Both types of inmates lead highly structured lives with schedules that include early wake up times, breakfast, time for work—which may vary depending on the type of facility or type of offences, lunch, time for work again, dinner, and “free time”. Free time can be spent in classes, drug rehabilitation classes, religious events, and visits with family. While many women’s prisons are filled with less violent offenders and with those convicted of drug charges, some women’s prisons are dedicated to serving violent, repeat offenders similar to their male counterparts. Still there is a schedule for both sets of inmates which definitely effects the subculture. Women may be different in the fact that they need more social support and could benefit from services that include rehabilitation of drug issues, self-help type courses, and preparation for life on the outside. Sometimes there is a lack of this programming due to funding and this may negatively affect female prisoners in a way that it does not affect men. Another difference between male and female prison subcultures is that males may have more contact with the outside world through visitation of friends, family, and other visitors like church prison ministries. This too could have a negative impact on women’s social life in prison because of their potential need for and benefit from more social
The number of incarcerated women increased by more than 700%, between 1980 and 2014 (Carson 1). Prisons were made for men, so why are so many women going to prison? Women make up just 7% of the prison population (O’Brien 80). A little more than 4% of those offenders committed a nonviolent crime. Women are more likely to commit nonviolent crimes than men. Women who are alcohol and drug abusers could resolve their problems in rehabilitation centers or join recovery programs. Since women make up such a small population in the prison they are not always the biggest priority. “Women’s biological needs, family responsibilities and unique paths to prison combine to create incarceration experiences that are vastly different from
Woman are entering our correctional facilities at an astonishing rate. In 1995 it was reported that approximately 68,468 women were incarcerated in federal or state prisons; however, by 2010 that number increased by 66% to 113,462 (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2013, p. 227). The question is, why is the number of women being incarcerated increasing? Some blame the economy for heightening unemployment and poverty rates while others prefer to believe it is due to growing drug use. We know that the majority of incarcerated women are young, poor, have little to no formal education, and have suffered physical as well as sexual abuse. Many of our women are brought to us pregnant or have children at home. Many more suffer from varying degrees of mental illness.
The nature of women’s contribution in delinquency responds to the individual and essential causes of their unlawful behavior rather than relying solely on corrective responses (Van Wormer, Bartollas). The statistics women in state prisons were less likely than men to have been convicted of a violent crime (35% vs. 53%) (Van Wormer, Bartollas). Our nation’s reliance on correctional facilities to deal with women’s involvement in crime is steadily increasing (Van Wormer, Bartollas).
As of the early 20th century, there has been a rise in violent crime committed by women. This is due to a change in gender roles that result in women having a lack of informal control, giving women the mindset that they are more assertive (Kruttschnitt, et. al, 2008). It has been found that women as a whole are less likely to reoffend after attending a restorative justice conference (Hayes, 2005). Due to the female violent offenders only being a minority offender group (Bonta, et.al, 1995), there are gaps in research in terms of the effectiveness of restorative justice on their recidivism rates (Latimer et.al, 2005). This research proposal will aim to address the gaps in this research by outlining the theoretical framework that backs the ideology that restorative justice may potentially be more beneficial and have a more positive outcome for females than males. Firstly this paper will discuss the current literature, outlining the effectiveness of restorative justice, the research surrounding the rise in female violent offenders, and the potential success of the two variables in reducing future recidivism. And finally, a research question and hypotheses will be outlined in order to potentially influence future policy change.
Being sentenced to prison for committing a crime(s), in theory, sounds logical and would serve as a deterrent. However, in reality and as evidenced by several studies, prison does not act as a deterrent. The rate of recidivism in one study suggests it is declining. However, the table on page 426 shows Tennessee at 45% in 2009 (Bethel, 2014). In 2015, the rate is holding steady at ~50% over the last five years (information obtained from the state sub-cabinet on Public Safety – information to be released after the legislative session takes up the Governor’s criminal justice bill). Either way, recidivism appears to be holding steady, suggesting that prison is not an effective deterrent. Rehabilitation also has poor success stories. One element
Criminal Recidivism is a global and contemporary social a phenomenon. It is considered as a situation of going back to a criminal behaviour after released from the prison (Maltz, 1984). Various studies have shown that offenders that have been to prison and released re-enter their societies with a considerable likelihood of reoffending and eventual reincarceration (Stahler et al. 2013). To be specific, studies on criminal recidivism found that two thirds of prisoners released were rearrested within 3 years and about one quarter of them were reincarcerated within that period (Langan & Levin, 2002). More recent studies show that criminal recidivism rates are still high. For instance, it was reported that 22% of a sampled of released offenders were reincarcerated within one year of their release (Visher, Yahner, & La Vigne, 2010). Other studies however, revealed that, about 80% of the released prison inmates were taken back as criminal recidivists (The Sentencing Project, 2011). On the other hand, many studies however, attributed criminal recidivism among the ex-prisoners as part of challenges faced by the ex-prisoners. It is established that, ex- prison are basically facing a number of obstacles in many areas of life:
This research study will address the on-going issues of reducing recidivism, and the need to help ex-offenders succeed in society post incarceration. While literature pertaining to this topic of reducing recidivism is available, such literature tends to be written by elites and/or individuals who have never been incarcerated. Our study will provide first hand authentic answers regarding how to reduce recidivism.
Longitudinal research has been conducted comparing the rate of violence in male and female prisons. It is important to do research on this topic because it does not only lead to the conclusion of where is violence prevalent, but focuses on other aspects as well. It focuses on the psychological, social, and sexual side of the inmate. This topic does not only focus on who has the highest rates of violence, but why does that sex have a higher rate. This topic looks deeper at the differences between male and female inmates and what causes them to have high rates of violence. Most people would say that male prisons have a higher rate of violence due to biological reasons. People tend to think that males are more aggressive therefore violence is prevalent in male prisons, yet there is a lot more to this idea.
Based on the statistics, there are nearly 700,000 individuals are released from prisons nationwide annually. Moreover, many of them would continue to engage in criminal behaviour and back to prison which consists two-thirds rearrested and half return to prison within three years of their release. Since they have fewer connections in the community (such as family engagement), and less support on the residence and job-seeking for the prejudice of prisoners, they would less likely to learn to get along with others and losing the abilities to obtain the jobs because of the long-time imprisonment. Therefore, the individuals could be higher risk of recidivism and even have more serious prior