Abstract
Widely used risk/need assessment instruments assume that female offender risks for recidivism are essentially equivalent to those of male offenders. A look at the lives of female and male offenders reveals that there are important differences in the context of both offending and re-offending. This research draws on both quantitative and qualitative data to explore the effectiveness of a well known risk instrument to both predict recidivism and potentially direct intervention efforts. The results, particularly the in-depth interviews with offenders (both male and female) serving time on parole or felony probation reveal differences not detected by most contemporary risk and need assessment instruments. Ultimately, the gendered links among physical and sexual abuse, drugs, and crime are missed in risk and need assessments, thereby placing female offenders at risk for neglect and criminalization in an otherwise seemingly objective method of assessment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Bonta et al. (2001) define the actuarial approach as (p. 229), “…the assessment of risk and needs…based upon the objective measurement of factors that have demonstrated an empirical relationship to rule violation and criminal behavior.”.
Being addicted to drugs can be considered a disability and therefore makes one eligible to draw SSI.
This is a term often used to describe marijuana in Hawai‘i.
“Ice” is the term often used in Hawaii to describe crystal methamphetamine.
Hanai refers to a practice of informal adoption practices in Hawaii.
References
Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2000). The level of service inventory-revised: User’s manual. Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
Austin, J. (2003). Findings in prison classification and risk assessment. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections, U.S. Department of Justice.
Beck, A., & Karberg, J. C. (2001). Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2000. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
Beckett, K. (1997). Making crime pay: Law and order in contemporary American politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Belknap, J. (2001). The invisible woman: Gender, crime and justice (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Belknap, J., & Holsinger, K. (2006). The gendered nature of risk factors for delinquency. Feminist Criminology, 1, 48–71.
Benda, B. B. (2005). Gender differences in life-course theory of recidivism: A survival analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49, 325–342.
Blanchette, K. (2004). Re-designing corrections for women: The Canadian experience. Journal of Community Corrections, 13, 11–22.
Blanchette, K., & Brown, S. L. (2006a). The assessment and treatment of women offenders. West Sussex, England: Wiley.
Blanchette, K., & Brown, S. L. (2006b). Gender-informed correctional practice: Integrating gender-neutral and gender-specific/responsive paradigms. Women, Girls & Criminal Justice, 7, 49–64.
Bloom, B., & Chesney-Lind, M. (2003). Women in prison: Vengeful equity. In R. Muraskin (Ed.), It’s a crime: Women and the criminal justice system (pp. 175–195). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bloom, B., & Owen, B. (2002). Gender-responsive strategies: Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders. National Institute of Corrections.
Bloom, B., Own, B., & Covington, S. (2003). Gender-responsive strategies: Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections, U.S. Department of Justice.
Bonta, J. (1989). Native inmates: Institutional response, risk, and needs. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 39, 49–62.
Bonta, J. (1996). Risk-needs assessment and treatment. In A. T. Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (Vol. Chap. 2). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Bonta, J., Bogue, B., Crowley, M., & Motiuk, L. (2001). Implementing offender classification systems: Lessons learned. In G. A. Bernfeld, D. P. Farrington, & A. W. Leschied (Eds.), Offender rehabilitation in practice (Vol. Chap. 11). New York: Wiley.
Bonta, J., & Motiuk, L. L. (1992). Inmate classification. Journal of Criminal Justice, 20, 343–353.
Bosworth, M. (2004). Editorial introduction: Gender, risk, and recidivism. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 181–184.
Brennan, T. (1998). Institutional classification of females: Problems and some proposals for reform. In R. T. Zaplin (Ed.), Female offenders: Critical perspectives and effective interventions (pp. 179–198). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2006). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics Online. http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/pdf/t6282006.pdf.
Calahan, M. (1986). Historical corrections statistics in the United States, 1850–1984. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
Chesney-Lind, M. (1997). The female offender: Girls, women and crime. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Chesney-Lind, M., & Pasko, L. (2004). The female offender: Girls, women, and crime. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Clements, C. B. (1996). Offender classification: Two decades of progress. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 121–143.
Comack, E. (2006). Coping, resisting, and surviving: Connecting women’s law violations to their histories of abuse. In L. F. Alarid & P. Cromwell (Eds.), In her own words: Women offenders’ views on crime and victimization. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company.
Coulson, G., Giorgio, I., Nutbrown, V., & Giulekas, D. (1996). Predictive utility of the LSI for incarcerated female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 427–439.
Covington, S. S., & Bloom, B. E. (2003). Gendered justice: Women in the criminal justice system. In B. E. Bloom (Ed.), Gendered justice: Addressing female offenders. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (1999). What works for female offenders: A meta-analytic review. Crime & Delinquency, 45, 438–452.
Farr, K. A. (2000). Classification for female inmates: Moving forward. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 3–17.
Feeley, M., & Simon, J. (1992). The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30, 449–474.
Flavin, J. (2004). Employment counseling, housing assistance…and aunt Yolanda? How strengthening families’ social capital can reduce recidivism. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 209–216.
Funk, S. J. (1999). Risk assessment for juveniles on probation: A focus on gender. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 26, 44–68.
Glaze, L. E., & Bonczar, T. P. (2006). Probation and parole in the United States, 2005. (NCJ 215091). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Gottfredson, D. M. (1987). Prediction and classification in criminal justice decision making. In D. M. Gottfredson & M. Tonry (Eds.), Prediction and classification: Criminal justice decision making. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
Gottfredson, D. M., & Snyder, H. N. (2005). The mathematics of risk classification: Changing data into valid instruments for juvenile courts. National Center for Juvenile Justice (pp. 1–32).
Hannah-Moffit, K., & Shaw, M. (2003). The meaning of ‘risk’ in women’s prisons: A critique. In B. Bloom (Ed.), Gendered justice: Addressing female offenders. Durham, North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press.
Harcourt, B. E. (2007). Against prediction: Profiling, policing, and punishing in an actuarial age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Harer, M. D., & Langan, N. P. (2001). Gender differences in predictors of prison violence: Assessing the predictive validity of a risk classification system. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 513–536.
Harrison, P. M., & Beck, A. J. (2006). Prisoners in 2005. (NCJ 215092). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Hollin, C. R., & Palmer, E. J. (2006). Criminogenic need and women offenders: A critique of the literature. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11, 179–195.
Holsinger, A. M., Lowenkamp, C. T., & Latessa, E. J. (2003). Ethnicity, gender, and the level of service inventory-revised. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31, 309–320.
Holsinger, A. M., Lurigio, A. J., & Latessa, E. J. (2001). Practioners’ guide to understanding the basis of assessing offender risk. Federal Probation, 65, 46–50.
Holsinger, K., & Van Voorhis, P. (2005). Examining gender inequities in classification systems: Missouri’s development of a gender-responsive assessment instrument. Women, Girls & Criminal Justice, 6, 33–48.
Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M. D., & Morash, M. (2004). Poverty, state capital, and recidivism among women offenders. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 185–208.
Hubbard, D. J., & Pratt, T. C. (2004). The criminogenic needs of girls: What are the most important risk factors for delinquency and are they different from the risk factors for boys? Women, Girls, and Criminal Justice, August/September, 57–63.
James, D. J. (2004). Profile of jail inmates, 2002. (NCJ 201932). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Jones, P. R. (1996). Risk prediction in criminal justice. In A. T. Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (Vol. Chap. 3). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Jones, D. A., Johnson, S., Latessa, E., & Travis, L. F. (1999). Case classification in community corrections: Preliminary findings from a national survey. In Topics in community corrections (pp. 4–10). National Institute of Corrections: Washington DC.
Kruttschnitt, C., & Gartner, R. (2003). Women’s imprisonment. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 30, 1–82.
Lab, S. (2003). Let’s put it in context. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 39–44.
Loader, I., & Sparks, R. (2002). Contemporary landscapes of crime, order, and control: Governance, risk, and globalization. In M. Maguire & R. Reiner (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of criminology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maidment, M. R. (2006). Doing time on the outside. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
McDiarmid, A. (2005). Gender responsivity. Presentation to the Hawaii Department of Public Safety, July 11, 2005.
Miller, S. (2005). Victims as offenders: The paradox of women’s violence in relationships. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Modley, P. (2000). “Foreword”. Responding to Women Offenders in the Community. Topics in Community Corrections Annual Issue. National Institute of Justice. U.S. Department of Justice.
Morash, M. (2005). Understanding gender, crime, and justice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Olson, D. E., Alderden, M., & Lurigio, A. J. (2003). Men are from Mars, women are from Venus, but what role does gender play in probation recidivism? Journal of the Justice Research and Statistics Association, 5, 33–54.
Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York: Oxford University Press.
Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1993). Evaluating intensive supervision probation/parole: Results of a nationwide experiment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice.
Reisig, M. D., Holtfreter, K., & Morash, M. (2006). Assessing recidivism across female pathways to crime. Justice Quarterly, 23, 384–405.
Richie, B. E. (1996). Compelled to crime: The gender entrapment of battered black women. New York: Routledge.
Richie, B. E. (2001). Challenges incarcerated women face as they return to their communities: Findings from life history interviews. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 368–389.
Sabol, W. J., Courture, H., & Harrison, P. M. (2007). Prisoners in 2006. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
Sabol, W. J., Courture, H., & Harrison, P. M. (2008). Prison inmates at midyear 2007. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
Simon, J. (1993). Poor discipline: Control of the underclass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sprague, J. (2005). Feminist methodologies for critical researchers: Bridging differences. Walnut Creek: AltaMira.
Van Voorhis, P. (2005). Gender responsive assessments. Presentation given in Honolulu, Hawaii at the Department of Public Safety on July 11, 2005.
Van Voorhis, P., Salisbury, E., Bauman, A., & Wright, E. (2008). Gender responsive risk/needs assessment final report. Report prepared for the Maui CARE Project.
Whitaker, M. S. (2000). Responding to women offenders: Equitable does not mean identical. In Responding to women offenders in the community. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections (Topics in community corrections annual issue).
Widom, C. S., & Hiller-Sturmhofel, S. (2001). Alcohol abuse as risk factor for and consequence of child abuse. Alcohol Research and Health, 25, 52–57.
Widom, C. S., & Maxfield, M. G. (2001). An update on the “cycle of violence”. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
Wright, J. (2002). Next step: Creating gender responsive risk assessment tools. Women, Girls & Criminal Justice, 3, 81–94.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Davidson, J.T., Chesney-Lind, M. Discounting Women: Context Matters in Risk and Need Assessment. Crit Crim 17, 221–245 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-009-9084-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-009-9084-x