Women in Prison: Growing Numbers and Increased Inequities

By Erika Kates, Ph.D.

When I first conducted research on women in prison in the 1980s, it was difficult to find data on their numbers.  There were about 14,000 in the U.S., and they made up 4% of the incarcerated population. Historically, this small number was often used to explain their neglect. While this reasoning was not valid three decades ago, it is certainly not true now. The numbers have exploded, and yet this myth of small numbers is still used to explain why women receive so little attention.

The Myth of Small Numbers

1.    The U.S. has the largest incarcerated population in the world. In 2007, over two million prisoners were held in federal, state and local correction institutions; of these 203,100 were women.

2.    The percentage of women has more than doubled - it is now 9%; and this is the highest percentage in the world.

3.    In 1977-2007 the U.S. female prison population grew by 800%; and the annual growth has doubled that of men for some time.   

4.    The US also has the highest incarceration rate in the world.  In 2008, it was around 900 per 100,000 for men, and 62 for women.

5.    Racial and ethnic factors are significant, too. The rate for black women in the US is 149 per 100,000 compared to 75 for Hispanic women, and 50 for white women.

Even in Massachusetts, a state with a low incarceration rate of 13 per 100,000, this trend continues. Between 1977-2007 the female prison population grew by almost 400%, with an average annual rate of increase of 8.7% per year.

It's important to realize:  the growth in the incarcerated population is not matched by a comparable increase in crime: much of it is accounted for by mandatory minimum sentencing practices and parole limitations, and "three strikes and you're out" policies

The Myth of  "Easy Time"

The length of women's sentences is typically underestimated. In fact, the average Massachusetts state sentence is 4.2 years, compared to 4.7 years for men. Almost half of the women sentenced to "county time" actually serve their sentences in the state prison, because half of the counties don't hold women prisoners.  So, they are held in medium-maximum security instead of minimum security, (just 0.2 % of men serving county sentences were held in a state prison). In November 2009, over 20% of the women held at MCI-F (Massachusetts Correctional facility at Framingham) were in the Awaiting Trial Unit (ATU), compared to 3% of men who were held outside their counties awaiting trial.  Half the women in the ATU were held there because they could not pay even $50 bail.

These factors contribute to what I call the over-incarceration of women in Massachusetts.  There are also two major areas where women face serious inequities.

INEQUITY #1.  Women and their Children

Of the women offenders in Massachusetts, an estimated two-thirds of women offenders in Massachusetts are mothers, over half of who had lived with their children prior to arrest.   When women are arrested, their children are displaced, unlike the children of male prisoners who tend to remain with their primary caregivers. Their children are more likely to be moved several times and to be separated from siblings.

Most women's prisons are isolated geographically.  In Massachusetts, half the women inmates at MCI-F-- the state's only women's prison, where half of the county women are now held-- do not receive visits from their children.  This puts them at serious risk of losing contact with children and permanently losing custody.

INEQUITY #2.  Access to Appropriate Treatment

The majority of women offenders have histories of substance abuse and mental health issues, as well as sexual and physical abuse.  In Massachusetts, major state commissions and reviews in 2005 and 2008 highlighted the poor physical conditions, the poor mental health resources, and lack of care for pregnant women at MCI-F.

In 2008, over two thirds of the sentenced women in MCI-F had a formal mental health diagnosis, compared to just over one quarter of the sentenced men.

Women need gender-responsive and trauma-informed therapies. These resources are sorely lacking, with serious consequences

Alternatives

My research in 2009-2010 documented the availability of gender-responsive resources for women who are incarcerated, and my current research explores the extent to which they are (or could be) used as alternatives to incarceration

There are several trends that indicate that using alternatives is timely.

• Over-incarceration,
• Cost of incarceration,
• Lack of effective resources within the prisons,
• Non-violent nature of women's offenses,
• Inequitable impact on their families.

So why not divert women into treatment programs that combine parenting assistance and educational and vocational skills.  Holistic trauma-informed programs provide effective resources, and if they were used more frequently as alternatives to diversion, many of the problems related to family and community separation could be avoided or mitigated. 

MORE FACTS ON WOMEN IN PRISON

1.    No other country in the world incarcerates as many people. 

2.    The incarceration rates of twenty countries vary from 900 for the US to 63 for Japan.

3.    The percentage of women imprisoned varies from 9% in the US to 3.7% in France.

4.    And yet the demographics, issues and concerns of women are remarkably similar: in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, England, Scotland and Wales For example:

•  Women of color and indigenous women are incarcerated at greater rates than white women.

• Suicides are a major concern in Canada; there were 10 in a period of less than 2 years, which led to wide scale reforms. 
• The percentage of women with children is very similar.

5.    Almost all countries allow women to keep their newborn children: the period of time varies from 3 months to 6 years

6.    Emerging concerns in these and other countries are sex trafficking, immigrant detainees, and political prisoners. 

7.    Resources to conduct research and gain access to prisons are highly problematic.   Yet this is an important area for action-oriented research and documentation.

A Senior Research Scientist at Wellesley Centers for Women, Erika Kates, Ph.D. studies Gender and Justice and Women's Economic Development through Education. She holds a Ph.D. in Social Policy from Brandeis University. For over 20 years, she has examined the intersection of welfare, workforce development and higher education policies in her work on access to education and training for low-income women.  Kates was hired as the first criminal justice planner in Massachusetts, became a member of the state's first Women and Criminal Justice organization, and directed a unique pre-trial diversion program for women arraigned in the Boston courts.  She has extensive experience in policy analysis and research, focusing mainly on low-income women, women of color and immigrants and has taught courses on feminist perspectives on policy.  In 1994 and 2002, she provided testimony at U.S. Congressional debates on welfare reform.