally noted by every other inmate and their partner we looked it, it’s more about the closeness and little things like getting to hold your partner’s hand or just hold them in general, as well as waking up next to them. She states, “It feels good… because I don’t get that at home. Ya know. At home I’m sleeping by myself, unless my grandbaby or one of my kids wanna sleep with me. But they’re grown. But they still do sleep with me sometimes. But other than that, you know, I’m waking myself up in the morning, or the alarm clock is waking me up, or my grandson comes and wakes me up. It’s good to have my husband waking me up. It’s the nicest thing about being married. Isn’t it? Waking up?”

She also states of her husband, “He watches me through the night… I know he does ’cause sometimes I wake up and he’s looking at me. And I do the same to him. Sometimes he’s sleeping and he wakes up and I’m watching him.”

Similarly summed up by the aforementioned Vanessa Coles, the value of extended family visits is about keeping her family together- “It keeps our bond going, keeps our marriage strong and keeps him on track.” As for the couple’s young kids, “The little one needs it because that’s all he knows. The older one needs it to remember what he knows.” And as for those arguing against allowing such visits, she states, “[The prisoners] are being punished. I get it. [But] destroying your marriage and family should not be a part of your sentence.”

If you liked this article, you might also enjoy our new popular podcast, The BrainFood Show ( iTunes , Spotify , Google Play Music , Feed ), as well as:

• What Happens to Your Stuff When You Get Sent to Prison for Life?
• When Did Having a Prisoner’s Last Meal Be Anything They Want Start?
• From a Life of Crime to One of the Most Prolific Actors of All Time- Danny Trejo’s Prison Break
• Are You Really Entitled to a Phone Call When Arrested?
• What Happens if You Commit a Crime in Space?

Bonus Facts:

Going back to what caused the massive spike in U.S. incarcerations starting in the 1980s that has more or less continued unabated since, one thing often pointed to is that this was around the time the war on drugs was ramped up, generally considering to account for about 25%-50% of the increase in inmate population. This still leaves the rest, which is the majority. And unless you just think U.S. citizens are far more likely to commit crimes than, for example, our European brethren, obviously there is something weird going on. As to what, a variety of factors are pointed to including the cutting of many programs designed to keep people from being repeat offenders, marked increase in sentence length, especially compared to the rest of the world for similar crimes, and perhaps the catch-all which has driven a lot of this to the extreme- the privatization of prisons that occurred at this time, making many prisons for-profit institutions.

In the decades since, these entities have heavily lobbied for things that seem pretty directly tied to doing everything possible to make prison sentences longer and keep people coming back for more- most pertinent to the topic at hand, cutting costs wherever possible for themselves, including any and all recidivism programs. After all, they get paid per inmate, so aren’t too concerned with what the total cost is to the state, other than the greater that cost, the more they make.

Naturally, the longer sentences and increased likelihood of repeat offenders, at a rate of about 45% within 3 years and 76% within five, has seen prison populations skyrocket in the United States since the 1980s. The net result of all of this being that, at present, the land of the free currently houses almost one quarter of all inmates imprisoned in the entire world! The cost of housing these inmates comes to about $50-$70 billion annually. This does not include the police and judicial costs that get the prisoners put there in the first place- all summing up to massive sums of money being spent and many more crimes being committed while proven recidivism programs that see massive reductions in repeat offenders going largely unused. And noteworthy here is that about 95% of prisoners do get out at some point.

And speaking of recidivism programs like extended family visits, a study done by the United States Department of Justice noted that prisoners given access to educational programs were, for vocational certificates 14.6% less likely to find their way back in prison within 3 years vs. the general prison populace. For those achieving a GED while in prison, they were 25% less likely to end up back in the slammer. And those who attained an Associates degree were the highest of all in their study at about 70% less likely, approximately the same benefit as those given access to extended family visits.

Averaging it all out, the net effect of the educational programs was about a 43% reduction in rate of returning to prison within 3 years. From this, crunching the numbers, the study showed that this meant for every $1 spent by the states towards educating prisoners, it saved $5 annually thanks to the reduction of prison population, let alone other cost savings in court and police expenditures and, of course, a reduction in crime rate. Given each year about 700,000 inmates are released in the United States, that amounts to a massive reduction in crime, while a rather large increase in a better educated and more skilled populace.

Finally, one more bonus fact- while violent criminals are almost always seen as the most dangerous and most likely to re-offend by the general public, the data does not back that up at all- not even close. According to the United States Department of Justice, the highest rate of re-offenders within 3 years after being released were those stealing motor vehicles at 78.8%! Next up are those in prison for selling stolen property at 77.4%. The list goes on and on, but essentially, those who steal are generally about 70%+ likely to re-offend within 3 years and are the highest at-risk re-offenders. In stark contrast, violent crime convicts are massively less likely to re-offend. For example, rapists and murderers are only 2.5% and 1.2% likely to re-offend respectively. Of course, the latter is much more news worthy and traumatic, leading to the skewed public perception.

• Conjugal Visit
• Prisoner Murders Girlfriend
• The Dark Origins of Conjugal Visits
• No Laughing Matter
• Mississippi Ending Conjugal Visits
• How Conjugal Visits Work
• States That Allow Conjugal Visits
• Conjugal Visits Correlate to Fewer Sexual Assaults
• Conjugal Visits Rules and History
• Extended Family Prison Visit
• One Conjugal Visit
• Conjugal Visits
• California Inmate Visitation
• San Quentin Visitation
• Prison Visits
• The Conjugal Visit
• Canada Visiting an Inmate
• Pennsylvania Visiting Rules
• National Crime and Justice
• Conjugal Visits Not Practical
• Australia Conjugal Visits
• South Dakota Corrections
• United States Incarceration Rate
• New Mexico Incarceration Statistics
• New Research on Prison Education
• State of Phone Justice
• Cost of Incarceration

I can’t comment on everything in the bonus facts, but I think the low (1.2%) re-offending rate for murder can be put down to two things: (1) they receive very long sentences (if not actually executed!), and so leave prison in their old age, and (2) they were more likely to have committed a crime of passion, rather than be career criminals. For that matter, I read that, at Devil’s Island, the murderers looked down on the thieves. Murder might be a worse crime, but it was usually the only one they committed, while the thieves were habitual criminals. (That might be a reason behind the high re-offending rate for stealing cars and receiving stolen goods.)

You might want to look that up because it is actually not correct. Depending on the severity of the crime murder can carry as little as a 5 year sentence, and remember it is not uncommon to serve as little as one quarter of the issues sentence. Also, execution is remarkably rare with many US states banning it or in moratorium. For a detailed state by state list of murder recommended sentences see this wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_punishments_for_murder_in_the_United_States

Become a member of The Marshall Project during our fall member drive. Our journalism has tremendous power to drive change, but we can’t do it without your support.

Happiness is a family sleepover.

Ray Coles has a temper. It got him sentenced to nine years for battery, and prison continued to test his self-control. “I have little patience for ignorance and disrespect,” said Coles, 36, an inmate at the California Men's Colony in San Luis Obispo, California. But he stifles the urge to lash out at guards and fellow inmates because he knows it would jeopardize his “extended family visits” – quarterly private time with his wife, Vanessa, and their two young sons.

The overnight visits, in a little house on the prison grounds, might sound like a grim rained-out vacation to most: TV, board games and tasteless, reconstituted meals. But for Coles, the chance to interact freely with his family every few months, outside the gaze of officers and inmates, reminds him of his long-term goal – to be approved for parole when he becomes eligible in May 2017.

"Having that physical connection with your wife is heaven – a complete escape from this negative life behind these walls," Coles said in a letter to The Marshall Project. The bliss of companionship, connection and touch "with the opposite sex is so rare that an inmate will go to the extreme to avoid bad encounters or situations," he said. "Every action or choice I make is made with my wife in mind.”

A conjugal visit bedroom at Auburn State Prison in Auburn, N.Y.

Coles is an anomaly. Despite considerable evidence that extended family visits, commonly called conjugal visits, lower dangerous tensions and contribute to rehabilitation, the practice is rare and becoming rarer. Mississippi abolished its program a year ago. New Mexico stopped family visits in May. That leaves only three states – Washington, New York and California – with meaningful programs. (Connecticut has extended visits at one prison, with only 15 inmates participating, and even that program is under review.) No federal facilities in the United States permit overnight family visits.

California’s Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has permitted conjugal visits since the early 1970s. They are not available to lifers, death row inmates, sex offenders, those convicted of domestic violence or under disciplinary restrictions for violating prison rules. In 2007, following a lawsuit brought on behalf of a gay inmate and anti-discrimination legislation, the state added "domestic partners" to the list of those family members approved for visits. A department spokeswoman said the family overnights improve prison safety and maintain family and community connections that help ease inmates’ reentry into society.

But critics offer an array of arguments against visitation programs: that they are costly, unpopular with the public, and risk the spread of diseases or burdensome pregnancies. Data on costs is scant; New Mexico calculated the extended visits for two percent of its 7,000 inmates costs $120,000 a year. No one appears to have polled public opinion on the practice.

"Even though we provide contraception, we have no idea how many women are getting pregnant only for the child to be raised by one parent,” the Mississippi corrections chief, Christopher B. Epps, said when announcing the end of the program in December 2013. (Advocates say family visits for female inmates are more likely to include children and parents – rarely husbands – so that pregnancy is less of an issue.) Mississippi pioneered the practice of conjugal visits – which at first included prostitutes - to its black prisoners in 1918 on the premise black inmates were "naturally promiscuous and were in greater need of sexual outlets" according to a research paper submitted to the criminal justice program at the University of Southern Mississippi. White prisoners in Mississippi weren't permitted the privilege until the 1940s. Only 155 inmates out of its population of 22,000 prisoners were participating at the time of its abolition.

New Mexico abolished its program, according to corrections spokeswoman Alex Tomlin, after a study concluded that it did not reduce recidivism. When asked for the study, Tomlin said a formal report did not exist: "We looked at (the records of) individual inmates, is my understanding," she said.

What works in New York state may not prove successful in New Mexico, continued Tomlin: Most of New Mexico's inmates, she said, "have less than a high school education. Most are Roman Catholic, most are Hispanic, and on their fourth, fifth or sixth conviction," and more likely to be wedded to a gang than a spouse, she said. Contraband can be smuggled into prisons during extended visits, and it makes sense to use prison resources on programs that will benefit the most prisoners, she said.

Conjugal visits “may be more beneficial to maintaining already functional families than addressing the needs of a dysfunctional family,” wrote Reginald A. Wilkinson, then director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction in a June 2003 article in Corrections Today. Conjugal visits not only increased the risk of "spreading sexually transmitted diseases by an already identified high-risk population," but unsupervised visitation could put family members at risk of violence. Providing facilities that allowed private visitation to occur in a "dignified, yet secure, manner," was too costly, wrote Wilkinson, concluding, "Ohio has not found that the benefits outweigh the disadvantages and financial cost to prison administrators, families of offenders and the community."

In its resistance to conjugal visits, the United States is “an outlier,” said Heather Ann Thompson, an associate professor of history and African American studies at Temple University, who has researched prisoner rights. Canada, Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and many Latin American are among countries that permit them. "Notably, Costa Rica, Israel and Mexico allow them for homosexual prisoners," she adds. While they are banned in Great Britain, they are allowed for eligible inmates in Spain, Germany, Denmark and Russia.

Thompson cites reports showing that extended family visits justify their costs by cutting recidivism and improving inmate behavior. A study of the family reunion program in New York State published in 1982 by Corrections Today showed that prisoners who participated had a 67 percent lower rate of recidivism than those who did not. The Minnesota Department of Corrections concluded in 2011 that "Revisiting visitation policies to make them more 'visitor friendly' may therefore represent a relatively low-cost, potentially high-benefit measure that correctional systems could take to help ease the burden of prison overcrowding and budget deficits." Minnesota abandoned extended family visits 30 years ago, “due to a variety of security and contraband issues,” a spokeswoman for that state’s corrections department said. “We are currently working to provide video visiting to address distance concerns.”

While there are costs associated with extended visits, families and inmates pay a significant portion. (Coles' wife, for example, totes in her family's linens and pays $90 - $100 for the family's pre-ordered food each time she goes.) Family members wishing to participate undergo rigorous screenings, background checks, and inspections and searches before being permitted to spend the night. Vanessa Coles must not only present her marriage certificate each time, but also hand over her birth control pills to be doled out by prison staff.

To minimize the risks of sexually transmitted disease, New York and Washington have elaborate prevention protocols requiring testing, counseling, and disclosure to a spouse or domestic partner before a superintendent will approve a visit including the possibility of intimate contact.

Stewart J. D'Alessio, a professor of criminal justice at Florida International University, concedes that conjugal visits may mainly serve to preserve functional families – but that in itself helps make society safer. "The studies show generally that getting married and having a family reduces recidivism and lowers criminal involvement,” he said. “It increases your social capital: You have a vested interested when you have a wife and kids in not going to prison. You have a stake now."

D'Alessio is the lead author of a 2012 study showing that the sexual violence rates in prison were 75 percent lower in states where conjugal visits were permitted. D'Alessio says the existence of extended family visits might be an indicator that an institution embraces other enlightened rehabilitative practices as well.

Arthur Leonardo, a retired warden of New York State's Great Meadow Correctional Facility, attributes hostility to extended visits to a punitive attitude in the American public. "There's this feeling that we shouldn't be doing anything for them," said Leonardo. Voters, he lamented, "get upset when they find out inmates get health care! Health care is a curse word!" While the public may seek satisfaction in vengeance, the reality of rehabilitation is that reform is often best achieved via a system of rewards and incentives than ever harsher punishments, said Leonardo, who retired in 1999. The "family reunion" visits in Great Meadow, he recalled, "certainly encouraged them to keep clean disciplinary records and stay out of trouble," and staff generally supported their existence as well, he recalled. "We don't have much to give to people in prison," he explained. "If you don't have anything to take away from someone, you don't have anything to take away to urge them to do the right thing," he said.

Not all prison administrators welcome the idea of family overnights. But wardens with experience overseeing such programs are most likely to believe that they lowered the risk of violence and maintained family stability, according to a survey of 226 wardens published in The Journal of Correctional Health Care in 2002. Wardens with more education were also more supportive.

All visits are helpful, but family visits are particularly effective in reforming people with antisocial behaviors. Family – the kinship that many young men seek when joining gangs – is a potent behavioral transformer. "Those people are out there and available when you get out," Leonardo explained. "To have someone who loves you and will help you, and in the case of children, people who depend on you," is, for most people, a more powerful incentive than threats and orders from authority figures with whom they have no emotional connection, Leonardo explained.

Vanessa Coles, who met her husband 12 years ago in a vocational school they both attended, said that being with her husband and watching her five- and 11-year-old sons play with their dad is worth the five-hour drive. “The little one needs it because that’s all he knows,” she said. “The older one needs it to remember what he knows.”

She acknowledges that the visits are not exactly repeat honeymoons. But they do take her husband's "mind off being in prison and my mind off being a single mom…. It keeps our bond going, keeps our marriage strong and keeps him on track."

"They're being punished: I get it!" Vanessa said. But "destroying your marriage and family should not be a part of your sentence."

Has your partner been in prison? Help others understand what the experience is like by filling out our questionnaire.

Our reporting has real impact on the criminal justice system

Our journalism establishes facts, exposes failures and examines solutions for a criminal justice system in crisis. If you believe in what we do, become a member today.

Stay up to date on our reporting and analysis.

How to visit an inmate at Noble Correctional Institution in Ohio

Updated on 06-15-2024

Before visiting your inmate check all the rules you need to follow. You can find an inmate at Noble Correctional Institution , using the Pigeonly Inmate Search if you need help before visitng. After the visitor has been approved by the correctional facility they need to check with their inmate on what days they are allowed to visit. Before connecting with a loved one here, you can find them using a free inmate locator. Pigeonly helps you add money to a trust account at Noble Correctional Institution and other services.

• Write a Prisoner
• Inmate Calling
• {facilityName}

Noble Correctional Institution Correctional Facilities

• • City: Caldwell
• • County: Noble County
• • State: Ohio
• • Facility: Noble Correctional Institution
• • Locator: Use Our Free Inmate Locator
• • Address: 15708 McConnelsville Road, Caldwell, OH, 43724
• • Phone: 740-732-5188

Table of Contents

• • Visitation
• • What to Wear When Visiting Inmate
• • What can I Bring to Visit an Inmate
• • Visitation Hours
• • General Visitation List
• • What are the Visitation Hours
• • How to schedule a Visit
• • What are the requirements to visit your inmate
• • How to make an appointment to visit your inmate
• • How to book a prison visit online
• • How to connect with your inmate through video visit
• • How to connect through jail video visitation
• • FAQs

Noble Correctional Institution inmate lookup

Go to pigeonly.com to start a search for your inmate. First, click "Get Started" and enter your inmate's first and last name.

Make sure to check if your inmate's facility is county, state, or federal.

Find your inmate and select from the list of services designed to help you keep in touch.

How it Works

Finally, you'll need to register an account with Pigeonly, and we'll provide you with your loved one's contact information. (Don't worry, registration is completely free!)

Pigeonly understand how difficult it is for families to stay away from their inmate and it is important to familiarize yourself with the basic of inmate visitation before planning a visit as each facility has specific rules that you must follow. All visitors must be pre-approved; your inmate must put you on the pre-approved visitation list in order for you to visit them which is later reviewed by the correctional facility. When considering approval, correctional facilities look at many factors as all the formalities need to be done. Many facilities limit the number of visitors therefore inmate have to narrow down the list of potential visitors. All correctional facilities have their own set of rules which you need to follow. You will be expected to follow the prison rules, no matter how arbitrary they may seem, when you visit.

The inmate you plan on visiting should be able to advise you the visiting time schedule for that prison, however it is always a good idea to call the prison before to ensure visitation is permitted and whether potential visitors are approved or not. All the prisoners are searched before and after any visits due to the security reasons. The families visiting their inmates need to respect the dress code of the particular prison otherwise they may be refused visitation. All visitors are expected to present a valid, government issued photo ID.

What to wear when visiting inmate at Noble Correctional Institution

Each facility requires that their rules be followed according to local ordinances. Typically, for any given institution you want to make sure to wear appropriate attire. Make sure your outfits are not too tight. Different states may have different rules on attire. For information on what to wear in Ohio, be sure to check out their appropriate state laws for Ohio's Department of Corrections at your State's official website.

What can I bring to visit an inmate in Noble Correctional Institution, Caldwell, Ohio

Every Inmate facility has different procedures, so is the case with Noble Correctional Institution Caldwell The General list of items that prohibited is as follows, However Please check out the Noble Correctional Institution's Website to get the whole list.

General List

The following items are strictly prohibited:

• Mobile phones / Cameras / Video cameras / Recording devices;
• Cigarettes / Tobacco;
• Drugs, syringes or any other drug paraphernalia;
• Weapons (guns, knives etc.);
• Chemicals / Flammable liquids / Explosives;
• Medication: over the counter, prescribed or herbal (carriage of diabetic pens and epi-pens subject to approval by a Superintendent);
• Alcohol and alcohol based products;
• Bags for personal property, non-transparent, (i.e. briefcases, backpacks, handbags, wallets, purses etc.);
• Personal property, including keys (other than Visitor Reception Centre locker keys), money, personal identification;
• Electronic games consoles, MP3 players, iPods, electronic storage devices including USB flashdrives, memory sticks and heart rate monitors (except where approved by a Superintendent);
• Mliti-media items, CDs, DVDs, films, videos, prohibited publications;
• Electronic items, including rechargeable toothbrushes, razors, clippers etc. (except for medical reasons, subject to approval by a Superintendent);
• Lighters, matches, candles, incense, aerosol-pressure spray can; Any food or drink;
• Metal cutlery / glass bottles or glass containers, non-transparent lunch boxes;
• Colours / patches / gang identification and associated clothing;
• Paint, pens and highlighters with non-transparent casing, scissors, knitting needles;
• Tattooing materials, tools, weights, magnet / magnetic devices.

What are the Visitation hours for Noble Correctional Institution

• Sunday: 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM
• Monday: 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM
• Tuesday: 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM
• Wednesday: 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM
• Thursday: 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM
• Friday: 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM
• Saturday: 7:30 AM to 2:30 PM

***These visiting hours may be outdated. Please visit the official Noble Correctional Institution website for more information on when can you visit Noble Correctional Institution Facility.***

Can I schedule for Conjugal visit in Noble Correctional Institution, Caldwell, Ohio

Contact Noble Correctional Institution for the rules of the visit as only four states currently allow Conjugal visits.

How to schedule a visit in Noble Correctional Institution

Noble Correctional Institution request visitors to schedule the visit one day in advance in order to avoid trouble while visiting your inmate, all visitors are requested to arrive at least 15 minutes in advance. Visitors are required to show valid photo ID at the check-in.

Contact Noble Correctional Institution Facility to schedule an appointment with your inmate and to check the time slot, as the inmates are allowed one visit per day. Visitors are required to check the timings and regulations before visiting the prison.

What are the requirement to visit your inmate in Noble Correctional Institution, Caldwell, Ohio

Visitors must register in the Inmate Visitation system prior to scheduling an appointment with the inmate. Walk in visit are welcome, but are available on a first come first basis and are subject to availability. Contact the Noble Correctional Institution for scheduling a visit with your inmate.

How to book a prison visit online in Noble Correctional Institution, Caldwell, Ohio

Booking a prison visit online is simple as it takes about 5 minutes of your time. It lets you select 3 slots instead of 1 and you can check with your inmate or the Noble Correctional Institution for the visiting hours. The prisoner must add you to their visitor list before you book a visit. You have to create an account online with Noble Correctional Institution to book the slot online once it gets confirmed by Noble Correctional Institution you can visit your inmate.

How to connect with your inmate through video visit from home in Noble Correctional Institution, Caldwell, Ohio

Video Visit is a convenient way to connect with your inmate without traveling to the prison or writing an inmate, these video visits can be conducted at home from your Laptop or Android mobile device as it saves you time and expense. Children can now also communicate without visiting the facility. Visitors need to create an account with Noble Correctional Institution and get it approved by the facility in order to use this service.

How to connect through jail video visitation in Noble Correctional Institution, Caldwell, Ohio

Jails are now replacing personal visit through video visit in order to avoid huge traffic and making it convenient for the families of an inmate. The Inmate must register their families on the list which needs to be approved by the Noble Correctional Institution.

Frequently Asked Questions

Generally, you're allowed to keep the following items with you during your visit:

• Money for vending machine snacks
• Diaper and bottle if you bring a child
• Medication of any sort
• Cigarettes or tobacco-related products
• Anything that can be considered or used as a weapon
• Illicit substances or materials

Yes, any person that is visiting a prisoner is liable to be checked and possibly arrested if they have any active warrants.

• Immediate family members
• Approved relatives
• Friends (usually an approved list of fewer than 10 individuals)
• Religious leaders

On the other hand, there are a number of reasons you may not be allowed to visit a loved one in prison, such as if you have an outstanding warrant, you have an active order of protection against you, you're currently on probation or parole, or you're deemed a security risk. Although individuals who have previously been convicted of felonies may face a tough time being admitted as visitors to a prison, they'll be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

You may not use our service or the information it provides to make decisions about consumer credit, employment, insurance, tenant screening, or any other purpose that would require FCRA compliance.

Visit an inmate in ohio :

• City & County Jails
• State Prisons
• Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
• US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
• FIND AN INMATE

What is a conjugal visit?

Conjugal visits allow couples and family members to be reunited for extended visits in medium-security facilities...

SEARCH FOR ANY FACILITY OR INMATE IN THE COUNTRY

City or county jail.

Locate the state, then the city or county where you think they are being held.

STATE PRISON

Locate the state where you think they are being held.

FEDERAL PRISON

You must first go to any Federal Bureau of Prisons facility.

• Connecticut
• District of Columbia
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• West Virginia

STATE PRISON INMATE

Locate a federal prison inmate.

Conjugal visits are private visits that allow married couples to spend time alone, engaging in companionship and sexual relations. They are also for families to reunite (up to three family members), where children and siblings can be a part of the visit, as well (in Connecticut, children are required to be part of the conjugal visit). They are only available in medium-security facilities.

Sometimes they're referred to as extended visits or family visits or family renunion visits, and they can last for 1-72 hours, depending upon the facility.

Although many believe that such visits have value in helping to rehabilitate inmates, reduce recidivism rates, and strenghten family bonds, this extension of family visitation rights has nearly disappeared across the USA. There are no federal prisons that offer conjugal visits, and very few states permit them (California, Washington, New York and Connecticut still permit conjugal visits). Only inmates with a proven good behavior record are eligible.

To find out how to visit someone you know, begin your search for an inmate or arrestee here:

To find your jail or prison visitation policies, begin by finding the facility or prison system here:

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

Lyons v. Gilligan, 382 F. Supp. 198 (N.D. Ohio 1974)

382 F. Supp. 198 (1974)

Michael LYONS et al., Plaintiffs, v. John J. GILLIGAN, Individually and in his capacity as Governor of the State of Ohio, et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. C 74-271.

United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, E. D.

September 9, 1974.

*199 Ovid C. Lewis, University Heights, Ohio, for plaintiffs.

Richard B. Igo, Asst. Atty. Gen., Columbus, Ohio, for defendants.

WILLIAM K. THOMAS, District Judge.

Plaintiffs, two inmates of the Marion Correctional Institution of Marion, Ohio, and their wives, bring this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1970) against various state officials on the theory that the absence of the opportunity for conjugal visits at the institution denies the plaintiffs their constitutional right of privacy and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Defendants move to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The truth of the facts hereafter set forth is accepted as alleged in the complaint for purposes of considering defendants' motion.

Since October, 1972 plaintiff Michael Lyons has been serving a one- to seven-year sentence for stealing auto parts; plaintiff Donald Richards began a five-to 30-year sentence following a conviction for burglary and larceny in March, 1973. Both were married while they were inmates in the Cuyahoga County Jail. They allege that before their commitment to county jail they had been living with their prospective spouses, and each couple had held itself out to the community as man and wife. During that time both couples "engaged regularly in sexual intercourse" and, their complaint continues, they "felt that sex and private displays of affection for one another were an important part of their relationship and marriage." The rules of the Marion Correctional Institution "completely prohibit any acts of sexual intimacy between inmates and their visitors." Plaintiffs allege and defendants have not denied that no facilities exist for either of the two couples to engage in acts of sexual intimacy. Proceeding from these facts the plaintiffs say in substance that the denial of conjugal visits causes constitutional deprivation of their claimed right of marital privacy and intimacy and the imposition of cruel and unusual punishment.

Plaintiffs contend at the outset that this case is governed by the rule that a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b) (6) should not be granted "unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief." Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 , 45, 78 S. Ct. 99, 102, 2 L. Ed. 2d 80 (1957). Because these claims turn on constitutional considerations that may be fully tested in light of the facts alleged in the complaint and accepted as true for the purpose of considering the defendants' motion to dismiss, it is concluded that this case does not fall within that rule.

Elaborating their first claim, plaintiffs say:

[T]he right to engage in sexual relations with one's lawfully-wedded spouse, free from intrusion or regulation by the State, is part of the fundamental right of privacy guaranteed to all persons by the Constitution of the United States.

They then allege that defendants abridge this fundamental right

. . . by formulating rules denying Plaintiffs their right to engage in sexual relations with their respective *200 spouses, and by failing to provide facilities which would allow Plaintiffs to engage in sexual relations with their respective spouses . . ..

Having presumed this "fundamental right of privacy," plaintiffs urge that this right may not be denied prisoners unless that denial is necessitated by the fact of incarceration and the state can show a compelling interest for denying the right as well as the absence of less onerous means of effectuating that interest. Necessarily a prerequisite to these contentions is establishment of the claimed fundamental right of privacy. But this requires a long leap beyond the present concept of the privacy right guaranteed by the Constitution. The right of marital privacy was first recognized by the Supreme Court when it held in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 , 85 S. Ct. 1678, 14 L. Ed. 2d 510 (1965) that a statute forbidding the use of contraceptives violates the right of marital privacy guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. The Court's concern was that a prohibition on the use of contraceptives necessarily anticipated searches of marital bedrooms for proof, and it concluded, "The very idea is repulsive to the notions of privacy surrounding the marriage relationship." Griswold, supra at 485-486, 85 S. Ct. at 1682. Cf. Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 , 89 S. Ct. 1243, 22 L. Ed. 2d 542 (1969). In an attempt to establish that Griswold has a broad reach, plaintiffs point out that since that case the Indiana sodomy statute has been declared inapplicable to married couples, to protect marital relations "from regulation by the state through the use of a criminal penalty." Cotner v. Henry, 394 F.2d 873, 875 (7 Cir. 1968), cert. den. 393 U.S. 847, 89 S. Ct. 132, 21 L. Ed. 2d 118 (1969). Again, police enforcement of such a statute would require intrusion into the intimacies of the marital relationship. Cotner has not been extended. In Lovisi v. Slayton, 363 F. Supp. 620 (E.D.Va. 1973) a district court concluded that the sodomy statute is enforceable where a married couple has relinquished its privacy. Thus, that court also recognized that the right of privacy on which plaintiffs rely is bottomed on the need to ensure private citizens that the police will not intrude upon their most intimate affairs. It does not follow, however, that because the state cannot pass criminal laws the enforcement of which will require such intrusion, the state is obligated by the Constitution to create private places for the conduct of marital relations. The nub of Griswold was restraint on governmental intrusion. It cannot be extended to impose an affirmative duty on the government. Moreover, imprisonment of persons convicted of crimes is not tantamount to an intrusion into the prisoner's home. Thus it is concluded and determined that the plaintiffs' constitutional right of privacy is not being infringed by the absence of facilities for conjugal visits or by prison rules prohibiting acts of sexual intimacy between prisoners and their wives during visits. Cf. Gittlemacker v. Prasse, 428 F.2d 1 (3 Cir. 1970). [1]

Plaintiffs contend that the deprivation of conjugal visits is causing great physical and psychological stress to them and is "endanger[ing] the stability and the very existence of Plaintiffs' marriages." *201 They assert that these results

are beyond the purview of acceptable punishments which the state may impose upon Plaintiffs Michael Lyons and Donald Richards.

The wives, because of the deprivation of sexual relations with their husbands, are allegedly being punished "equally with their husbands although [they] have not been adjudged guilty of any crime or offense against the State of Ohio." Hence it is asserted that the deprivation of conjugal visits "amounts to the imposition of cruel and unusual punishment upon the several Plaintiffs."

It is true that Harlena Lyons and LaQuita Richards in effect are penalized by their husbands' incarceration without having themselves been convicted of a crime. But the Eighth Amendment prohibition does not reach so far as to require the state to ensure against hardships caused to third persons as a result of the incarceration of one convicted of a crime. Accordingly, if an Eighth Amendment violation were found here, the rights affected would only be those of plaintiffs Michael Lyons and Donald Richards.

There is no ready formula for determining what treatment constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 , 99, 78 S. Ct. 590, 2 L. Ed. 2d 630 (1958) (plurality opinion); see Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 , 92 S. Ct. 2726, 33 L. Ed. 2d 346 (1972) (memorandum opinion and nine separate opinions). The Supreme Court guidelines on the Eighth Amendment are few: For example, the death penalty as applied in particular cases violates the Eighth Amendment. Furman, supra . Punishment is cruel and unusual if it is inflicted pursuant to a law that makes a crime of the illness of narcotic addiction. Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 , 82 S. Ct. 1417, 8 L. Ed. 2d 758 (1962). Denationalization as a punishment is barred by the Eighth Amendment, for it is "the total destruction of the individual's status in society" and places his "very existence . . . at the sufferance of the country in which he happens to find himself." Trop v. Dulles, supra (plurality opinion). Finally, the severe and excessive punishment of bearing a chain night and day and being forced to do painful and hard labor for 12 years for falsifying public records violates the Eighth Amendment. Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349 , 30 S. Ct. 544, 54 L. Ed. 793 (1910).

Without attempting to summarize all the Supreme Court's applications of the Eighth Amendment, it may be said for purposes of this case that punishment must be meted out only for crimes committed, must comport with human dignity, and must not be excessively severe in itself or in relation to the crime. The Court has noted, in addition, that the concept of acceptable punishment is not static, but "must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." Trop, supra, 356 U.S. at 101, 78 S. Ct. at 598 (plurality opinion).

The absence of conjugal visiting in prisons is not excessive punishment in itself or disproportional to plaintiffs' crimes. It is merely a customary concomitant of the punishment of incarceration. Plaintiffs allege that they are suffering physical stress; yet less than ideal physical conditions characterize prisons: for example, institutionalized diets, confining cells, limited exercise, lack of quiet. They also allege they have suffered psychological stress. But psychological stress, like loneliness, boredom, wasted time, and the other wages of incarceration, do not in fact and therefore cannot in law constitute cruel and unusual punishment. [2] By a *202 parity of reasoning, a denial of conjugal visits does not constitutionally destroy or impair an inmate's human dignity. [3]

Trop v. Dulles, supra declares

The [Eighth] Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.

356 U.S. at 101, 78 S. Ct. at 598 (plurality opinion). This instruction makes it essential to inquire into the fact noted in plaintiffs' brief that a number of foreign countries and "several states, including Mississippi and California, allow prisoners to have conjugal visits with their wives."

In 1968 California began its system of prisoner family visits at California Correctional Institution at Tehachapi, a treatment-oriented institution. [4] In 1971 the program was extended to maximum security prisoners with its introduction into Soledad, San Quentin, and the rehabilitation center at Corona. [5] The conjugal visits program in California is actually only a part of the family visiting program. [6] It allows inmates to spend three days a month with their families in apartments outside but close to the prison walls. Eligibility is limited, however, to men who have earned parole consideration and have had six months of good conduct in the institution. [7] At the Mississippi State Penitentiary conjugal visits are permitted on the prison grounds during weekly visiting hours. Formerly the Parchman plantation, the penitentiary is a prison farm now called "Parchman." Prisoners are organized in camps of up to 200 prisoners. Each camp has a small house erected by the prisoners in their spare time and used for wives' visits. The whole family is encouraged to visit the prisoners and the small-camp arrangement makes it possible to have both family visits and marital intimacy with a minimum of administrative difficulty and embarrassment. The family visiting program also includes the possibility of furloughs. *203 However, maximum security prisoners are not allowed to have conjugal visits. [8]

These brief descriptions show that California grants conjugal visiting only with strict eligibility requirements. As for Mississippi, it excludes maximum security prisoners, and the physical facility at Parchman is especially amenable to such visits. Apparently experiments in New Jersey, Texas, and North Carolina have also been undertaken in recent years, but again, only for a select group of prisoners. [9]

New approaches to family visiting incorporating conjugal visiting are being taken in an increasing number of state prisons in our nation. While this trend is one of the indicators of whether "evolving standards of decency" have yet made deprivation of conjugal visiting a constitutional violation, this evolving reform in penological practices is not translatable into a constitutional right.

As this state studies the progress of family visiting including conjugal visiting at some penal institutions in California, Mississippi, and other states, Ohio may decide similarly to expand its program of family visiting at some of its correctional institutions. Nonetheless, as this court understands the constitutional rights of marital privacy and the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, neither of these federal constitutional rights compels Ohio or any other state to grant conjugal visiting to its penal inmates and their spouses.

Upon the entire record, and for the foregoing reasons, the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint is granted.

It is so ordered.

[1] Because of the finding that plaintiffs have not been denied a fundamental right, it is unnecessary to reach the question of what test should be applied to determine whether the denial of a right by a prison is justified and constitutional. However, it should be pointed out that the plaintiffs' test, that the denial be necessarily inherent in incarceration and that the state show a compelling interest and "that no less onerous alternative exists to effectuate that interest," would not necessarily be applied by this court. A recent statement by the Supreme Court suggests that a less stringent test would be in order: "[T]here must be mutual accommodation between institutional needs and objectives and the provisions of the Constitution that are of general application." Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 , at 556, 94 S. Ct. 2963, at 2975, 41 L. Ed. 2d 935 (1974). [Emphasis supplied.]

[2] Examples exist of other prison practices that must also cause mental stress, yet have been held not to be cruel and unusual. E. g., Johnson v. Rockefeller, 365 F. Supp. 377 (S.D.N.Y.1973) (prisoners denied marriage ceremony); Pinkston v. Bensinger, 359 F. Supp. 95 (N.D.Ill.1973) (lack of privacy during visits to inmates in solitary confinement).

Other courts have likewise found the failure to provide for marital relations in prison not to be a violation of the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments. In Stuart v. Heard, 359 F. Supp. 921 (S.D.Tex.1973) the court held that segregating prisoners by sex and not providing facilities for marital visits did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Stuart cities and relies on Tarlton v. Clark, 441 F.2d 384 (5 Cir.), cert. denied, 403 U.S. 934, 91 S. Ct. 2263, 29 L. Ed. 2d 713 (1971), where in a mandamus action the court held that the United States Bureau of Prisons had not denied the plaintiff his Eighth Amendment rights in not allowing him to have sexual relations with his wife during her visit. The same result was reached in Brown v. Gillman, No. 73-80-2 (S.D.Iowa, March 30, 1973) (unreported), and Payne v. District of Columbia, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 345, 253 F.2d 867 (1958).

[3] It may be, in fact, that a greater risk of loss of dignity inheres in imposing a scheme of conjugal visits than in the withholding of those visits. Sol Chaneles in The Open Prison (1973) at 121-22, reports that when the New York State legislature began hearings on the question whether to provide for conjugal visits, it received many letters in opposition from inmates' wives. They believed such visits would be "personally humiliating" and would "grossly [demean] the emotional aspects of sexual expression." See also Balogh, Conjugal Visitation in Prisons: A Sociological Perspective, 28 Federal Probation 52, 56-57 (1964).

[4] Time, Aug. 9, 1968, at 68.

[5] Life, Aug. 13, 1971, at 25.

[6] Hayner, Attitudes Toward Conjugal Visits for Prisoners, 36 Fed. Probation 43, 48 (1972).

[8] Hopper, The Conjugal Visit, The Soc. of Punishment & Correction (1970), reprinted from 53 J.Crim.L.C. & P.S. 340-43 (1962). Only one house, that at the first offenders' camp, was built by official plan. The others were done over the years at the prisoners' initiative with administrative concurrence. Id.

[9] Sol Chaneles, The Open Prison, 121-22 (1973). The selectivity of family visiting programs has been criticized. See Johns, Alternatives to Conjugal Visiting, 35 Fed. Probation 48, 49-50 (1971).

For a discussion of conjugal visiting practices in foreign countries based on a 1958 study, see Cavan & Zemans, Marital Relationships of Prisoners in Twenty-Eight Countries, 49 J.Crim.L.C. & P.S. 133 (1958).

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

Get free summaries of new Northern District of Ohio US Federal District Court opinions delivered to your inbox!

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

• Login or Sign up

Prison Visitation: A Fifty State Survey

As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

More from this issue:

• Arkansas Sheriff Took Kickbacks for Card Fees, Class-Action Suit Says , by Erik De La Garza
• Prison Visitation: A Fifty State Survey , by Chesa Boudin
• Maine Prisoner’s Contraband Conviction Vacated
• Pennsylvania: No Prison Time for Guards Convicted of Abusing Prisoners , by Christopher Zoukis
• My Life with Lifers, by Dr. Elaine J. Leeder. (E-Books Unbound, 2012). 140 pages, $4.99 (e-book) or $14.95 (paperback) , by John Dannenberg
• Mandatory Lifetime Monitoring a Direct Consequence of Sex Offense Plea Bargain in Michigan
• Governmental Highway Robbery: Asset Forfeiture and the Pillaging of the American People , by John W. Whitehead
• $17.75 Million Settlement for Victims of Pennsylvania “Kids for Cash” Scandal , by David Reutter
• Virginia Prisoner Pardoned After Accuser Admits She Lied
• Ex-Felons are About to Get Health Coverage , by Michael Ollove
• CCA Admits to Falsified Staffing Records, Violating Contract with Idaho DOC
• Utah: Private Company Offers to Pick Up Prison Tab , by Eric S. Peterson
• Iowa Sex Offender Special Sentence Provisions Interpreted: Time-Served Credit, but Not Earned-Time, Reduces Revocation Term
• California: Parole Placement of Serial Killer’s Accomplice in Remote County Upheld
• North Carolina County Conned into Building $100 Million Jail
• Seventh Circuit Vacates Summary Judgment for Nutriloaf Diet
• Eighth Circuit Overturns Jury’s $850,000 Verdict for Nebraska Detainee’s Suicide
• Oklahoma Parole Board Members Charged with Violating Open Meeting Act , by Christopher Zoukis
• CCA Excludes Shareholder Resolution Requiring Company to Fully Disclose Information about REIT Conversion
• No Room for 900 New Washington Prison “Rugs”
• Faulty Background Checks Blamed on Digitized Records, Greedy Amateurs , by Joe Watson
• Prison Health Care Provider under Fire in Illinois , by Christopher Zoukis
• Lawsuits Filed Over Unrelated Deaths of Two Oregon Prisoners
• Muslim Prisoners Challenge Ohio’s Denial of Halal Meals; Pork Producers Protest , by Joe Watson
• New York: $225,000 Settlement for Prisoner’s Suicide Attempt, Abuse at Rikers Island
• California District Attorney Sued by Former Colleague
• Administrative Remedies “Unavailable” when Prisoner under Threat of Intimidation or Retaliation
• California: Lifer Entitled to Credit for Time Served Following Governor’s Erroneous Veto of Parole Grant
• Kentucky DOC May Not Alter Presentencing Custody Credits
• Oregon Parole Board’s Notice-of-Rights Form Violates APA
• New York Creates “All Crimes DNA Database”
• Federal Court Limits New York’s Civil Commitment Statute, but Injunction Vacated on Appeal , by Derek Gilna
• $695,000 Settlement in Discrimination Suit by Deaf Colorado Detainees
• California State Bar Recommends District Attorney’s Disbarment , by Christopher Zoukis
• New York Sex Offender Registration Determination is Exception to Article 78 Review
• Sixth Circuit: Disciplinary Conviction Does Not Bar Excessive Force Claim , by Christopher Zoukis
• California: Nine Detainees Charged in Jailhouse Killing; Five Sentenced to Life Terms
• Oregon: Only Voluntary Surrender Avoids Fugitive Dismissal Rule
• Oregon Jail Guard Gets Three Years for Sex with Prisoner
• Arkansas Prisoner’s Ad-Seg Reviews Held to be Meaningless; Case Remanded to Recalculate Damages
• U.N. Considers Revisions to Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners , by Christopher Zoukis
• News in Brief

More from Chesa Boudin:

• Prison Visitation: A Fifty State Survey , May 15, 2013

More from these topics:

• The 153 Exonerations in 2023 Include 19 Resulting From Threats or Sentences of Death , July 15, 2024. Statistics/Trends , Wrongful Conviction .
• North Carolina’s Largest City Elects First Ex-Prisoner to Council , July 1, 2024. Elections , Rehabilitation/Recidivism .
• Colorado Program Employs Prisoners as Professors , July 1, 2024. Work , Education , Rehabilitation/Recidivism , Release and Reentry .
• Decoding Recidivism: Unraveling Its Complex Metrics and Real Impact , July 1, 2024. Statistics/Trends .
• Report Finds Inaccurate Field Drug Tests Major Cause of Wrongful Convictions , June 15, 2024. Drug Testing , Statistics/Trends , Databases , Wrongful Conviction , False Arrest .
• Push Notifications Pull to the Forefront , June 15, 2024. Statistics/Trends , Police State-Surveillance , Electronic Surveillance .
• Missouri DOC Models Re-entry Program on Norwegian Prisons , June 1, 2024. Prison Reform , Rehabilitation/Recidivism , Post-release, ex-offender, re-entry .
• Executions Rise in 2023, Number on Death Row Falls , June 1, 2024. Criminal Prosecution , Statistics/Trends , Death Penalty , Death Row .
• Dixie Prison Growth Drives Number of Incarcerated Americans Above 2 Million Once Again , June 1, 2024. Statistics/Trends .
• U.N. Panel Finds Rampant Racism in U.S. Criminal Justice System , June 1, 2024. Racial Discrimination , Commentary/Reviews , Crime/Demographics , Criminal Prosecution , Statistics/Trends .

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

NCJRS Virtual Library

Conjugal visitation in american prisons today, additional details, no download available, availability, related topics.

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Federal Bureau of Prisons

General visiting information.

Make sure your visit will be a success by carefully following these four steps.

Discover or confirm the whereabouts of the inmate you would like to visit.

Before you can visit you must be placed on the inmate's approved visiting list.

Review all visiting rules, regulations, and procedures before your visit.

Find out when you can visit and get directions to the facility.

Locate the inmate

Sometimes an inmate may be moved to a different facility so that they can benefit from unique programs offered at that location. They might also be moved to receive treatment for a medical condition or for security concerns. Therefore, the first step in planning your visit should be to determine where the inmate is currently housed.

Please verify you are a human by entering the words you see in the textbox below.

To visit, you must be pre-approved.

You can only visit an inmate if they have placed you on their visiting list and you have been cleared by the BOP.

• An inmate is given a Visitor Information Form when he/she arrives at a new facility.
• Inmate completes their portion of the form and mails a copy to each potential visitor.
• Potential visitor completes all remaining form fields.
• Potential visitor sends the completed form back to the inmate's address (listed on the form).
• We may request more background information and possibly contact other law enforcement agencies or the NCIC
• The inmate is told when a person is not approved to visit and it is the inmate's responsibility to notify that person.

Who can an inmate add to their visiting list?

• Step-parent(s)
• Foster parent(s)
• Grandparents
• No more than 10 friends/associates
• Foreign officials
• Members of religious groups including clergy
• Members of civic groups
• Employers (former or prospective)
• Parole advisors

In certain circumstances such as when an inmate first enters prison or is transferred to a new prison, a visiting list might not exist yet. In this case, immediate family members who can be verified by the information contained in the inmate's Pre-Sentence Report, may be allowed to visit. However, if there is little or no information available about a person, visiting may be denied. You should always call the prison ahead of time to ensure your visit will be permitted.

Be Prepared

You should be familiar with all visiting rules, regulations, and procedures before your visit.

The following clothing items are generally not permitted but please consult the visiting policy for the specific facility as to what attire and items are permitted in the visiting room:

• revealing shorts
• halter tops
• bathing suits
• see-through garments of any type
• low-cut blouses or dresses
• backless tops
• hats or caps
• sleeveless garments
• skirts two inches or more above the knee
• dresses or skirts with a high-cut split in the back, front, or side
• clothing that looks like inmate clothing (khaki or green military-type clothing)

Plan your trip

• the prison location
• the prison type
• inmate visiting needs
• availability of visiting space

The inmate you plan to visit should tell you what the visiting schedule is for that prison; however, if you have any questions please contact that particular facility .

General Visiting Hours

Camp general visiting hours, fsl general visiting hours.