Female Offenders in Canadian Corrections

| Female Offenders in Corrections | Jarrod Birch | | Criminology 252 | Karin Kaercher |

|

Introduction Female offenders that enter into the correctional system in Canada do so with an entirely different set of risk factors than their male counterparts. Through comparisons and contrasting of facts, this paper will set out to identify the issues correctional services in Canada face when dealing with female offenders entering into the system. For example, female offenders that end up in the corrections system experience much different lives than males do; such as one in four women being identified as having mental health issues upon their entry into the system. In addition to mental health issues, the majority of women in prison have experienced some sort of abuse and, or, trauma at one point in their life (Public Safety Canada, 2010). Although males experience abuse, trauma and many suffer from mental health they are brought into the corrections system with a certain framework that is specialized and formulated to rehabilitate and reintegrate a male offender back into society. This gender specialization works well for the disproportionally high number of male offenders but leads to several short comings when working with women in the same system (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). “For too long women have been boxed in by a grid-like structure which is dominated by visions of male criminality. It is time that the gender realities which dominate the lives of many females are integrated into the assumptions underlying the guidelines.” (Wald, 2001). This quote explains that women have very different needs upon sentencing and in order for a sentence to be successful in preventing recidivism and producing a motivated individual in society upon release; these needs cannot be ignored or addressed by using the same correctional philosophy as a sentenced male. Comparing the “risk/needs model” for men and women plus the lack of gender specialization for female offenders will provide the reader with an idea of the current state of corrections in Canada with regards to a female offender. By highlighting the lack of facilities across the country to house federally charged female offenders and the minimal amounts of programming available to females currently; the reader will gain perspective into the difficulties corrections personnel face in successfully reintegrating female offenders back into society.
Female Offenders Female offenders generally are guilty of committing property crimes in Canada. However, criminal behaviour of females is not limited to property crimes by any means. Violent crimes committed by women tend to be ‘sensational’ stories for the media to pick up on as they are quite rare, but, the violation of gender norms has led to increased coverage and unwarranted attention to the violent female offender and therefore distorting the public’s view on female offenders in general (Dell, Fillmore, & Kilty, 2009). It is not unheard of for women to engage in violent behaviour, and some suggest that female violence is on the rise (Chesey-Lind, 2001). According to a study done by the FBI, in the United States of America, between 1989 and 1998 the arrests of adolescent girls increased by over 50 percent; whereas the increase for boys was an increase of just under 20 percent (Chesey-Lind, 2001). These statistics must not be taken out of context however. This “rise” in arrests, is actually more of a closing of the gap between arrest statistics and what has always been happening (Chesey-Lind, 2001). As stated by (Streib, 2001) it is not unheard of for women to even be sentenced to death albeit not in Canada. Women, account for approximately one in one hundred and forty executions in the US and of the 8,000 plus executions in the US since 1900, only forty four of them have been women (Streib, 2001). Nevertheless, the truth still remains that the majority of female offenders commit property crimes such as, theft or fraud (Dell, Fillmore, & Kilty, 2009). It is important to understand the types of crimes female offenders commit as it aids in illustrating the risks a female offender poses to herself, the public and the incarcerated population once sentenced. In addition to the risks an offender poses, the types of crimes she commits provide insight into the needs, such as treatment, an offender will need access to in order to successfully rehabilitate and reintegrate back into society.
“Risk/Needs Model” Women that enter into the criminal justice system tend to have a unique path that greatly differs from that of their male counterparts. This is mind, women generally have a low risk, and high needs model that requires specific programming and treatment to deal with issues of self-concept, physical, emotional abuse and also abuse of substances. If not addressed, these needs will leave women with a difficulty adjusting to life in prison, post sentence, and in turn making reintegration into society far more likely to fail (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). The use of inmate classification based on a male offender does not work because of the tendency to classify women as high risk and therefore limiting her access to treatment and programs based on this over classification (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). By sampling four groups of people: female offenders, female non-offenders, male offenders and male non-offenders; researchers found that female offenders were at the highest risk of taking their emotions out on not just others but themselves as well. By comparison, male offenders tended to take out emotions on others; such as anti-social behaviour, however, not necessarily taking these emotions out on themselves in any way (Harris, Clarbour, Moore, & McDougall, 2002). This strengthens the need to specialize classification by gender and to avoid placing female offenders under the same classification as males; simply because, it is not conducive to proper rehabilitation (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). The most prominent risks and needs for females are as follows: non-violence coupled with “exceedingly high levels of drug and alcohol abuse” plus the vulnerability to male domination (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). These risks and needs lead to a very low recidivism rate that is not common with male offenders and therefore draw attention to the placement of female offenders causing some researchers to believe that giving a female offender access to the treatment she needs for issues handling abuse and keeping intact her family ties would exponentially increase her successful reintegration into society upon her release (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007).
Facilities in Canada As of 2007 there were 476 female offenders incarcerated in federal institutions and 513 females serving their sentences in their communities (Public Safety Canada, 2010). These numbers make up a very small proportion of federally sentenced inmates across Canada and therefore female offenders have access to a very small proportion of facilities across Canada. In 2006; 45% of incarcerated females were held in medium security institutions (Correctional Service Canada, 2006). According to the research done on “risk/needs model” of female offenders the absence of non-violent behaviour and the high percentage of female offenders abusing substances would place emphasis on treatment and programs needed by women that would be better available in a low security setting (Wald, 2001). Of all the federal institutions housing offenders serving sentences of two years or more only seven institutions are for female offenders (Public Safety Canada, 2010). Not even every province has a centre for females and this in itself presents a problem. The research done provides insight into the values women place on relationships and the importance of maintaining relations with significant others whether incarcerated or not (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). However, with only seven facilities federally dedicated to female offenders the likelihood of an offender not being moved a significant distance from her home places great strain on these relationships and therefore inhibits the ability of the correctional system to successfully rehabilitate an offender and conversely the offender’s willingness to participate without the familial support she is used to. That is not to say, however, that the Correctional Services Canada needs to increase the number of federal facilities for women as they are such a fraction of the entire incarcerated population that financially it may not be worthwhile; although as of 2007, conditional sentences and the use of probation and community supervision are the majority of females sentenced and most definitely allow for that bond between offender and significant others to maintain intact (Public Safety Canada, 2010).
Treatment and Programming Treatment for conditions such as drug and alcohol abuse along with programming to handle addictions are vital in determining the success or failure of an inmate, male or female. However, with an overwhelmingly large number of inmates in Canada being male the majority of funding designated for these programs are naturally budgeted for men. However, in 1990 with the “Report of the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women: Creating Choices” the Correctional Services Canada started in a new direction in treatment and programming for women (Public Safety Canada, 2010). The closing of the Prison for Women in Kingston, Ontario in conjunction with the opening of five new regional facilities plus the creation of an Aboriginal healing lodge to work with female Aboriginal offenders offered sentenced women the ability to stay closer to their homes. The most significant step in treatment and programming was the gender specified programs that were developed. Although male offenders receive the bulk of funding for programs and treatment this gender specified treatment allowed the correction service the ability to address the needs specific to women. This was brought to fruition through the passing of Section 77 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA) (Public Safety Canada, 2010).
Conclusions
It is quite apparent that female offenders present an entirely different set of issues in a correctional setting than males do. Based on the risks female offenders pose, the person most at risk is the female offender. Females are far more likely to engage in self-injurious behaviour than males are and this has to be accounted for when assessing females and when sentencing an offender. Female offenders also have more likely experienced pasts riddled with victimization as well as possible abuse; nearly 50 percent of women as opposed to only 13 percent of men report experiencing either physical or sexual abuse at some point in their lives (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). These factors taken into account frequently leave corrections staff assessing female offenders as low risk for violent behaviour and high needs for treatments and programming. It has also been noted that up to seventy percent of female inmates are the primary caretaker of a child and therefore once incarcerated lose the ability to give care to a significant part of their life. Of these primary caregivers it has been proven that by working as best as possible to maintain a female offender’s bonds with her significant others on the outside will directly result in a lower chance of recidivism (Wald, 2001). Working to keep these bonds in tact as much as possible the addition of Section 77 of the CCRA provided gender specified treatment for females and in conjunction with the “Creating Choices” report by the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women allowed for more centres for women to be opened nationally therefore decreasing the distance an inmate has to travel to serve her sentence. Section 77 allowed for Correctional Services Canada to provide women with treatment and programs that were gender informed thereby specifying treatments towards women dealing with issues such as mental health issues, substance abuse and abuse of other types such as sexual or physical (Public Safety Canada, 2010). The correctional philosophy whether for men or women is to successfully reintegrate an offender back into society with proper tools and motivation necessary to be successful and of good character. However, this cannot be done with a general objective and classifications. The classifications used for men that are proven successful have actually worked detrimentally for female offenders and have subsequently required an adaptation on the part of the federal corrections system (Wright, Salisbury, & Van Voorhis, 2007). The ability of the corrections entities to adapt and change as the needs of the public and offenders change will ultimately result in a more successful rehabilitation of the offender and as a result provide the public and offender with confidence of successful reintegration.

Works Cited
Chesey-Lind, M. (2001). Are Girls Closing The Gender Gap in Violence? Criminal Justice, 18-23.
Correctional Service Canada. (2006, March 12). Women Offender Programs and Issues. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from Correctional Service Canada: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/prgrm/fsw/wos24/profile_women-eng.shtml
Dell, C. A., Fillmore, C. J., & Kilty, J. M. (2009). Looking Back 10 Years After the Arbour Inquiry Ideology, Policy, Practice and the Federal Female Prisoner. The Prison Journal, 286-308.
Harris, R., Clarbour, J., Moore, S., & McDougall, C. (2002). Women Offenders. Probation Journal, 314-317.
Public Safety Canada. (2010, April 12). 9 Corrections Fast Facts. Retrieved November 9, 2010, from Public Safety Canada: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/prg/cor/acc/_fl/ff9-en.pdf
Streib, V. L. (2001). Sentencing Women to Death. Criminal Justice, 24-28.
Wald, P. M. (2001). Why Focus On Women? Criminal Justice, 10-16.
Wright, E. M., Salisbury, E. J., & Van Voorhis, P. (2007). Misconducts of Women Offenders The Importance Of Gender-Responsive Needs. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 310-340.

Cited: Chesey-Lind, M. (2001). Are Girls Closing The Gender Gap in Violence? Criminal Justice, 18-23. Correctional Service Canada. (2006, March 12). Women Offender Programs and Issues. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from Correctional Service Canada: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/prgrm/fsw/wos24/profile_women-eng.shtml Dell, C. A., Fillmore, C. J., & Kilty, J. M. (2009). Looking Back 10 Years After the Arbour Inquiry Ideology, Policy, Practice and the Federal Female Prisoner. The Prison Journal, 286-308. Harris, R., Clarbour, J., Moore, S., & McDougall, C. (2002). Women Offenders. Probation Journal, 314-317. Public Safety Canada. (2010, April 12). 9 Corrections Fast Facts. Retrieved November 9, 2010, from Public Safety Canada: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/prg/cor/acc/_fl/ff9-en.pdf Streib, V. L. (2001). Sentencing Women to Death. Criminal Justice, 24-28. Wald, P. M. (2001). Why Focus On Women? Criminal Justice, 10-16. Wright, E. M., Salisbury, E. J., & Van Voorhis, P. (2007). Misconducts of Women Offenders The Importance Of Gender-Responsive Needs. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 310-340.