The joint interviews occurred from the wishes and preferences of the families to talk about their experiences together. The researcher asked if family members would prefer to be interviewed individually, and in all instances, the caregivers opted for a joint interview. Interestingly, they often explained this preference as due to two reasons: first, to ensure that their experience was fully captured in the interview; and, second, to provide emotional support to one another while talking about their difficult experiences. These motivations to participate in the study show the significance that participants placed on being able to have their voices heard, perhaps owing to their feelings of otherwise being ignored or isolated during the mother’s sentence (see Chapter Six). While Chapter Three explores the significance of the joint interviews further, it is important to note that both kin being interviewed sometimes self-identified as primary kin caregivers (for example, Terry and Jasmine), whereas others differentiated their roles. This demarcation is emulated in Table 2.1 by the separate column for ‘other carers’. To clarify, some of these ‘other carers’ lived apart from the primary kin caregiver and children (for example, Mary, Emily and Lorriane), while others viewed themselves as having fewer caring responsibilities despite living in the same household (for example, Martin and Sandra).
Table 2.1: Caregivers: their demographics and childcare arrangements
| Primary kin caregiver | Relationship to children | Age | Ethnicity* | Other carers at interview | No. of children | Children’s ages (years) | Children’s carer before CJS** | Changes to children’s residence |
| Shelia | Maternal grandmother | 56 | White British | – | 1 | 6 | Mother and maternal grandparents | No change. Mother and grandson had lived with Shelia before arrest. |
| Pita | Father | 38 | Indian national | – | 1 | 12 | Mother and father | Yes, after mother’s imprisonment, Pita and his son moved into Pita’s uncle’s house. |
| Miriam | Maternal grandmother | 44 | White British | Maternal great- grandmother (Mary) | 3 | 2, 4, 6 | Mother | Yes, after mother’s arrest, the children moved into Miriam’s home. |
| Lucy and Kristen*** | Maternal grandmother and mother’s cousin | 51, 33 | White British | – | 2 | 11 months, 3 | Mother and father | Yes, after mother’s imprisonment, the children moved into Lucy’s and Kristen’s homes. Father was in prison. |
| Daniel | (Step)father | 42 | White British | – | 4 | 9, 10, 17, 18 | Mother and (step)father | No change. Daniel and children remained in family home. |
| Martha and Malcolm | Maternal grandparents | 42**** | British | – | 1 | 5 | Maternal grandparents, mother and father | No, Martha and Malcolm had guardianship of their grandson for three years before his mother’s arrest. |
| Ava | Maternal grandmother | 41 | White African | Maternal great-grandmother (Sandra) | 2 | 1, 3 | Mother | Yes, after mother’s imprisonment, the children moved into Ava’s home. Father imprisoned at same time. |
| Shannon | Maternal grandmother | 53 | White British | – | 4 | 6 months, 8, 9, 10 | Mother | Yes, after mother’s imprisonment, children moved into Shannon’s home. Father was in prison. |
| Annette | Maternal grandmother | 47 | White British | Maternal grandfather (Martin) | 1 | 6 | Maternal grandparents and mother | No, Annette had guardianship of her grandson for three years before his mother’s arrest. |
| Claudia | Maternal grandmother | 51 | British | Claudia’s friend (Emily) | 1 | 9 | Maternal grandmother | No, Claudia had guardianship of her grandson for six years before his mother’s arrest. |
| Janice | Maternal grandmother | 53 | White British | Mother’s friend (Lorraine) | 2 | 10 months, 6 | Mother and father | Yes, after mother’s imprisonment, children moved into Janice’s home. |
| Kevin | (Step)father | 39 | **** | – | 5 | 7 months, 7, 8, 13, 15 | Mother and (step)father | No change. Kevin and children remained in family home. |
| Rebecca | Maternal grandmother | 44 | White British | – | 1 | 2 | Mother and father |
|