Battered Women in the Criminal Justice System: An Empowerment Perspective

Existing theories of criminology are preoccupied with male delinquency, neglecting the causes of women’s crime. In the United States today, nearly half of all female inmates have a history of physical or sexual abuse. Without viable alternatives, many battered women turn to crime in response to abuse, only to find themselves further abused within the U.S. criminal justice system. To end this cycle of abuse, social workers must provide battered women with viable alternatives, empowering them to take control of their lives. This approach, with its focus on empowering women, helps women to develop self-efficacy, utilize innate abilities, and take advantage of existing resources. Whether or not battered women have committed a crime, the empowerment approach can be used to end the cycle of victimization and abuse. An empowerment approach is key to helping battered women find alternatives to crime for three reasons: (1) the perception of limited opportunity is a factor in female crime, (2) the prison system is ineffective at restoring control to these women, and (3) a variety of new, innovative empowerment programs show a great deal of promise in rehabilitating battered women and preventing recidivism.

Limited Opportunity as a Factor in Crime

For delinquent women, a lack of alternative opportunities may factor in the decision to commit a crime. A majority of female inmates lack a high school degree, are dependent on drugs or alcohol, and nearly half of such women have a history of physical or sexual abuse. For these women, violent offenses are often the result of victimization (DeKeserdy & Hinch, 1991).

Further research shows that women who engage in criminal activity do so for different reasons than men. Compared to men, women arrested for homicide are more likely to have committed the offense alone, are less likely to have previous criminal histories, and are more likely to have killed someone intimate as the result of domestic violence (Brownstein, Spunt, Crimmins, Goldstein, & Langley, 1994). Other studies have shown that women who kill their partners are likely to have been abused by that partner (Walker, 1989). Women exposed to routine violence often perceive that there is “no way out” of their situation and respond in violent desperation once a tipping point is reached.

This phenomenon was studied in the 1970s by a group of social scientists who sought to explain the relationship between the perception of limited opportunity and criminality. These theorists hypothesized that delinquent women would be more likely than delinquent men to perceive that their opportunities are limited (Datesman, Scarpitti, & Stephenson, 1975). To test this hypothesis, a sample of respondents –– both delinquent and non-delinquent –– were asked to evaluate their perceived opportunities as high, medium, or low. Between delinquents and non-delinquents, the percentage differences between scoring “high” on this measure were approximately 18% for males and 30% for females. This means that a lack of perceived opportunity is a larger factor for delinquent women than delinquent men. The study demonstrated further that delinquent women are more likely than non-delinquent women to perceive their opportunities as limited. While 44.1% of non-delinquent women responded that they perceived themselves to have “high” opportunity, only 15.6% of delinquent women responded this way. Nearly 60% of delinquent women perceived themselves to have “low” opportunity. Using these numbers, Datesman, et al. theorized that women needed a greater “push’” into delinquency than men and are more hesitant to engage in delinquent activities (1975). Because the limitation of opportunities is a key factor in female criminality, the empowerment approach is especially promising. Expanding access to opportunities is key in both preventing potential crimes and rehabilitating battered women.

The Inefficacy of the Prison System

The prison system is ineffective at rehabilitating battered women and often exacerbates the sense of powerlessness and victimization that these women experience. Restoring control to these women is essential to preventing recidivism and preventing future abuse. The prison system, as it exists today, is inadequate for this purpose. Contemporary U.S. prisons are run in a male-centric style, encourage the infantilization of women, and often perpetuate the abuse that these women have experienced. Each of these practices is disempowering, removing control from women and rendering them helpless.

The U.S. prison system designed for men is inadequate for women. The system is militaristic, designed to control violent male predators. Under this system, a focus on containing potentially violent offenders distracts supervisors from the unique problems that victimized women face (Banks, 2003). Because many women are incarcerated for non-violent offenses, they are ill-suited for this type of system. This male-centric prison system also fails to offer adequate gynecological care, neglects the unique reasons for female criminality (abuse, drug dependency, and so forth), and locates inmates far from their friends and families. Because fewer women are incarcerated than men, fewer women’s prisons exist, meaning that women are often incarcerated far away from their communities. In each of these ways, a lack of attention to women’s needs renders the prison system ineffective for women.

The U.S. prison system infantilizes delinquent women, treating inmates as irresponsible children. Women are routinely referred to by correctional officers as “girls” or “ladies,” but rarely as “women.” Like children, inmates are harshly punished for trivial matters such as cursing or perceived disrespect (Pollock, 1998). Correctional officers may be excessively concerned with cleanliness and displays of minor vices (Banks, 2003). Within this system, female passivity is encouraged, independent thinking is not rewarded, and women who speak out against the system are actively punished. Being treated like children exacerbates the sense of powerlessness that these women are already experiencing.

The abuse a woman has experienced at home often continues within the prison. Entering the prison, almost half of all female inmates have a history of physical or sexual abuse (National Crime Prevention Council, 1995). While incarcerated, women face a loss of control over privacy, being subjected to strip searches, body cavity searches, and male guard supervision when changing, showering, or using the bathroom. For victims of sexual abuse, body cavity searches are particularly traumatic. In an article on the subject, Buchanan writes, “Women prisoners' history of abuse heightens their risk of revictimization” (2007). Under these degrading conditions, sexual abuse by guards is prevalent. Correctional officers and guards have power over what women eat, where they reside, what they wear, and what work they are assigned to. These power imbalances create an environment where women feel powerless to resist sexual advances (Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project, 1996). Buchanan’s research reveals that “sexual abuse by guards in women's prisons is so notorious and widespread that it has been described as ‘an institutionalized component of punishment behind prison walls’” (2007). When caught having sexual relations with a guard, female inmates are often punished with solitary confinement or undesirable work assignments. The guards involved are most commonly relocated to facilities for men. Under these conditions, lenient enforcement and little oversight, it is not unusual for male staff to withhold basic needs (food, personal items, visitation rights) to coerce sexual favors (Banks, 2003). These patterns of degradation and abuse reinforce patterns of victimization for already battered women.

Promising Alternatives: Empowering Women

A variety of new, innovative empowerment programs show a great deal of promise, focusing on rehabilitation and empowerment rather than penal retribution. These programs can be tailored for women who have been incarcerated and for those who have not. For female criminals, programs that focus on enhancing strengths –– rather than focusing on deficits –– have been shown to reduce recidivism (Trotter, McIvor, & Sheehan, 2012). When determining the need for incarceration, women who pose no threat to society should be eligible for outpatient programs involving parole or probation. These women could be enrolled in a variety of empowerment programs and monitored through regular visits by a correctional officer. For women who have not engaged in criminal activity or need to be institutionalized, similar programs should be available.

Programs for battered women who have not engaged in criminal activity may include a variety of community interventions. Battered women should have access to the means for achieving independence from their abuser. Programs promoting independence may focus on vocational training or substance abuse treatment. Vocational training may involve simple employment advice and support or may involve more intensive help with job placement. Substance abuse programs must be sensitive to the reasons why women become dependent on drugs or alcohol in the first place and should seek to address the roots of these dependencies (Trotter et al., 2012). Counseling services should be available for victims of partner abuse. Each of these services carries the dual benefits of rehabilitating the battered woman and preventatively deterring crime.

Programs for battered women who have engaged in criminal activity may need to be suited to an institutional setting or program of conditional release. For these women, the increased use of probation and parole are especially promising. These forms of conditional release reduce the costs of imprisonment, both for society and for the women. For women who are incarcerated or involved in a release-program, substance abuse treatment should play a key role in any state-sponsored assistance. Because 80% of female inmates have a history of drug or alcohol abuse, treatment is essential to prevent future recidivism. Unfortunately, existing substance abuse programs have been designed for men, and, as a result, are “hierarchical, punitive, and psychologically destructive for women” (Banks, 2003, p. 97). As Trotter et. al.’s research indicates, programs that focus on women’s strengths, taking an empowerment approach, are far more successful for women.

Additional support for delinquent women may include free, confidential counseling services, adequate treatment for mental illness, opportunities to pursue education, and parenting programs. Programs teaching parenting skills, coupled with visitation programs, are particularly promising. Education programs are essential as well and must be funded accordingly. Given that more than half of all female inmates lack a high school diploma and perceive their opportunities to be limited, education may play a crucial role in helping a woman achieve independence (from abusive relationships and from the criminal justice system). Transitioning from prison, adequate vocational and housing support must be available. For poor women, access to state-sponsored support for housing reduces the rate of recidivism by 83% (Holtfreter, Reisig, & Morash, 2004). Adequate aftercare following release is essential to preventing recidivism and ensuring a woman’s success. Each of these programs –– counseling, treatment for mental illness, education, good parenting, and housing –– should be considered when evaluating the needs of individual women.

Concluding Thoughts

In the United States today, a majority of women in the criminal justice system have a history of physical or sexual abuse. Many of these battered women turn to crime in reaction to abuse, only to find themselves further abused within the U.S. criminal justice system. The empowerment approach is key to helping battered women find alternatives to crime. A lack of perceived opportunity factors in female crime. For these women, the prison system is ineffective because the masculine prison model inadequately responds to women’s needs, treats women like children, and exposes women to further abuse. The alternative to retributive incarceration is rehabilitation, focusing on empowering women to take control of their lives. In order to adequately meet the needs of battered women and prevent recidivism, the criminal justice system needs to refocus attention on empowerment. This is an essential strategy for 21st-century criminologists and feminists alike.

References

Banks, C. (2003). Women in prison: A reference handbook. Santa Barbara, C.A.: ABC-CLIO Inc.

Brownstein, H. H., Spunt, B. J., Crimmins, S., Goldstein, P. J., & Langley, S. (1994). Changing patterns of lethal violence by women: A research note. Women and Criminal Justice, 5(2), 99-118.

Buchanan, K. S. (2007). Impunity: Sexual abuse in women’s prisons. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 42 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 45. Retrieved from www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic

Datesman, S. K., Scarpitti, F. R., & Stephenson, R. M. (1975). Female delinquency: An application of self and opportunity theories. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 12(2), 107-123.

DeKeserdy, W. S., & Hinch, R. (1991). Women abuse – Sociological perspectives. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.

Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M. D., & Morash, M. (2004). Poverty, state capital, and recidivism among women offenders. Criminology Public Policy, 3(2), 185-208.

Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project. (1996). All too familiar: Sexual abuse of women in U.S. state prisons. New York: Human Rights Watch.

National Crime Prevention Council. (1996) “Safety and savings: Crime prevention through social development.” Ottawa: National Crime Prevention Council.

Pollock, J. M. (1998). Counseling women in prison. Thousand Oaks, C.A.: Sage.

Trotter, C., Mcivor, G., & Sheehan, R. (2012). The effectiveness of support and rehabilitation services for women offenders. Australian Social Work, 65(1), 6-20.

Walker, L. E. (1989). Terrifying love – Why battered women kill and how society responds. New York: Harper and Row.