Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Access for All
Exhibit Hall
Hotels
WiFi
Search Tips
This paper draws on ghost criminology to offer a comparative analysis of the lived experience of electronic monitoring (EM) across the criminal legal system (CLS) and the immigration system. While EM is institutionally framed as a non-punitive alternative to incarceration, the people who are shackled to electronic monitors experience it as punishment: a form of confinement that extends carceral control into the home, the family, and the community. Drawing on the concepts of haunting and visibility/invisibility from ghost criminology (see Fiddler, Kindynis, and Linnemann 2022), we explore the ways in which the experience of electronic monitoring is both similar and distinct for individuals in these two legal systems. This comparison allows us to better specify what is unique about electronic monitoring as a carceral technology by disentangling the complexities of broader system involvement.
Drawing on in-depth interviews from two different studies on the experience of electronic monitoring, we explore how the technological device of electronic monitoring brings up distinct memories, fears, and associations for individuals under different types of state surveillance. The particular type of “haunting” that the device conjures for each group is embodied and physically manifested through the device’s constant presence. Additionally, we explore the similarities present for both sets of respondents, particularly the ways in which this particular form of state surveillance shapes family relationships, material needs, and social stigma. The comparative findings presented in this paper reveal that EM does not operate uniformly across populations. Its meaning, burden, and consequences are shaped by citizen status and prior history with state systems, and the particular fears and stakes each group carries.