American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 353–376 | Cite as

Dangerousness or Diminished Capacity? Exploring the Association of Gender and Mental Illness with Violent Offense Sentence Length



The presence of mental illness within criminal sentencing can be conceptualized both as a mitigating factor based on the diminished capacity argument and as an aggravating factor stemming from the perceived dangerousness stigma associated with mental illness. The current study tests these hypotheses for violent offenses using data from the 2004 Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities within a weighted negative binomial regression framework. Separate analyses were conducted for male and female offenders to isolate gender effects in relation to the sentence length of offenders with a mental illness. The findings reveal that the presence of a mental illness tended to increase violent conviction sentence length reported by male offenders and decrease sentence length reported by female offenders, suggesting mental illness in the context of a violent conviction may be interpreted as evidence of diminished capacity for females and future dangerousness for males.


Mental Illness Sentencing Corrections 


  1. Abramson, M. (1972). The criminalization of mentally disordered behavior: possible side-effect of a new mental health law. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 23, 101–105.Google Scholar
  2. Aderibigbe, Y. (1997). Deinstitutionalization and criminalization: tinkering in the interstices. Forensic Science International, 85, 127–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albonetti, C. (1991). An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion. Social Problems, 38, 247–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angermeyer, A., Cooper, B., & Link, B. (1998). Mental disorder and violence: results of epidemiological studies in the era of de-institutionalization. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 33, S1–S6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnett, M., Brodsky, S., & Davis, C. (2004). When mitigating evidence makes a difference: effects of psychological mitigating evidence on sentencing decisions in capital trials. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 751–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkman, E. (1989). Mental illness as an aggravating circumstance in capital sentencing. Columbia Law Review, 89, 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berman, D. (2005). Distinguishing offense conduct and offender characteristics in modern sentencing reforms. Stanford Law Review, 58, 277–292.Google Scholar
  8. Bushway, S., & Piehl, A. (2001). Judging judicial discretion: legal factors and racial discrimination in sentencing. Law and Society Review, 35, 733–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Court Statistics Project. (2009). State court guide to statistical reporting. Williamsburg: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
  10. Crew, B. (1991). Sex differences in criminal sentencing: chivalry or patriarchy. Justice Quarterly, 8, 60–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daly, K. (1989). Rethinking judicial paternalism: gender, work-family relations and sentencing. Gender and Society, 3, 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daly, K., & Bordt, R. (1995). Sex effects and sentencing: an analysis of the statistical literature. Justice Quarterly, 12, 141–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ditton, P. (1999). Mental health and treatment of inmates and probationers: Special report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  14. Doerner, J., & Demuth, S. (2010). The independent and joint effects of race/ethnicity, gender, and age on sentencing outcomes in U.S. federal courts. Justice Quarterly, 27, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Erickson, P., & Erickson, S. (2008). Crime, punishment, and mental illness: Law and the behavioral sciences in conflict. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Fluent, T., & Guyer, M. (2006). Mental Illness and Sentencing Length in Supervised Release Revocation. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 35(1), 122–124.Google Scholar
  17. Frase, R. (2000). Panel remarks: is guided discretion sufficient? overview of state sentencing guidelines. Saint Louis University Law Journal, 44, 425–446.Google Scholar
  18. Horwitz, A. (2002). The social control of mental illness. Clinton Corners: Percheron Press.Google Scholar
  19. Huizinga, D., & Elliot, D. (1986). Reassessing the reliability and validity of self-report delinquency measures. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2, 293–327.Google Scholar
  20. James, D., & Glaze, L. (2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
  21. Koons-Witt, B. (2002). The effect of gender on the decision to incarcerate before and after the introduction of sentencing guidelines. Criminology, 40, 297–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Link, B., & Cullen, F. (1986). Contact with the mentally ill and perceptions of how dangerous they are. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 27, 289–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lipsitz, S., Kim, K., & Zhao, L. (1994). Analysis of repeated categorical data using generalized estimating equations. Statistics in Medicine, 13, 1149–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lubitz, R., & Ross, T. (2001, June). Sentencing guidelines: Reflections on the future. National Institute of Justice, Papers From the Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections, No. 10. Retrieved from:
  25. Lurigio, A. J., & Swartz, J. A. (2000). Changing the contours of the criminal justice system to meet the needs of persons with serious mental illness. In J. Horney (Ed.), NIJ 2000 Series: Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system (Vol. 3) (pp. 45–108). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  26. McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. (1989). Generalized linear models (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mechanic, D., & Rochefort, D. (1990). Deinstitutionalization: an appraisal of reform. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 301–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miller, R. (2001). Comment: Diminished capacity-expanding discretion: section 5 K2.13 of the federal sentencing guidelines and the demise of the non-violent offense. Villanova Law Review, 46, 679–715.Google Scholar
  29. Moore, C., & Miethe, T. (1986). Regulated and unregulated sentencing decisions: an analysis of first-year practices under Minnesota’s felony sentencing guidelines. Law and Society Review, 20, 253–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pescosolido, B. A., Martin, J. K., Long, J. S., Medina, T. R., Phelan, J. C., & Link, B. G. (2010). “A disease like any other”? a decade of change in public reactions to schizophrenia, depression, and alcohol dependence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 167(11), 1321–1330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Phelan, J., & Link, B. (1998). The growing belief that people with mental illness are violent: the role of the dangerousness criterion for civil commitment. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 33, S7–S12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rodriguez, S., Curry, T., & Lee, G. (2006). Gender differences in criminal sentencing: Do effects vary across violent, property, and drug offenses? Social Science Quarterly, 87, 318–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. SAS Institute. (2010). SAS/STAT user’s guide. NC: Cary.Google Scholar
  34. SAS Institute. (2011). SAS/ETS user’s guide. NC: Cary.Google Scholar
  35. Scnittker, J. (2000). Gender and reactions to psychological problems: an examination of social tolerance and perceived dangerousness. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 41, 224–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Silton, N. R., Flannelly, K. J., Milstein, G., & Vaaler, M. L. (2011). Stigma in america: has anything changed? impact of perceptions of mental illness and dangerousness on the desire for social distance: 1996 and 2006. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 199(6), 361–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steffensmeier, D., Kramer, J., & Streifel, C. (1993). Gender and imprisonment decisions. Criminology, 31, 411–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J., & Kramer, J. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: the punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. (2006). Does gender modify the effects of race-ethnicity on criminal sanctioning? sentences for male and female, white, black, and Hispanic defendant. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 241–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Slate, R., & Johnson, W. (2008). The criminalization of mental illness: crisis and opportunity for the justice system. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar
  41. Spohn, C., & Beichner, D. (2000). Is preferential treatment of female offenders a thing of the past? a multi-site study of gender, race, and imprisonment. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 11, 149–184.Google Scholar
  42. Teplin, L. (1984). Criminalizing mental disorder: the comparative arrest rate of the mentally ill. American Psychologist, 39, 794–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. United States Sentencing Commission (2011). 2011 Federal sentencing guidelines manual. Retrieved from
  44. United States Sentencing Commission. (2013). Variable codebook for individual offenders. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  45. Wahl, O. (2003). News media portrayal of mental illness: implications for public policy. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 1594–1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walker, S. (2011). Sense and nonsense about crime, drugs, and communities (7th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  47. Wilper, A. P., Woolhandler, S., Boyd, J. W., Lasser, K. E., McCormick, D., Bor, D. H., et al. (2009). The health and health care of US prisoners: results of a nationwide survey. American Journal of Public Health, 99(4), 666–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Winick, B. (2009). The supreme Court’s evolving death penalty jurisprudence: severe mental illness as the next frontier. Boston College Law Review, 50, 785–858.Google Scholar
  49. Wirth, J., & Bodenhausen, G. (2009). The role of gender in mental-illness stigma: a national experiment. Psychological Science, 20, 169–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Criminal Justice, College of Human EcologyEast Carolina UniversityGreenvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Criminal Justice, College of Health & Public AffairsUniversity of Central FloridaOrlandoFlorida

Personalised recommendations