Feb-Mar-97

Women and Imprisonment In The U.S.,

Women are an extremely small percentage of the U.S. prison popu-lation, approximately 5%. At the end of 1988, there were 32,691 women in state and federal prisons. Although imprisonment rates for women are low, they are rising rapidly, after having remained more or less constant for the previous 50 years.

According to government statistics, the number of women prisoners has mushroomed from 13,420 in just 8 years, a 244% increase, compared to a 188% increase of for men. The rate for women has grown faster than that for men each year since 1981. In New York City jails, the rate for women rose a staggering 33% in the last year alone, more than twice the rate of men.

Some say the jump in violent crime perpetrated by women is a result of the women's movement and the associated empowerment of women. In other words, increased gender equality brings more violence by women. However, no evidence supports the allegation that female violent crimes have increased, nor that equality leads to more violent crime by women. In fact, violent crimes by women have remained constant or, in some cases, actually declined. For instance, a comparison of female crime rates between 1977 and 1987 indicates that violent personal crimes actually declined while alcohol and drug-related crimes tripled. A study by Weisheit specifically compared "gender equality" in various states with the female homicide rates in these states, showing that those states with the highest degree of gender equality also have the lowest rate of homicide by females.

The rising rates can be explained, to a large extent, by many of the same factors that influence the rise in male imprisonment, for example, substance abuse offenses. In one southern prison, 77% of the women are there on drug or alcohol-related offenses. In another state, the number of new admissions for such offenses has jumped from 5% to 56% in the last ten years. Not only are drug and alcohol-related offenses more frequent, but the charges tend to be more severe. We are now seeing felony drug charges as compared to past misdemeanors for substance abuse.

It is also possible that the deteriorating economic conditions are now pushing women to the brink faster than men; as the primary caretakers of children, women may be driven by poverty to engage in more "crimes" of survival. Changes in sentencing laws and practices, such as mandatory minimum-sentencing, are also considered a main cause in rising imprisonment rates for women. Certainly judges are less hesitant than ever to send women to prison. Offenses which used to get probation are now drawing prison time, and sentences are harsher.

Whatever the reason, women are being treated more punitively than in the past by the criminal justice system.

Who are the women in prison?

The profile that emerges in study after study is that of a young, single mother with few marketable job skills, a high school drop-out who lives below the poverty level; 75% are between the ages of 25 and 34, are mothers of dependent children, and were unemployed at the time of arrest. Many left home early and have experienced sexual and physical abuse. Ninety percent have a drug or alcohol-related history. Another extremely significant factor is the race of incarcerated women. In 1982, the population of women's prisons was 50% Black although Blacks comprised only 11% of the total population in this country; 9% Latino when they were only 5% of the total population and 3% Native American, although this group comprises only .04% of the total population.

African American women are eight times more likely than White women to go to prison. Although a greater proportion of White women are arrested, a smaller proportion are incarcerated. A 1985 Michigan study reported that 10.5% of all arrests were those of White women, while non-White women accounted for 6.1% of all arrests. On the other hand, Euroamerican women were 1.8% of those incarcerated, while women of color were 4.5%. It is not clear what other factors are involved, such as the distribution of arrestable offenses or the role of prosecutorial discretion. What is certain is that a different set of dynamics is at work for White and non-White women. As Karl Rassmussen, Executive Director of Women's Prison Association of New York says, "150 years ago it was poor whites, their names often Irish, and alcohol abuse. Today, it's poor minorities and drug abuse."

Numerous studies have indicated that women of color-Black women in particular- when compared with White women, are over-arrested, over-indicted, under-defended and over-sentenced. African American women are seven times more likely to be arrested for prostitution than women of other ethnic groups. A California study demonstrated that White women drug-violators represent the primary group arrested for this offense (65.1%) but are far less likely to be imprisoned (39.4%) than any minority female group. Over a 16-year period, Black women incarcerated in Missouri received significantly longer sentences for crimes against property, and served longer periods in prison. White women were generally given much longer sentences for crimes against persons, in fact almost double those of Black women. However, actual time served for Afroamerican women was longer. For both murder and drug offenses, Euroamerican women ended up serving one-third less time for the same offenses. The study concluded that "differential treatment is definitely accorded to female offenders by race."

Assata Shakur, the once-imprisoned leader of the Black Liberation Army who was liberated from a New Jersey prison in 1979 and granted political asylum in Cuba, has offered this description:

There are no criminals here at Riker's Island Correction Institution for Women (New York), only victims. Most of the women (over 95 percent) are black and Puerto Rican. Many were abused children. Most have been abused by men and all have been abused by "the system" . . . . There are no big time gangsters here, no premeditated mass murderers, no god mothers. There are no big time dope dealers, no kidnappers, no Watergate women. There are virtually no women here charged with white collar crimes like embezzling and fraud. Most of the women have drug related cases. Many are charged as accessories to crimes committed by men. The major crimes that women here are charged with are prostitution, pickpocketing, shop lifting, robbery and drugs. Women who have prostitution cases or who are doing "fine" time make up a substantial part of the short term population. The women see stealing or hustling as necessary for the survival of themselves or their children because jobs are scarce and welfare is impossible to live on.

As Shakur paints the picture, women's offenses are rarely vicious, dangerous, or profitable, but arise from difficult circumstances within society at large. Most women are in prison for relatively minor offenses; property crimes, sometimes referred to as poverty crimes, are the most frequent. According to 1983 Bureau of Justice statistics, 43% of women were in for larceny, fraud, or forgery, compared with 15% of men. Additionally, women are less likely to be imprisoned for violent offenses; 35% of the men were in for violent crimes as compared with 24% of women. In general, women are less likely to be involved in homicide than are men.

When women do engage in violent crime, however, it is often a fundamentally different sort of act. Women are much more likely to kill a male partner than to kill anyone else. Men are much more likely to perpetrate homicides against individuals outside the partner relationship, although the rate of male-perpetrated homicide against intimate partners is still nearly double the rate for female-perpetrated homicides of male partners. Women are much more likely to kill in self-defense in response to their male partners' physical aggression and threats, and it is unlikely for a woman to repeat a homicide. Other authors point out that besides the provocation that immediately triggers the female homicide and is recognized by the court of law, female homicide is often in response to preceding years of male abuse.

According to Shelley Bannister, over one-third of all women have been abused as children by males within and outside of their families. Annually, over two million women are battered by male partners. No one knows exactly how many women are in prison for killing an abusing husband or boyfriend, but Charles Patrick Ewing, a psychologist and attorney, believes that as many as a thousand women a year are convicted for such acts: "This small but increasingly visible minority of battered women are in many cases doubly victimized: once by the men who have battered them and again by a system of criminal justice which holds them to an unrealistic standard of accountability."

In the early 1970s, when there was an activist women's movement, several strong campaigns were waged regarding individual cases in which women physically defended themselves and their children against attack. Yvonne Wanrow, a Colville Indian, was convicted by an all-White jury for the self-defense killing of a man who molested her nine-year-old son as well as several other children. lnez Garcia struck back against the men who raped her and threatened her life, while the judge insisted that the allegations of rape were not even an issue in the case. Dessie Woods was found guilty of murder and robbery of a White insurance agent who tried to rape her and a friend (Bar None #7).

The influence of feminist thinking and agitation can be seen today. Bannister argues in a current criminal justice journal that "women who kill or attempt to kill their abusers are incarcerated for several reasons: (1) to deter other women from believing that they can similarly resist; (2) to reinforce in women the belief that they have no right to their own bodies' integrity and no right to defend against or resist male attack; and (3) to protect and assert men's power over women." Even the Governor of Ohio felt compelled to pardon thirty-five women who had been imprisoned as a result of violence towards husbands and other men who had abused them.

Feb-Mar-97 - - Archives - - HOME- - Electrons to Editor