Incarceration of women in the United States
This article discusses the incarceration of women in prisons and jails within the United States. According to a November 2018 report by the Prison Policy Initiative, 219,000 women are incarcerated in the United States. A 2017 report by the World Prison Brief states: "The highest female prison population rates are in the U.S.A. (about 65.7 per 100,000 of the national population), Thailand (60.7), El Salvador (58.4), Turkmenistan (about 38.2), Seychelles (34.8), Russian Federation (33.5), French Guiana (32.4), Macau-China (31.3), Rwanda (29.6), Greenland (28.5) and American Samoa (27.3)."
Prison and jail populationEdit
- See also: List of U.S. states by incarceration and correctional supervision rate. It has state by state numbers for female incarceration.
In the United States in 2015, women made up 10.4% of the incarcerated population in adult prisons and jails. Between 2000 and 2010 the number of males in prison grew by 1.4% per annum, while the number of females grew by 1.9% per annum. From 2010 to 2013 the numbers fell for both genders, −0.8% for males and −0.5% for females. For jails the figures for 2000–10 are 1.8% for males and 2.6% for females, while for 2010–13 they are −1.4% for males and 3.4% for females. Over this period the female proportion of the incarcerated population has been increasing, at least partly due to compulsory sentencing.
Hispanic women are incarcerated at nearly twice the rate of white women, and black women are incarcerated at four times the rate of white women. The Prison Policy Initiative writes: "Incarcerated women are 53% White, 29% Black, 14% Hispanic, 2.5% American Indian and Alaskan Native, 0.9% Asian, and 0.4% Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander." Within the US, the rate of female incarceration increased fivefold in a two decade span ending in 2001; the increase occurred because of increased prosecutions and convictions of offenses related to recreational drugs, increases in the severity of offenses, and a lack of community sanctions and treatment for women who violate drug laws. Tough-on-crime legislation and legislation associated with the war on drugs have been connected to the increasing rate of the incarceration of women of color from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. This rapid boom of female prisoners is something the primarily male-dominated prison system was not structurally prepared for and, as a result, female prisons often lack the resources to accommodate the specific social, mental, healthcare needs of these women. Many reforms aiming to reduce prison populations have been designed with only men in mind and have thus not helped reduce the number of incarcerated women; this is especially true of state-level reforms. The mass incarceration of females in the US has become a major human rights issue that has been widely criticised by international organisations such as Human Rights Watch.
In the United States, authorities began housing women in correctional facilities separate from men in the 1870s. The first American female correctional facility with dedicated buildings and staff was the Mount Pleasant Female Prison in Ossining, New York; the facility had some operational dependence on nearby Sing Sing, a men's prison.
Unlike prisons designed for men in the United States, state prisons for women evolved in three waves, as described in historical detail in "Partial Justice: Women in State Prisons" by Nicole Hahn Rafter. First, women prisoners were imprisoned alongside men in "general population", where they were subject to sexual attacks and daily forms of degradation. Then, in a partial attempt to address these issues, women prisoners were removed from general population and housed separately, but then subject to neglect wherein they did not receive the same resources as men in prisons. In a third stage of development, women in prison were then housed completely separately in fortress-like prisons, where the goal of punishment was to indoctrinate women into traditional feminine roles.
Despite the widespread historical shifts in female incarceration, there have been documented instances of women being held in men's prisons well into the twentieth century, one such example being the nearly two years that Assata Shakur was imprisoned, primarily in men's facilities, in the 1970s. In 1973 Shakur was held in the Middlesex County Jail in New Jersey, supposedly due to its proximity to the courthouse. She was the first, and last, woman ever imprisoned there, and was held in deplorable conditions including isolation and twenty-four hour observation. While Shakur was eventually transferred to a women's prison, her treatment illustrates the fact that women were held in male facilities far into the twentieth century, and indicates that racial prejudice continues to play a pivotal role in determining how women are treated during a period of incarceration.
Some fifty years ago, President Lyndon Johnson called for a “War on Crime.” Consequently, Johnson presented to Congress the Law Enforcement Assistance Act, which allowed for the first time in America, a “direct role for the Federal Government in local police operations, court systems, and state prisons.” Republican and Democratic policymakers worked together in fighting this War on Crime, which would later become a “War on Drugs.” Together, the War on Crime and War on Drugs would produce contemporary mass incarceration in America,“distinguished by rate of imprisonment far above all other industrialized nations and involving the systematic confinement of entire groups of citizens.”
In the early 1980s, the Nixon administration introduced the political term “War on Drugs,” condemning all unapproved drug use. This “War on Drugs” refers to federal, state, and local government policies that have been created to eliminate drug use within specific communities. Before announcement of the War on Drugs, the Federal Government had created the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA), which became the fastest-growing federal agency in the 1970s; its purpose was to supervise and control low-income urban communities. The War on Crime and the War on Drugs has led to the increase in prosecution of drug cases, which has been the central contributor to both the expansion of prisons and the “philosophical shift” to that of a more punitive system. This effort was further enforced by the Reagan administration who pressed the sales of illegal drugs as a critical political issue. With use of the strategies, institutions, and bureaucracy already developed at the state and local levels during the War on Crime, Reagan made national programs far more punitive by the end of the 1980s. At the same time, the social service centers that had been founded during the War on Poverty in the 1960s were “nowhere to be found in some of the most vulnerable and isolated neighborhoods in American cities.” As a result, residents were forced to call the police and law enforcement authorities when their children, friends, and family engaged in criminal activity. The War on Drugs has placed law enforcement agencies, criminal justice institutions, and jails as the “primary public programs in many low-income communities” across the U.S. Reagan fought the War on Drugs by using policing activities and federal policies that promoted the task of searching for and apprehending as many suspects as possible. The War on Drugs was fought with an increase in raids, stings, and tactical police units.
President Reagan’s Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 focused on the activities of inner-city youth and small-time drug dealers. Severe sentencing laws, especially mandatory minimum sentences, which were a part of Reagan’s crime bill and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 engendered a mass increase in imprisonment. For example, between 1980 and 1998 the U.S. incarceration rate rose almost 300 percent. The passage of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines compelled judges to give lengthy sentences even when they believed the defendant was not a threat to society. The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 eradicated the existing parole system and replaced it with a “determinate method” of sentencing that based all federally imposed sentences on mandatory guidelines. The guidelines were fixed, providing a “detailed list of point allocations for every illegal drug and specific sentence for the amount possessed or sold.” In the same year, Congress enacted statutes imposing mandatory minimum sentences for drug and weapons offenses, as well as adopted definitions of “drug related activities” and harsh sentences for those with any connection to drugs. This was intended to keep individuals with any sort of connection to drugs “‘off the streets’ and behind bars” for extensive periods of time. These strict guidelines sent men and women away for decades. The War on Drugs has targeted individuals beyond those using or addicted to drugs by also victimizing those who are “unwittingly, unknowingly, or peripherally” involved in drug-related activity. This has specific consequences for women, especially women in relationships with partners or relatives who use or sell drugs, as well as women who have no other choice but to become involved in the drug trade in order to support their families in the “absence of living wage jobs and in the face of cuts to public assistance." The War on Drugs has a specific and devastating impact on women. The number of women in prison and the time they spent inside grew significantly throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Between 1986 and 1999, the number of women incarcerated in state prisons for drug-related offenses increased by 888 percent. More so, it has also expanded the criminalization of people by race and gender. For example, there has been a distinct increase in the number of incarcerated African American and Latina women in the U.S., who make up a disproportionate number of women arrested, charged, convicted, and incarcerated for drug-related offenses. The incarceration rate for African American women for all crimes, driven by drug-related offenses, increased by 800 percent between 1986 and 2005, compared to a 400 percent increase for women of all races.
Even though the number of crimes committed by women has remained relatively constant, the rate of imprisonment has continued to increase. As of 1997[update] over 135,000 women in the United States were in prisons and jails. "More than 950,000 women were under correctional supervision in 1998, about 1% of the US female population. In the past decade, the numbers and proportions of women have increased in terms of all components of the system: jail, probation, parole, and prison". Many state that this is a factor of increased incarceration in response to drug offenses. "Approximately 55% of women in prison are serving their first prison sentence. Although drug users are less likely to be imprisoned for violent offenses than non-drug users, women incarcerated for drug convictions are still likely to be placed in maximum-security facilities". African American women are the largest group to be incarcerated as a result of drug crimes.
Gender of guards and staffEdit
As of 2007, in most of the Western world, the guards in female prisons are exclusively female. Until the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act, this was true in the United States. Men usually worked in perimeter posts, such as gate posts, rather than having direct contact with female prisoners. Male employees previously had restricted positions. Both acts integrated the workforce, and after the acts passed male employees gained increasingly direct contact with female prisoners. As of 2007, about 40% of prison guards in American women's prisons are men. In some facilities, most of the prison guards are men: Silja Talvi, author of Women Behind Bars: The Crisis of Women in the U.S. Prison System, argued that in theory gender equality makes sense in all occupations, but in practice having male guards watch over female prisoners is problematic.
Social factors leading to incarcerationEdit
There are many socioeconomic factors that foster the cycle of mass incarceration. The exponential growth of female inmates reflects the “pervasive gender mandates” in America, as well as women’s lower-ranking social and economic status. The overrepresentation of minorities and poor people in prison reflects the “deeply entrenched forces of institutional racism and class prejudice.” Poor families living in “de-industrialized” urban areas, “devoid of their traditional communities of sustenance and healing” are more likely to be victims of “violent stigmas that predestine their incarceration.” Notably, poverty, racism, domestic violence, and addiction intersect to create a “cycle of survival, criminalization, and repeated incarceration." In her book Interrupted Life, historian Rickie Solinger believes that four factors contribute to the prison crisis. First, the impacts of globalization and economic restructuring on low-income communities. Second, the War on Drugs. Third, the role of globalization in fueling migration from the global South, the criminalization of migration, and growth of immigrant incarceration. Lastly, emergence of a prison-industrial complex, a relationship between corporate and governmental interests that has led to prison expansion in the U.S. Along with these items, women’s poverty is criminalized in many ways. In particular, due to feminization of poverty and lack of housing choices for women of color with children, the War on Drugs affects minority women living in inner cities, forcing them to live in “high crime, drug-infested areas.” In face of declining incomes and few economic opportunities, women often have no choice but to turn to the street economy, sex work, petty theft, welfare “fraud,” and other means of survival. For many women, personal or domestic violence and sexual abuse are a part of their incarceration. For poor women especially, experiences of violence, particularly in the household, may incite behavior that leads to arrest and criminal charges. Poverty is also criminalized when women with mental illness, most who have experienced post-traumatic symptoms from childhood and adult trauma, come into contact with the law, either through “antisocial or violent behavior or through self-medication with illegal drugs."
Women of color also feel pressured to fit into the 'norm' of what social life should be for women (i.e. be happily married, have a functional family, have a good job and a nice house). This often leads to their conforming and accepting abusive relationships or adapting to their partner's expectations. For example, women who suffer from substance abuse are mainly subjected to it by their partner. Studies showed that women, in fact, believe that engaging in such destructive activities would create a stronger emotional bond, as well as put a halt to the abuse they consistently endure. They assume that because their relationship is going downhill, it must be a failure on their part and decide to make a change, usually for the worse.
The disadvantages of black men in society also affect the outcome of women; they have to take on the role of the breadwinner and often, when not making enough, lead to taking alternatives such as involvement with drugs, theft, and prostitution. This of course, leads to their incarceration. The "profile" that surfaces of the black female offender is "that of a young, uneducated, single mother. She is likely to be unemployed, with few marketable skills, and is more likely to be on welfare". Female inmates were also described as "confined by social conditions in their communities, restrained by their families' circumstances, severely limited by abuse in their intimate relationships, and forced to make hard choices with very few options". They are characterized as "compelled to crime".
Differences between incarcerated women and menEdit
Men make up the majority of prisoners in the United States, approximately ten times as many as women in 2013, but the growth rate for women has been dramatically higher than the growth rate for men over the past few decades, a difference that is especially pronounced in state facilities. Women are disproportionately held in jails: the Prison Policy Initiative found that "about a quarter of convicted incarcerated women are held in jails, compared to about 10% of all people incarcerated with a conviction." Studies show that the way in which men and women cope while imprisoned differs in that women tend to form family structures in an effort to recreate the roles they would normally follow in society; however, men tend to isolate themselves from others and tend to be more aggressive towards the other inmates. Child care is also another issue that women must worry about when they are incarcerated. According to Mumola, 64% of women were primary guardians for their children prior to being incarcerated compared to men at only 44%. (Mumola) It is likely that men like women experienced traumatic events in their childhood, but research has shown that women experience a higher rate of trauma.
Because many states have only one female facility, in comparison to having numerous men's facilities, women are forced to stay in that one specific facility. Women do not have the option of transferring to another facility like men do and they "experience additional deprivations" as they do not have the option to transfer in cases of problematic issues with other inmates or work staff or in cases of desiring to be closer to home. Women have fewer visits from their children, which is influenced by the fact that women facilities are limited and located mostly in rural areas far from women's hometowns. When men are in prison, their female partners may take the kids to visit him. However, due to the statistics on the many of women prisoners being the primary caregivers of children, usually another female family member will take care of her children.
Those who take care of the children with an incarcerated mother where the mother is the primary caregiver, the financial costs of raising that incarcerated mother's children limits the amount of resources people send to the mother in prison. Raising a child, specifically in this instance, someone else's child, is costly. As stated in the source "Surviving incarceration: Two prison-based peer programs build communities of support for female offenders," mothers in prison generally "worry about the welfare of their children, if their children are properly cared for, and if they will be able to maintain long-lasting bonds with their children in lieu of these barriers."
Incarcerated women also use prison libraries differently from the way male prisoners do. In general, women are less likely to use the law library to "seriously research their own cases." Some scholars believe it's because women's sentences are typically shorter and less severe than men's. Often, incarcerated women are seeking information about marital law and child custody and support in prison libraries.
The number of women on death row is significantly less than the number of men, women make up only 2% death row as of 2013. All the women on death row in the past two centuries committed murder, with the exception of Ethel Rosenberg who was sentenced to death for espionage. Women on death row have a relatively low chance of actually being executed: there have only been 571 documented executions from 1632 to 2012. Currently, about half of the women on death row are in the top five states for death row sentencing (California, Florida, Texas, North Carolina and Ohio). Although California is the top state for death sentences, no woman has been executed since 1962.
Mental health issuesEdit
Overall, incarcerated populations are more likely than the general population to have a mental illness. According to research conducted by James and Glaze in 2006 and Steadman, Osher, Robbins, Case, and Samuels in 2009, incarcerated women are more likely than men to report their mental health issues. Although it is unclear if both men and women suffer from mental issues at approximately the same rate due to lack of full and comprehensive reports, they don't experience the same disorders. Typically, women suffer from mood and anxiety disorders, whereas men are more likely to have issues regarding substance abuse and antisocial personalities. Compared to men, women are significantly more likely to seek professional help for their psychiatric problems, however only one-fourth of women follow through and receive treatment. Jails and prisons experience mental illness at different rates and offer different resources, meaning the inmate experience with mental health issues in a jail versus a prison will differ, either negatively or positively. As of 2006, about 64% of women entering jail may have one or more mental illnesses, while 54% of women entering prison may have one or more mental illnesses. Currently, there is scarce research on female psychological development and psychological health, as well as the effects of the diagnosis and treatment. This makes it difficult to treat women due to issues, such as appropriate doses of drugs. In addition, many women have multiple illnesses at once, such as substance abuse, trauma, and mental health issues, making it difficult to diagnose mental health issues alone. Treatment programs seek to provide women with community services that will help them with food, clothing, health care, and educational needs. In addition to this, jails and prisons experience mental illness at different rates and offer different resources. As of 2006, about 64% of women entering jail may have one or more mental illnesses, while 54% of women entering prison may have one or more mental illnesses. Jails typically have fewer resources for mental health diagnosis, treatment, and programs than prisons, depending on the its funding and reliance at specific levels of the justice system. Having prior symptoms and diagnoses of mental illnesses can be amplified and worsened by a prison system that cannot afford to provide the proper support for inmates.
This section relies largely or entirely on a single source. (December 2015)
The mental stress women go through in prison has a toll on them after they are released. The way they cope with life is different than for a woman who has never set foot in a jail cell. Johnson, Kristine A., and Shannon M. Lynch (Journal of Family Violence) discuss the mental traumas women have before they have been incarcerated (state prisons) and the possible causes for their incarceration. In their article, the rate women are being detained as the years pass is evaluated through a series of interviews and assessments. Most prisoners suffer from CSA (childhood of sexual abuse). The percentage at which women are being imprisoned is just as high as the number of women suffering from this trauma. Lynch and the others suggest that there might be a link between the number of women being incarcerated and their trauma. In 1999, the Bureau of Justice Affairs suggested that 44% of the women suffered from sexual abuse, with 10% abused when under the age of 18. In 2005, 100 females were interviewed, 90% of them suffered from interpersonal violence (IPV) which can be partner violence, sexual assault, or CSA. These statistics are around the same range or higher as the years progress.
Female offenders have a higher rate of IPV than men and women from the general public. According to Lynch and her colleagues, the likelihood of a woman suffering from their traumas depends solely on the length they carry the memory and self-blame. This article suggests that the cognitive distortion these women have is self-blame of their incidents.
According to the December 1999 publication Women Offenders of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 1998 40% of women in US state prisons said that they were using drugs at the time of committing the crimes that they were convicted of, compared with 32% of men. Of the women in state prisons in 1998, according to the publication, one third committed their crimes in order to buy drugs. The 2004 publication Drug Use and Dependence, State and Federal Prisoner of the Bureau of Justice Statistics stated that 60% of women in state prison had histories of dependence on drugs. The 1997 publication Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoner, 1997 states that 1/5 of female state prisoners with histories of substance abuses and 1/8 of female federal prisoners with histories of substance abuse receive treatment for addiction.
Historically, sexual abuse within the prison and jail system has been prevalent as seen through years of sexual exploitation of incarcerated women by prison and jail administrators and guards. Dating back to the 1800s, Estelle Freedman sheds light on the prison brothel that was run by male staff members of an Indiana state prison. Sexual abuse can range from numerous different actions and behaviors that are targeted toward the victim, and in prisons and jails, male guards can even overstep their bounds when conducting invasive body pat downs and searches. Some forms of sexual abuse, such as pat downs, are normalized through the manipulation of “routine prison practices.” Although sexual abuse and rape are seen in all combinations of genders, many reports show that male guards are more likely to instigate issues against women inmates due to the fact that they can act almost freely, with impunity.
Sexual abuse and rape can happen to all demographic groups within the prison system, but those belonging the LGBT community or people with mental illness are more heavily targeted. A large prison found in the Southern part of the United States discovered through a intensive study that 68.4% experienced sexual assault prior to being incarcerated, and 17.2% experienced sexual assault in prison. Three percent of the people in this study have experience a completed rape inside prison. Bureau of Justice Statistics figures show that women are at higher risk than men of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization, and lower risk of staff sexual victimization:
|Prison inmates reporting sexual victimization[note 1]||Jail inmates reporting sexual victimization[note 1]|
|Sex||Number of inmates[note 2]||Inmate-on-inmate||Staff sexual misconduct||Number of inmates[note 2]||Inmate-on-inmate||Staff sexual misconduct|
|Female||100,600||4.7%[note 4]||2.1%[note 4]||99,100||3.1%[note 4]||1.5%[note 4]|
The same study shows that women are less likely than men to be forcibly abused, but more likely to be persuaded. In regard to inmate-on-inmate abuse in prison, males (16%) were more likely than females (6%) to have been victimized 11 or more times, to have been bribed or blackmailed (42% compared to 26%), offered protection (39% compared to 19%), or threatened with harm (48% compared to 30%). Males were more likely than females to report have multiple perpetrators (25% compared to 11%), and to have incidents initiated by a gang (20% compared to 4%). Broadly similar ratios applied to jails.
A study published in the Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease found that in Correctional Institution for Women in Rhode Island 48.2% of the inmates met criteria for current PTSD and 20.0% for lifetime PTSD. The study noted that often female inmates suffered a history of sexual abuse or physical abuse in their childhood. Sexual offenses against women prisoners can include rape, assault, and groping during pat frisks. Male correctional officials can often violate women prisoners' privacy by watching them undress, shower, and go to the bathroom. Research suggests that "women with histories of abuse are more likely to accept sexual misconduct from prison staff because they are already conditioned to respond to coercion and threats by acquiescing to protect themselves from further violence". "In federal women's correction facilities, 70% of guards are male."
Two prominent prison reforms for sexual abuse have come about in the last 20 or so years. In 1996, the Prison Litigation Reform Act, or PLRA, was passed in response to an increase in prisoner complaints and lawsuits. The PLRA was designed to make it more difficult for prisoners to file for litigation by providing a rigid guideline and checklist that must be met before being able to file a valid lawsuit. Inmates must exhaust all grievance remedies before qualifying for legal action against a prison or jail guard or staff member. The PLRA resulted in a negative sentiment in reporting cases of sexual abuse or assault because inmate would fear punishment and lash back on themselves, while having low expectations for adequate and appropriate responses to be made in reparation of their case. In 2003, President Bush signed the "Prison Rape Elimination Act into law, legally addressing prisoner rape, calling for a study of prison rape and developing guidelines for states on how to address the problem." The purpose of the act was to provide research and gather statistics for the rate of prison rape in all governmental levels of the prison system and it is supposed “to provide information, resources, recommendations and funding to protect individuals from prison rape”. Although the primary focus was to combat all prisoner rape and sexual assault, the PREA does not successfully protect prisoners, especially those within minority groups like women and the LGBT community. Instead, PREA gives correctional officers and facility operators the ability to punish inmates for engaging in any sexual behavior, including consensual activity. As a result, punishment for all sexual acts “[discourages] prisoners from reporting sexual violence”. In 2005, "the Office of the Inspector General and the DOJ released a report documenting widespread sexual abuse by prison employees nationwide, noting that only 37% had faced some kind of legal action. Of those, ¾ walked away with no more than probation. It took all of this evidence for the BOP to finally criminalize sexual contact as a felony in 2006, so that guards can actually face up to five years in prison". However, "when authorities confirmed that corrections staff had sexually abused inmates in their care, only 42% of those officers had their cases referred to prosecution; only 23% were arrested, and only 3% charged, indicted, or convicted. Fifteen per cent were actually allowed to keep their jobs".
Despite such legislative progress, women are fully dependent on the guards for basic necessities and privileges, and in many states, guards have access to inmates' personal history files which can empower them to threaten prisoners' children if the women retaliate. Female inmates who retaliate also face the loss of eligibility for early parole in addition to prolonged periods of disciplinary segregation, and detrimental write-ups, which further deters acts of resistance. Many times, sexual abuse cases go unreported so the extent of the issue is unclear. Although this is true, the PREA and new national standards for prison rape prevention, detection, and response is showing an increasing in the number of reported allegations of sexual victimization. Of the new cases reported in 2015, 58% of them were inmate-inmate cases, while 42% of them were staff-inmate cases. From 2013-2015, there were about “15,875 allegations of inmate-on-inmate sexual harassment”, but only about 16% of the allegations were proven and found to be true based on investigations.
The neutrality of this section is disputed. (September 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Incarcerated women suffer disproportionately[discuss] from HIV/AIDS, infectious diseases within prisons, reproductive issues, and chronic diseases. Most inmates are women of color from low socioeconomic backgrounds and therefore suffer from both chronic diseases that are common in minorities (such as diabetes, heart disease, and hypertension) and health problems that may result from living in poverty (such as malnutrition, etc.). Transmittable infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and hepatitis C viral can be found at elevated rates in population of incarcerated women than in the community
The structure and system of the US prison system does not adequately accommodate for these healthcare needs. Since women are not given the proper healthcare once inside prisons, their health tends to keep deteriorating as time progresses. Policies regarding health treatment at prison institutions often limit the availability of care. For example, at many institutions women must wait in lines under strenuous conditions until designated times for most medical treatments and medications. Medical treatment oftentimes needs to be requested and approved by correctional officers who have little or no medical training. Due to the geographic isolation of prisons and the comparatively low wages offered, there is a lack of qualified and experienced healthcare professionals willing to work in prison, which in turn, reduces the quality of care offered. Overcrowding and poor environmental facilities exacerbate the problem. Studies show that "women's [prison] facilities are typically even more substandard and stressful from an environmental point of view than men's facilities". Other barriers include the lack of research being conducted specific to the needs of incarcerated women, including but not limited to the cultural and language barriers that women can face when trying to communicate their health issues.
There are two main reasons that may account for the incompetent provisions regarding the health of women imprisoned in the prison-industrial complex, which are the view of women's prisons being a profiting industry and the change from a welfare state to a crime control state. The view of prisons as a profiting industry for private companies is one of the main causes explaining why the health care system of women in prisons is not fully adequate. Women must choose between their freedom and their health since bodies in the prison-industrial complex are seen as slave labor. Women prisoners are the ones who complete the tasks necessary to keep the prisons operating so many are forced to keep working on tasks even if their health is not in good shape. For example, in California women who are categorized as disabled outside of prison are forced to work once inside prison since their disabled status is rejected. Many of the basic tools to keep good hygiene such as toothbrushes, shampoo, or soap are not given for free to women anymore but are sold in the commissaries by companies who paid the government the most amount to win over the contracts. Many women are unable to afford these products at such inflated prices causing there to be poor conditions inside prisons, which can be harmful to those who are seriously ill, such as those who have HIV. They are unable to avoid simple infections that can be avoided with good hygiene which ends up having detrimental effects upon them. Also, prisons tend not to spend adequately on the prisoners which has caused many prisons such as those in California to provide unhealthy meals for the prisoners. Meals that have high levels of fat, sugar, and salts have negative effects upon the health of the women. Those with illnesses such as diabetes have to forgo a meal since the meals would cause them to worsen. Fresh fruit or vegetables are rarely provided or when provided are in small proportions which ends up hurting the health of many since they do not get a well-balanced meal. Another reason which may account for the poor health conditions of women in prisons is the notion of the switch from a welfare state to a crime control state. Many women are neglected proper treatment; when they voice their complaints, they are often not taken seriously. When women are diagnosed, they are sometimes not fully informed, allowing prisons to overlooking providing proper medical attention. Often times with surgical procedures, the women may not be informed of what was performed or the reason why. This causes them to not have knowledge about their own health or the treatment options available to them. Those women who have addictions are sometimes not given drugs to help them in painful situations such is the case of Trina Brown, a prisoner in Central California's Women's Facility. She was neglected pain relievers even when she was in excruciating pain on the basis that she just wanted the medication to feed her former addiction. The healthcare provided, or lack of it, to incarcerated women can even be seen as a punishment for these women, contributing to a punitive nature in the healthcare system of these prisons. Since the prisons do not have to respond to the treatment of these women they save money which maximizes their profits. The maximizing of profits in the prison industrial complex ends up have grave consequences towards the health of many women incarcerated in prisons as well as the change of a welfare state to a crime control state. These medical abuses in the end prohibit women to have control over their own bodies and allows the state to have full control over them.
In 1994 the National Institute of Corrections said that American prison systems did not adequately provide gynecological services. During that year half of the state prison systems surveyed by the institute provided female-specific health care services, including mammograms and pap smears. Amnesty International said that, in the systems offering those services, many women encountered long waiting lists. The results of study conducted in a Rhode Island prison indicated high levels of reproductive health risks (STDs, unplanned pregnancies, etc.), from which researchers concluded that providing reproductive health services to incarcerated women would be beneficial to the women, the community, and the criminal justice system.
Within the American prison system, HIV became more prevalent among women than among men. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, from 1991 to 1998 the number of women prisoners with HIV increased by 69%, while the equivalent figure among male prisoners decreased by 22% during the same time period. The New York State Department of Health stated in 1999 that women entering New York state prisons had twice as high of an HIV rate as men entering New York state prisons. At the end of the year 2000 women in U.S. state prison systems had a 60% higher likelihood of carrying HIV than men in American state prison systems. According to HIV in Prison by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2004 2.4% (1 in 42) of women in American prisons had HIV, while 1.7% (1 in 59) of men had HIV.
Pregnancy and prenatal care in US prisonsEdit
Current Treatment of Pregnant InmatesEdit
Data from 2010 show that female incarceration rates are growing more rapidly than male incarceration rates in the United States. Consequently, one out of every four women in prison is pregnant. Less than half of prisons in the United States have official policies about medical care for pregnant inmates. About 48% of prisons have prenatal services. Of these 48%, only 15% of prisons have programs implemented to help mothers find suitable work after they give birth. Additionally, only 15% of prisons have policies that require light work or no work for pregnant women. Throughout the United States, pregnant inmates are treated poorly by prison staff because there is a permeating prejudice that pregnant inmates are not "worthy enough to have children". There are psychological stressors experienced by pregnant inmates during pregnancy and during the birthing process. For example, thirty-five states allow women to be chained to the bed while in labor and giving birth. In states where shackling is illegal, there are a significant amount of lawsuits claiming that shackling was used during childbirth. Researchers have argued that allowing women to remain shackled to a bed during birth is inhumane and undignified.
Problems with rising pregnancy rates in US prisonsEdit
Pregnancy among inmates is a challenge. According to a 2008 report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics on female prisoners, 4% of state and 3% of federal inmates said they were pregnant at the time they began their incarceration. However, it is difficult to accurately assess the recurrence due to a lack of reporting requirements and irregular pregnancy testing at admission. The needs of mothers during pregnancy and childbirth often conflict with the demands of the prison system.
In the United States, the prison system was designed to accommodate male inmates. The rising rate of female incarceration poses challenges on a variety of levels, including health care. It is estimated that 9% of women in prisons give birth while completing their sentence. In spite of a Supreme Court ruling Estelle v. Gamble, 1976, which declared entitlement to basic health care for all people who are incarcerated, provision of adequate prenatal care in US prisons has been inconsistent at best.
In addition, prisons have the power to hold incarcerated women and limit their contact with the outside world, which can result in women not being able to exercise their reproductive rights, such as getting an abortion. Incarcerated women’s struggle does not end after their incarceration, given that the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), expedites the process of terminating a parent’s rights if her children are in foster care, resulting in many incarcerated women losing the parental rights to their children.
Women who are in jail or prison often have very high-risk pregnancies due to a higher prevalence of risk factors, which can negatively influence both pregnancy and delivery. Among these are the mother's own medical history and exposure to sexually transmitted infections, her level of education, mental health, substance use/abuse patterns, poor nutrition, inadequate prenatal care, socio-economic status, and environmental factors, such as violence and toxins.
Prenatal care in prisons is erratic. The Federal Bureau of Prisons, the National Commission on Correctional Health Care, the American Public Health Association, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Bar Association have all outlined minimal standards for pregnancy-related health care in correctional settings, and 34 states have established policies for provision of adequate prenatal care. However, the services can vary widely, and there is not a reliable reporting measure to ensure services are delivered.
Prenatal care for incarcerated women is a shared responsibility between medical staff in the prison and community providers, but specific delineation of care is determined locally, depending on available resources and expertise. Women must often be transported for prenatal care and delivery, which can cause stress for the mother. In addition, some states continue to use shackles for security during transportation, labor, delivery, and postpartum care. The use of shackles is highly controversial, reported as both dangerous and inhumane.
Shackles are typically used for inmates, who demonstrate risk of elopement, harm to self, or harm to others. Historically, they have also been used with women attending prenatal care appointments, as well as during labor and delivery. When used during transit, the use of shackles on the ankles and wrists puts a mother at risk of falling, in which case she would be unable to reach out to soften the fall. In turn, this could put both the mother and the fetus at risk of injury. Shackles can also interfere with labor and delivery, prohibiting positions and range of motion for the mother, doctors, and nurses. Following delivery, shackles interfere with a mother's ability to hold and nurse her infant child. In addition, women feel ashamed and discriminated against when they are shackled in a community hospital. Eighteen states in the US currently have laws either prohibiting or restricting shackling pregnant prisoners, and ten states prohibit use of shackles by law.[clarification needed] As a result, it is still common practice in some places.
Constitutional Rights of Pregnant InmatesEdit
There has been significant strides in maintaining and protecting the constitutional rights of pregnant inmates. For example, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in the case of Nelson v. Correctional Medical Services ruled in 2009 that shackling pregnant women to the bed during labor and delivery is unconstitutional. This decision was rendered after twenty-nine-year-old Nelson was taken to a local hospital in 2003 and had her legs shackled to opposite sides of the bed. She was shackled to the bed for several hours while in labor before she was taken to the hospital room. Nelson claimed the shackles caused her intense pain, discomfort, and severe cramps. She also was unable to change positions while in labor, which caused further discomfort. Although she remained the shackles were removed while she was delivering her child, they were immediately put back on post-delivery. Nelson also claimed that after delivering her child, she soiled the bed sheet because she could not get to the bathroom on time due to the shackles. The Eighth circuit contended that shackling women to the bed during labor and delivery violated the Eighth Amendment since shackling during labor and delivery is cruel punishment. This judicial decision also deemed that the officer in charge of presiding over Nelson during her labor and delivery deliberately acted indifferently. As a result, the court ruled that showing indifference during a woman's labor and delivery or inflicting unnecessary pain or discomfort also violates the Eighth Amendment.
Another important landmark case was Boswell v. Sherburne County. Wanda Boswell was booked in Sherbrune County Jail in Minnesota for driving under the influence of alcohol. A female prison guard, Valerie Lero, found out that Boswell was about six months pregnant, and she was informed by Boswell that her pregnancy had been having some complications. Boswell also provided Lero some information regarding a fainting incident that happened a few days before her arrest. Boswell also told Lero that she had large amounts of vaginal discharge. While in the Sherburne County Jail, Boswell had been taking a shower and noticed she had been bleeding. She immediately informed Lero of the bleeding, and Lero proceeded to give Boswelll sanitary pads. However, Lero showed no sense of urgency or took any sort of initiative to contact professional medical personnel. Lero also did not record any of the health issues Boswell has expressed. In addition, Lero failed to contact Nancy Riecken, the relief jailer, to inform her of Boswell's medical condition.
Finally, Boswell took matters into her own hands and contacted Riekcken. Boswell wanted to see a doctor immediately due to her abnormal bleeding and severe abdominal cramping. Riecken, despite knowing the extent of Boswell's medical condition, failed to seek medical help because she claimed Boswell could not seek medical attention until she posted bail. This entire time, Boswell was locked in her cell and continuously banged on the wall for help. Riecken, who had taken over at this time, still refused Boswell's requests for medical attention. Hours passed and still no one was contacted to help Boswell. Riecken contacted the chief jailer who instructed Riecken to reach out to the two other counties where Boswell had outstanding warrants. In other words, the prison personnel left Boswell in her cell cramping and bleeding, just waiting for someone to take Boswell off their hands. Finally, a local police officer and trained emergency room technician examined Boswell and told Riecken to immediately call an ambulance. Boswell proceeded to give birth in an ambulance en route to the hospital. Joseph Boswell was born in the hospital but died thirty-four minutes later.
Boswell brought an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. alleging that the prison staff neglected her medical needs. She claimed her constitutional rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment were violated. The court found that both Riecken and Lero knew Boswell was bleeding and had severe cramps, yet failed to take action to reach out to medical professionals. Boswell's "clearly established right to medical care" was evidently violated. The court found Lero and Riecken responsible for this negligence. Under the Eight Amendment, prisons are required to provide adequate medical care.
Care after childbirthEdit
The structure of US justice systems makes development of maternal attachment nearly impossible. After the births of their children, many women are returned to the jail or prison, and their infant immediately enters foster or kinship care. However, within many state policies, relatives are given less financial support, which can leave foster care to be more viable than kinship placement. "For 50% of all incarcerated mothers, this separation becomes a lifelong sentence of permanent separation between mothers and their children."
Some prisons have nurseries for the mother and child. Women are only eligible to participate in a prison nursery if they are convicted of non-violent crimes and do not have a history of child abuse or neglect. Prison nurseries vary widely, but they provide an opportunity to breastfeed during a sensitive stage in development. They also provide time for a maternal attachment to be formed. Rates of recidivism are less for women who participated in prison nursery programs.
An improvement from the alternative, prison nurseries still leave many gaps in care. "Reports from mothers with children in prison nurseries indicate that their babies' close proximity allows prison staff to coerce and manipulate a mother by threatening to deny her access to her baby". Some advocacy groups argue for alternative sentencing, such as family-based treatment centers, where mothers convicted of non-violent crimes can learn parenting skills while receiving services and support to foster positive child development and build a foundation to re-enter society following her term with decreased risk for future incarceration.
Abortion while incarceratedEdit
Women have undergone forced sterilization which prohibits them from having children later in life. Other women in prison have not been given the option of having an abortion, although they may desire one. Even though there are women who can afford to pay for their own abortion, they still may not be allowed to have one because of being incarcerated. In some cases abortions may be allowed but some women may not be able to afford it, therefore ending the option of choice, as the government will not pay. These situations force women to have unwanted children and then they must find someone to keep their child until they are no longer incarcerated.
|Provide access to abortions||Funds therapeutic or medically necessary abortions||Funds abortions only to save life||Abortion counseling policy only||States with no official written policy|
|California||District of Columbia||Alabama||Idaho||Alabama|
|New Jersey||New Mexico||Florida||Kentucky|
|New Hampshire||North Dakota|
|Rhode Island||South Dakota|
|Bans on medical funding||Bans on public facilities||Mandatory waiting periods||In person counseling requirements|
|District of Columbia||Louisiana||Kansas||Wisconsin|
Effects on motherhood and family structureEdit
Prison can have an effect on relationships between prisoners and their children. As a general rule, except for with an experimental trial, a couple cannot enter the same prison. However, prisons have a problem with child care. 2.4 million American children have a parent behind bars today. Seven million, or 1 in 10 children, have a parent under criminal justice supervision—in jail or prison, on probation, or on parole. Many of the women incarcerated are single mothers who are subsequently characterized as inadequate, incompetent, and unable to provide for their children during and after imprisonment. However, "separation from and concern about the well-being of their children are among the most damaging aspects of prison for women, and the problem is exacerbated by a lack of contact".
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, "54% of mothers in state prisons as of 2000 had had no personal visits with their children since their admission". Obstacles that inhibit contact between mothers and their children include geographical distance, lack of transportation, lack of privacy, inability to cover travel expenses, and the inappropriate environments of correctional facilities. Mothers in prison typically are unable to fulfill the role of mother due to the separation. Incarcerated mothers are restricted in their decision-making power and their ability to create a sense of home and family within the institution is limited. Most children experience multiple risks across contextual levels for there is great importance in family environments. Children of incarcerated mothers are consistent with their high risk status and it can cause their intellectual outcomes to be compromised. Statistics indicate "that a majority of parents in state and federal prisons are held over 100 miles from their prior residence; in federal prison 43% of parents are held 500 miles away from their last home, and over half of female prisoners have never had a visit from their children and very few mothers speak with their children by phone while incarcerated".
Recent legislation has further impeded an incarcerated mother's ability to sustain custody of her children. The Adoption and Safe Families Act, enacted in 1997, "authorizes the termination of parental rights once a child has been in foster care for 15 or more months of a 22-month period. Incarcerated women serve an average of 18 months in prison. Therefore, the average female prisoner whose children are placed in foster care could lose the right to reunite with her children upon release". These stipulations expedite the termination of parental rights due to the narrow time frame. A 2003 study found that "termination proceedings involving incarcerated parents increased from approximately 260 in 1997, the year of ASFA's enactment, to 909 in 2002".
By examining post-incarcerated mothers, it is statistically and clinically proven that there is a positive effect of a healthy mother-child relationship and depression symptoms. There is also a positive effect of healthy peer and partner relationships on raising self-esteem for mothers who were previously incarcerated. This suggests that healthy relationships are essential to recovery from trauma and emotional well-being.
According to a 2000 report by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, "1/3 of incarcerated mothers lived alone with their children and over 2/3 of women prisoners have children under the age of 18; among them only 28% said that their children were living with the father while 90% of male prisoners with minor children said their children were living with their mothers."
The incarceration of parents affect family structures. Mothers in prison were more likely to report that they were the primary caregivers of their children. Maternal imprisonment affects children more harshly than the incarceration of their fathers. When the paternal figure of a home is convicted, children are affected, but they don't experience the same kind of attachment disparity as they do with their mothers. "When fathers go to prison, their children are more likely to remain in the care of their mothers; however, when mothers go to prison, not only are children separated from their mother but they more often transition to the care of a grandparent, or other family member, than to the care of their other parent ". In the case that there is no family member able to take the children in, they are taken into non-familiar care. Children who grow up without their parents tend to have a higher chance of engaging in "substance abuse and addiction, mental illness, and abusive familial relationships".
There are limited employment opportunities after incarceration. Reduced opportunities for parents means reduced opportunities for their children who cannot access those resources denied to their parents, such as food stamps or employment. In addition, for communities where the majority of the population are targets for incarceration and where there are high incarceration rates, those economies are affected. In addition to poor economies, limited employment opportunities, and high incarceration rates in those communities, there is the creation of a "criminogenic environment" which affects the children growing up in those areas.
Women in the US criminal justice system are marginalized by race and class. Single mothers with low income go into the "underground economies" because of their inability to find a job that is stable and provides a good earning. Many mothers end up trapped in drugs, prostitution and theft. In many cases, incarcerated women who committed acts of violence are for self-defense against their abusive partners.
Bureau of Justice reported that about 200,000 children under 18 had incarcerated mothers and that 1.5 million children had a parent behind bars. Children face disruption and deleterious where they feel separated from the world such as their friends, school and community.(1) It can bring integration into their new world without their mother. 6.7 percent of African American children have incarcerated parents, a rate that is seven-and-a-half times greater than that of white children. Hispanic children experience parental incarceration at nearly three times the rate that white children do (Glaze and MAruchak 2008) Children feel the mother absences and experience disruption more than the absences of their incarcerated father. "64.2 percent of mothers in prison report they were living with their children before they went to prison, only 46.5 percent of incarcerated fathers did so." "Men are more likely to rely on their children's mothers to care for the children during their incarceration than women can on the children father. 88 percent of fathers in prison report that their children are being cared for by their child's mother while only 37 percent of inmate mothers say their child is being cared for by the child's father" (PG.4 Disrupted childhoods: Children of women in prison.) Children in most cases stay with relatives such as grandparents and 10 percent in foster care, group homes or social service agencies. The Children often feel stigma for having a parent in prison where they may feel the need to keep it a secret where they are not able to adjust. Most of the time these children are at risk of following their parents footsteps where they might become criminals by learning the behavior such as antisocial and criminal behavior. Caregivers and teachers see the child of inmates fighting more and becoming aggressive leading them to have a higher risk of conviction.
Most prisons do not have public transport, restrictive policies governing visits and phone calls. Prisons have policies such as the removal of infants born to women in prison, speedy termination of child custody for incarcerated women, restrictive welfare policies that make it difficult for families to be reunited, and women repeated periods in custody. Activists are trying to make a change and pass reforms that are going to help children and mothers deal with these consequences that are affecting them. One guideline that would help is a family connections policy framework to support and strengthen the relationship between incarcerated women and their children. If women are able to see their children, it gives them motivation to try to get their lives back on track.
There is 6.7 percent of African American children whose parents are incarcerated, a rate that is seven and half times greater than that for white children, and Hispanic children experience parental incarceration at nearly three times the rate that white children do. Children feel the mother absences and experience disruption than their father. "Men are more likely to rely on their children mothers to care for the children during their incarceration than women can on the children father. 88 percent of father in prison report that their children are being cared for by their child mother while only 37 percent of inmate mothers say their child is being cared for by the child's father". Children in most cases stay with relatives such as grandparents and 10 percent in foster care, group home or social service agency. Children often feel stigma for having a parent in prison where they may feel the need to keep it a secret where they are not able to adjust. Most of the time these children are at risk to follow in the footsteps of their parents where they might become criminals by learning the behavior. Caregivers and teachers see the children of criminals fighting more and becoming aggressive leading them to have a higher risk of conviction.
Prisons prevent contact between the mothers and their children in many ways. The locations of the prisons might not have a public transport, restrictive policies governing visits and phone calls, the removal of infants born to women in prison, speedy termination of child custody for incarcerated women, restrictive welfare policies that make it difficult for families to be reunited, and women repeated periods in custody. Some activist are trying to make a change and pass reforms that are going to help children and mothers to not deal with this consequences that are effecting them. One guideline that would help is a family connections policy framework to support and strengthen the relationship between incarcerated women and their children. If women are able to see their children, it gives them motivation to try to get their lives back on track.
Demographics of incarcerated parents and their childrenEdit
The most common age range for incarcerated parents is from age 25 to 35, followed by age 35 to 44 and age 24 and younger. In mid-2007, 809,800 prisoners in the US prison system were parents to children 18 years of age or younger. Of those prisoners, 744,200 were fathers and 65,600 were mothers. In comparison to 1991, this data shows the number of women in prison has more than doubled and the number of fathers incarcerated has increased by seventy-seven percent. According to studies by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1,706,600 children had at least one incarcerated parent in 2007.
Children of incarcerated parentsEdit
The most common age range for children with at least one incarcerated parent is from 0–9 years old, followed by children from 10 to 17 years old. In terms of racial demographics of children with incarcerated parents, Latino children are three times more likely to have a parent in prison in comparison to white children. Black children are about eight times more likely to have a parent in prison in comparison to white children. Nearly half of the children with an incarcerated father are Black children. This is data that has been published in scholarly and peer-reviewed articles, but as the article "Children of Color and Parental Incarceration: Implications for Research, Theory, and Practice" states, "these data among racial minorities must be carefully interpreted because higher numbers may be a reflection of larger societal issues (such as relative degree of involvement in crime, disparate law enforcement practices, sentencing parole policies and practices and biased decision making... rather than a problem among certain groups."
Barriers to reentry to societyEdit
Of women in US state prisons, 44% do not have a high school diploma or equivalent (GED). As they reenter their communities, former inmates confront sparse job opportunities, limited options for stable and affordable housing, denials of public assistance, as well as the challenge of re-establishing relationships with family and friends. However, relationships, in particular among family, provide an extremely beneficial support system for prisoners returning home upon their release. Difficulties with employment, housing, and ostracism can decrease successful transitions and lead to a cycle in and out of prison.
Some concerns that are faced by policy-makers and correction officials about women re-entering into the community after prison are motherhood and the struggle with substance abuse and mental health issues.
Scholars have found that women face negative perceptions such as being seen as inadequate and unable to provide a stable, loving home for their children when they are transitioning back from prison into motherhood. This separation of children from their mothers is harmful to both the child and mother and this is the main reason for stress inside of women prisons. For many women getting out of prison, the only aspect of life they consider to be motivating and hopeful is resuming motherhood and connecting with their children again. Without their children, many see no reason to stay away from drugs or prostitution. Women in these circumstances are understood to have a better life if they are offered proper nutritional and medical care so they could lead a more stable lifestyle.
The struggle of addiction whether it be alcohol or drug abuse along with mental health issues are considered the three major factors that influence the success of women's transition back into the community. Women tend to take out their anger on themselves and in a self-mutilating or abusive way. Mood disorders, such as depression or anxiety, are seen to be more common among women than men. A study from 1990 found that 19 percent of women who suffer from depression, 31 percent of women who suffer from phobic disorders, and 7 percent of women that suffer from panic disorder also struggled with alcohol abuse. Women who have been released from prison face the struggle against addiction and could end up losing their children because of it.
In order for women to successfully transition back into society, they must begin this preparation process at the beginning of their sentence. Although this is recommended, inmates tend to not have any preparation before being placed back into the community. All of the released women have tasks they must complete in order to re-establish a place in society and in order to stay out of trouble. These are things such as, follow parole regulations, provide health care for themselves and/or their families, become financially stable, obtain employment, and find a safe place to live, all while possibly battling addiction. Without support from the community, women under these circumstances tend to fall back into drugs or criminal activity.
Women prison organizationsEdit
There are programs that have been established to help women after they are released from prison.
System organizations that are used to help women's reentry into the community consist of mental health, alcohol and drug programs, programs to help survivors and sexual violence, family services, food shelters, financial help programs, employment services, child care services, and community service clubs.
A continuity-of-care approach is taken when forming these programs for women. This is the providing of treatment, recovery, and support services throughout the entire process of reentry for women.
- Helping Women Recover: Program designed for treating substance abuse. This focuses on issues such as self-esteem, parenting, relationships, and spirituality. The program addresses these issues using discussion, activities, and exercises.
- Beyond Trauma: A Healing Journey for Women: This is 11 sessions long and teaches women what trauma is, and how it affects their thoughts and feelings as well as their behavior and relationships. The work is done on coping skills using exercises and videos.
- The Sanctuary Model: This program addresses the issues of mental health, trauma, and substance abuse. This focuses on safety and grieving to build individual empowerment.
- Seeking Safety: Program for women that have substance dependence and also PTSD. This focuses on five key elements: safety, treatment of PTSD and substance abuse, ideals, behavioral and interpersonal therapies, and therapist processes.
- The Addiction and Trauma Recovery Integration Model (ATRIUM): psycho-educational 12-week-long program. This is designed to intervene on levels of the body, mind and spirit.
- The Trauma Recovery and Empowerment Model (TREM): psycho-educational group that includes survival empowerment, self-soothing, and problem solving. This last 33 sessions over nine months.
These programs help women to not feel depressed or overwhelmed by the community once they are allowed to reenter them. There are two agencies that help these women as well, more well known as a settlement house.
- Our Place: This is located in Washington D.C. and focuses mainly on family reunification. This helps women reunite with family, and find housing and employment. This program helps women find the help needed whether it be mental help or substance abuse treatment.
- The Refugee Model: The Catholic Church works to assist the parolees and support their transitioning. This helps to make the women feel like someone is looking after them and encouraging them as they work to reenter the community. System organizations that are used to help women's reentry into the community consist of mental health, alcohol and drug programs, programs to help survivors and sexual violence, family services, food shelters, financial help programs, employment services, child care services, and community service clubs.
A continuity-of-care approach is taken when forming these programs for women. This is the providing of treatment, recovery, and support services throughout the entire process of reentry for women.
Despite all the things that incarcerated women endure prior to, during, and after their imprisonment, people often have a certain mindset regarding who they are. This is as a result of the inaccuracy the media uses to portray women who are detained; perpetuating the idea that there is nothing more to them than violence and sexual tension. The media's tendency to highlight the aspects of prison life that they deem suitable or entertaining for viewers really serves to belittle and shed attention away from the real issues that incarceration has on the women living their 'truth'. The way that these women are portrayed in the media is crucial to our understanding of their struggles and our ability to empathize with the traumatic experience that is serving time in prison. Instead, they are portrayed with a 'babes behind bars' theme.
Films such as The Big Doll House (1971), The Big Bird Cage (1972) and Caged Heat (1974) are examples of movies that depict these women as sex-crazed and distort our knowledge from the more universal and serious issues that come with being incarcerated. Because we live in a patriarchal society, women are viewed as objects for intercourse, and their issues are not taken as severely as we would that of males.
Very little factual representation is contained in these films. It is Hollywood, after all; they do not necessarily seek to educate—instead they aim to titillate:
These tales of vulnerable young things navigating a harsh prison are largely vehicles for money shot–style images that are the films' raison d'être: a roomful of women being hosed down by their sadistic warden as punishment (1971's Big Doll House) . . . or a young reform-school inmate gang-raped with a plunger by her roommates (1974's Born Innocent)".
- Kajstura, Aleks (November 13, 2018). "Women's Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie 2018". www.prisonpolicy.org. Retrieved 2019-03-22.
- "World Female Imprisonment List (fourth edition) | World Prison Brief". www.prisonstudies.org. Retrieved 2019-03-22.
- Correctional Populations in the United States, 2015. By Danielle Kaeble and Lauren Glaze, BJS Statisticians. Dec. 2016. Bureau of Justice Statistics. See PDF. Appendix table 3 on page 14 has state by state counts and rates of female incarceration. It says there are 1,942,500 male and 202,600 female inmates in prisons and jails. That is 10.4% female.
- Correctional Populations in the United States, 2013 (NCJ 248479). Published December 2014 by U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). By Lauren E. Glaze and Danielle Kaeble, BJS statisticians. See PDF. See page 1 "highlights" section for the "1 in ..." numbers. See table 1 on page 2 for adult numbers. See table 5 on page 6 for male and female numbers. See appendix table 5 on page 13, for "Estimated number of persons supervised by adult correctional systems, by correctional status, 2000–2013." See appendix table 2: "Inmates held in custody in state or federal prisons or in local jails, 2000 and 2012–2013".
- Owen, Barbara (2010). Prisons for Women. p. 1195.
- Kajstura, Aleks (November 13, 2018). "Women's Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie 2018". www.prisonpolicy.org. Retrieved 2019-03-22.
- Zaitow, Barbara H. and Jim Thomas. Women in Prison: Gender and Social Control. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2003. vii. Retrieved from Google Books on March 10, 2011. ISBN 1-58826-228-6, ISBN 978-1-58826-228-8.
- Acoca, L. "Defusing the Time Bomb: Understanding and Meeting the Growing Health Care Needs of Incarcerated Women in America." Crime & Delinquency 44.1 (1998): 49–69. Sage Journals. Web. 12 Mar. 2012.
- Banks, Cyndi. Women in Prison: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO, 2003. p.1. Retrieved from Google Books on March 10, 2011. ISBN 1-57607-929-5, ISBN 978-1-57607-929-4.
- Banks, Cyndi. Women in Prison: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO, 2003. p.5. Retrieved from Google Books on March 10, 2011. ISBN 1-57607-929-5, ISBN 978-1-57607-929-4.
- Rafter, Nicole Hahn (1985). Partial Justice: Women in State Prisons, 1800-1935. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press. ISBN 978-0930350635.
- Shakur, Assata (May 2, 2013). "Former Black Panther Assata Shakur Added to FBI's Most Wanted Terrorist List". Democracy Now. Retrieved May 15, 2016.
- Shakur, Assata (2001). Assata: An Autobiography. London: Lawrence Hill Books. pp. 66–67. ISBN 978-1556520747.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 1.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 2.
- Kilgore, James (2015). Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time. New York: The New Press. p. 60.
- Reagan, Bernida (1991). "The War on Drugs: A War against Women". Berkeley Women's Law Journal (6): 203.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 6.
- Kilgore, James (2015). Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time. New York: The New Press. p. 59.
- Kilgore, James (2015). Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time. New York: The New Press. p. 61.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 3.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 9.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 4.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 10.
- Hinton, Elizabeth (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 309.
- Golden, Renny (2005). War on the Family Mothers in Prison and the Families They Leave Behind. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge. pp. 1–2.
- U.S. Department of Justice. "Prisoners in 1998" (PDF). Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved 5 December 2018.
- American Civil Liberties Union. "Caught in the Net: The Impact of Drug Problems on Women and Families".
- Kilgore, James (2015). Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time. New York: The New Press. p. 66.
- Mauer, Marc. "Gender and Justice: Women, Drugs, and Sentencing Policy" (PDF). The Sentencing Project. Retrieved 5 December 2018.
- Kilgore, James (2015). Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time. New York: The New Press. p. 14.
- Freudenberg, Nicholas (2002). "Adverse Effects of US Jail and Prison Policies on the Health and Well-Being of Women of Color". American Journal of Public Health. 92 (12): 1895–1899. doi:10.2105/ajph.92.12.1895. PMC 1447348. PMID 12453803.
- Worell, Judith (2001). Encyclopedia of Women and Gender: Sex similarities and differences and the impact of society on gender. A-K Volume 1. Academic Press. pp. 612–619.
- Henriques, Zelma Weston; Manatu-Rupert, Norma (2001). "Living on the outside: African American women before, during, and after imprisonment". The Prison Journal. 81 (1): 6–19. doi:10.1177/0032885501081001002.
- Talvi, Silja (2007). Women Behind Bars: The Crisis of Women in the U.S. Prison System. Emeryville: Seal Press. pp. +women+prisoners+are+guarded%22&hl=en&ei=f9LzTfHfBsahtwe0hpSLBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22In%20the%20rest%20of%20the%20Western%20world%2C%20women%20prisoners%20are%20guarded%22&f=false 56.
- Talvi, Silja (2007). Women Behind Bars: The Crisis of Women in the U.S. Prison System. Emeryville: Seal Press. pp. +women+prisoners+are+guarded%22&hl=en&ei=f9LzTfHfBsahtwe0hpSLBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22In%20the%20rest%20of%20the%20Western%20world%2C%20women%20prisoners%20are%20guarded%22&f=false 56–57.
- Talvi, Silja (2007). Women Behind Bars: The Crisis of Women in the U.S. Prison System. Emeryville: Seal Press. pp. 57.
- Solinger, Rickie (2010). Interrupted Life: Experiences of Incarcerated Women in the United States. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. p. 6.
- Golden, Renny (2005). War on the Family: Mothers in Prison and the Families They Leave Behind. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge. p. 3.
- Solinger, Rickie (2010). Interrupted Life: Experiences of Incarcerated Women in the United States. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. p. 11.
- Solinger, Rickie (2010). Interrupted Life: Experiences of Incarcerated Women in the United States. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. p. 12.
- Reagan, Bernida (1991). "The War on Drugs: A War against Women". Berkeley Women's L.J. (6): 206.
- Solinger, Rickie (2010). Interrupted Life: Experiences of Incarcerated Women in the United States. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. p. 13.
- Kilgore, James (2015). Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time. New York City: The New Press. p. 157.
- Kilgore, James (2015). Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time. New York City: The New Press. p. 158.
- Solinger, Rickie (2010). Interrupted Life: Experiences of Incarcerated Women in the United States. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. p. 14.
- DeHart, Dana D (2008). "Pathways to prison impact of victimization in the lives of incarcerated women". Violence Against Women. 14 (12): 1362–1381. doi:10.1177/1077801208327018. PMID 19008544.
- Sawer, Wendy (January 9, 2018). "The Gender Divide: Tracking women's state prison growth". www.prisonpolicy.org. Retrieved 2019-03-22.
- Kajstura, Aleks (November 13, 2018). "Women's Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie 2018". www.prisonpolicy.org. Retrieved 2019-03-22.
- Johnson, R. (2002). Hard time: Understanding and reforming the prison (3rd ed.). Belmont, California: Wadsworth
- Ward, D., & Kasselbaum, G. (1965). Women's prison: Sex and social structure. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
- Pollock, J. (2004). Prisons and prison life: Costs and consequences. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company.
- Collica, K. (2010). "Surviving incarceration: Two prison-based peer programs build communities of support for female offenders". Deviant Behavior. 31 (4): 314–47. doi:10.1080/01639620903004812.
- Clark, Sheila; MacCreaigh, Erica (2006). Library Services to the Incarcerated : Applying the Public Library Model in Correctional Facility Libraries. Westport, Conn: Libraries Unlimited. p. 64. ISBN 9780313090615.
- "Death Row Population Size and Characteristics". Death Penalty Focus. Retrieved 2 May 2014.
- Streib, Victor. "Death Penalty for Female Offenders, January 1, 1973 through December 31, 2012" (PDF). Retrieved 2 May 2014.
- Lynch, Shannon M., et al. “Women's Pathways to Jail: The Roles & Intersections of Serious Mental Illness & Trauma.” PsycEXTRA Dataset, 2012, doi:10.1037/e528222013-001.
- Sydney, Linda. 6. "Gender-Responsive Strategies for Women Offenders." U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Corrections, n. pag. 0. (Archive)
- Johnson, Kristine A.; Shannon M. Lynch (19 March 2014). "Predictors of maladaptive coping in incarcerated women who are survivors of childhood sexual abuse". Family Violence. 28 (1).
- "Women in the Criminal Justice System: Briefing Sheets" (PDF). The Sentencing Project. Archived from the original on 2013-05-14. Retrieved 2011. Check date values in:
|accessdate=(help)CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link) ()
- VanNatta, Michelle. “Conceptualizing and Stopping State Sexual Violence Against Incarcerated Women.” Social Justice, vol. 37, no. 1 (119), 2010, pp. 27–52. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41336934.
- McFarlane, Linda, and Melissa Rothstein. “Survivors Behind Bars: Supporting Survivors of Prison Rape and Sexual Assault.” Support for Survivors, www.calcasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Survivors-Behind-Bars.pdf.
- Blackburn, Ashley G.; Mullings, Janet L.; Marquart, James W. (2008). "Sexual Assault in Prison and Beyond". The Prison Journal. 88 (3): 351–377. doi:10.1177/0032885508322443.
- "Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2008-09" (PDF). Table 5
- "Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2008–09" (PDF). p. 21.
- Zlotnick, Caron. "Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), PTSD Comorbidity, and Childhood Abuse among Incarcerated Women." Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease 185.12 (1997): 761–63. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Web. 13 Mar. 2012.
- Law, Victoria (2009). Resistance Behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women. Oakland: PM Press. p. 61.
- Brown, Sherri (April 2011). "Working with Women who are Survivors of the United States 'Corrections' Systems: Challenges for Social Service Workers". Lecture at University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
- Supreme Court of the United States. Woodford v. Ngo. 22 June 2006, supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/548/05-416/index.pdf.
- Piecora, Christina. “Female Inmates and Sexual Assault.” Jurist, 15 September 2014, www.jurist.org/commentary/2014/09/christina-piecora-female-inmates/.
- Law, Victoria (2009). Resistance Behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women. Oakland: PM Press. p. 69.
- Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 108-79, 117 Stat. 972 (2003).
- Arkles, Gabriel (2015). "Regulating Prison Sexual Violence". Northeastern University Law Journal. 7: 71–130.
- Palacios, Lena. “The Prison Rape Elimination Act and the Limits of Liberal Reform.” Gender Policy Report, Regents of the University of Minnesota, 17 Feb. 2017, genderpolicyreport.umn.edu/the-prison-rape-elimination-act-and-the-limits-of-liberal-reform/.
- Talvi, Silja (2007). Women Behind Bars: The Crisis of Women in the U.S. Prison System. Emeryville: Seal Press. p. 58.
- Kaiser, David; Louisa Stannow (24 March 2011). "Prison Rape and the Government". The New York Review of Books: 1–19.
- "Women in Prison: A Fact Sheet" (PDF). Amnesty International USA. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 25, 2009. Retrieved 2011-04-25.
- "American Bar Association - Criminal Justice Section - Criminal Justice Magazine". www.americanbar.org. Retrieved 2017-09-26.
- Sexual Victimization Reported By Adult Correctional Authorities, 2012-15. By Ramona R. Rantala. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, July 2018. <https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6326>
- Springer, Sandra A. (January 2010). "Improving Healthcare for Incarcerated Women". Journal of Women's Health. 19 (1): 13–15. doi:10.1089/jwh.2009.1786. ISSN 1540-9996. PMC 2828190. PMID 20088653.
- Chandler, Cynthia (2003). "Death and Dying in America: The Prison Industrial Complex's Impact on Women's Health". Berkeley Women's Law Journal. 18: 40–61. Retrieved 2 May 2014.
- "Women in Prison: Fact Sheet" (PDF). Amnesty International USA. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 25, 2009. Retrieved 2011-04-25.
- Clarke, J. G., Megan R. Hebert, Cynthia Rosengard, Jennifer S. Rose, Kristen M. DaSilva, and Michael D. Stein. "Reproductive Health Care and Family Planning Needs Among Incarcerated Women." American Journal of Public Health 96.5 (2006): 834-39. American Journal of Public Health. American Public Health Association. Web. 14 Mar. 2012.
- Law, Victoria (2009). Resistance Behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women. Oakland: PM Press. pp. +Searight%22&hl=en&ei=TLrzTZf3DYbAtgepwe3qBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22In%20August%202007%2C%20Searight%22&f=false 36.
- Tapia, Natalia D.; Vaughn, Michael S. (2010-10-11). "Legal Issues Regarding Medical Care for Pregnant Inmates". The Prison Journal. 90 (4): 417–446. doi:10.1177/0032885510382211. ISSN 0032-8855.
- Maruschak, L. M. (2008). "Medical problems of prisoners." Bureau of Justice Statistics.
- Clarke, J.G. & Adashi, E. Y. (2011). Perinatal care for incarcerated patients: A 25-year-old woman pregnant in jail. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 305(9), 923–29.
- Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2003). "Gender-responsive strategies: Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders." National Institute of Corrections, Washington, DC.
- Chambers, A. N. (2009). Impact of forced separation policy on incarcerated postpartum mothers. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 10(3), 204–11. DOI: 10.1177/1527154409351592
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 (1976).
- Fogel, C. I. (2006). Pregnant inmates: Risk factors and pregnancy outcomes. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing, 22(1), 33–39.
- American Civil Liberties Union. State standards for pregnancy-related health care and abortion for women in prison—map.
- American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU briefing paper: The shackling of pregnant women & girls in U.S. prisons, jails & youth detention centers.
- Ferszt, G. G. (2011). Who will speak for me?: Advocating for pregnant women in prison. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 12(4), 254–56.
- "Nelson v. Norris". ACLU. 2009.
- Griggs, Claire (2011). "Birthing Barbarism: The Unconstitutionality of Shackling Pregnant Prisoners". American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy the Law. 20: 247–272.
- McGurrin, Mary Catherine (1993). "Pregnant Inmates' Right to Health Care". New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement. 20: 163–539.
- Women's Prison Association, Institute on Women & Criminal Justice. (2009). Mothers, infants and imprisonment: A national look at prison nurseries and community-based alternatives. New York: Women's Prison Association.
- Kowitz Margolies, J.; Kraft-Stolar, T. (2006). "When 'free' means losing your mother: The collision of child welfare and the incarceration of women in New York state. A report of the Women in Prison Project of the Correctional Association of New York" (PDF). Women in Prison Project, Correctional Association of New York.
- Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2003). "Gender-responsive strategies: Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders." National Institute of Corrections, Washington, DC.
- Chambers, A. N. (2009). Impact of forced separation policy on incarcerated postpartum mothers. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 10(3), 204–11, direct quotation from p. 204. DOI: 10.1177/1527154409351592
- Goshin, L. S. & Byrne, M. W. (2009). Converging streams of opportunity for prison nursery programs in the United States. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 48(4), 271–95. DOI:10.1080/10509670902848972
- The Rebecca Project for Human Rights and The National Women's Law Center. (2010). Mothers Behind Bars: A state-by-state report card and analysis of federal policies on conditions of confinement for pregnant and parenting women and the effect on their children. Direct quotation from p. 13.
- The Rebecca Project for Human Rights and The National Women's Law Center. (2010). Mothers Behind Bars: A state-by-state report card and analysis of federal policies on conditions of confinement for pregnant and parenting women and the effect on their children.
- Roth, Rachel (2004). "Do Prisoners have Abortion Rights?". Feminist Studies. 30.2 (2): 353–81. doi:10.2307/20458968. JSTOR 20458968.
- Solinger, Rickie (2010). Interrupted Life:Experiences of Incarcerated Women in the United States. Berkely, CA.: University of California. p. 37.
- Travis, Jeremy (2003). Prisoners Once Removed: The Impact of Incarceration and Reentry on Children, Families and Communities. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press. p. 76.
- Travis, Jeremy (2003). Prisoners Once Removed: The Impact of Incarceration and Reentry on Children, Families and Communities. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press. p. 77.
- Luther, Kate, and Joanna Gregson. "Restricted Motherhood: Parenting in a Prison Nursery."International Journal of Sociology of the Family 37.1 (2011): 85-104. Print.
- Poehlmann, Julie. "Children's Family Environments And Intellectual Outcomes During Maternal Incarceration." Journal of Marriage & Family 67.5 (2005): 1275-1285.Women's Studies International. Web. 16 Mar. 2012.
- Travis, Jeremy (2003). Prisoners Once Removed: The Impact of Incarceration and Reentry on Children, Families and Communities. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press. p. 25.
- Law, Victoria (2009). Resistance Behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women. Oakland: PM Press. p. 45.
- Walker, Erin K. (2011). "Risk and protective factors in mothers with a history of incarceration: do relationships buffer the effects of trauma symptoms and substance abuse history?". Women & Therapy. 34 (4): 359–376. doi:10.1080/02703149.2011.591662.
- Graham, James A.; Yvette R. Harris (2013). "Children of Color and Parental Incarceration: Implications for Research, Theory, and Practice". Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development. 41.2 (2): 66–81. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1912.2013.00028.x.
- Dallaire, D. H. (2007). "Incarcerated Mothers and Fathers: A Comparison of Risks for Children and Families". Family Relations. 56 (5): 440–453. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2007.00472.x.
- Kirk, Gwyn; Margo Okazawa-Rey (1998). "Women's lives: Multicultural perspectives". Mayfield Pub.
- Siegel, Jane A. (2011). Disrupted childhoods: Children of women in prison. Rutgers University Press.
- Talvi, Silja (2007). Women Behind Bars: The Crisis of Women in the U.S. Prison System. Emeryville: Seal Press. p. 69.
- Travis, Jeremy (2003). Prisoners Once Removed: The Impact of Incarceration and Reentry of Children, Families, and Communities. The Urban Institute Press. pp. 76–103.
- Cecil, Dawn K (2007). "Looking beyond caged heat: Media images of women in prison". Feminist Criminology. 2 (4): 304–326. doi:10.1177/1557085107306142.
- Diaz-Cotto, Juanita. "Women and Crime in the United States." In: Mohanty, Chandra Talpade and Ann Russo. Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism (Volume 632 of A Midland book, ACLS Humanities E-Book, History e-book project). Indiana University Press, 1991. ISBN 0253206324, ISBN 9780253206329: p. 197.
- Haley, Sarah. ""Like I Was a Man": Chain Gangs, Gender, and the Domestic Carceral Sphere in Jim Crow Georgia." Signs. Vol. 39, No. 1, Women, Gender, and Prison: National and Global Perspectives (Autumn 2013), pp. 53–77. DOI: 10.1086/670769.
- Haney, Lynne. "Motherhood as Punishment: The Case of Parenting in Prison." Signs. Vol. 39, No. 1, Women, Gender, and Prison: National and Global Perspectives (Autumn 2013), pp. 105–30. DOI: 10.1086/670815 .
- Rafter, Nicole Hahn. (1985). Partial Justice: Women in State Prisons, 1800–1935. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
- Van Voorhis, Patricia Ph.D. and Lois Presser, MBA (University of Cincinnati Division of Criminal Justice). "Classification of Women Offenders: A National Assessment of Current Practices." U.S. Department of Justice. August 2001.
- "The Incarceration of Women." Women and Crime: A Text/Reader.
- Women in Solitary Confinement (2015-01-18), Victoria Law, Truthout.
- "Life Inside a California Women's Prison: The Real Orange is the New Black." Vocativ. November 28, 2014.