Gender Matters: Using an Ecological Lens to Understand Female Crime and Disruptive Behavior

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter will examine how the response of the criminal and juvenile justice system both reflects and perpetuates gender-based perceptions of female offenders. Toward this aim, alternative ways of defining the social problem of female crime will be advanced. These include person-centered, person-mediated, and ecological social problem definitions. Qualitative interviews with 19 girls involved in the juvenile justice system will be used to further describe the similarities, distinctions, and implications of each type of problem definition. The importance of the ecological level of analysis in particular is underscored, with an emphasis on the gendered response of the justice system as a key element of incorporating an ecological lens.

Keywords

Burning Income Stein Defend Meso 

References

  1. Anderson, K. L. (2005). Theorizing gender in intimate partner violence research. Sex Roles, 52, 853–865. doi: 10.1007/s11199-005-4204-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651–680. doi: 10.1016/S1359-1789(01)00061-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2004). Women offenders and the gendered effects of public policy. The Review of Policy Research, 1, 31–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.2004.00056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, L. M., Chesney-Lind, M., & Stein, N. (2007). Patriarchy matters: Toward a gendered theory of teen violence and victimization. Violence Against Women, 13, 1249–1273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bush-Baskette, S. (2000). War on drugs and the incarceration of mothers. Journal of Drug Issues, 30, 919–928.Google Scholar
  7. Bush-Baskette, S. (2004). The war on drugs and the incarceration of mothers. In P. J. Schram & B. Koons-Witt (Eds.), Gendered (in)justice: Theory and practice in feminist criminology. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  8. Caplan, N., & Nelson, S. D. (1973). On being useful: The nature and consequences of psychological research on social problems. American Psychologist, 28, 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chesney-Lind, M. (2002). Criminalizing victimization: The unintended consequences of pro-arrest policies for girls and women. Criminology and Public Policy, 2, 81–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9133.2002.tb00108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chesney-Lind, M., & Pasko, L. (2004). Girls, women, and crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Chesney-Lind, M., & Shelden, R. G. (2004). Girls, delinquency, and juvenile justice. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
  12. DeLeon-Granados, W., Wells, W., & Binsbacher, R. (2006). Arresting developments: Trends in female arrests for domestic violence and proposed explanations. Violence Against Women, 12, 355–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ehrensaft, M. K., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2004). Clinically abusive relationships in an unselected birth cohort: Men’s and women’s participation and developmental antecedents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113, 258–270. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.113.2.258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feder, L., & Henning, K. (2005). A comparison of male and female dually arrested domestic violence offenders. Violence and Victims, 20, 153–171. doi: 10.1891/vivi.2005.20.2.153.Google Scholar
  16. Feldman-Schorrig, S. P., & McDonald, J. J. (1992). The role of forensic psychiatry in the defense of sexual harassment cases. The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 20, 5–33.Google Scholar
  17. Fernandez, L. K. (2007). Battered women’s syndrome. The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, 8, 235.Google Scholar
  18. Frye, M. (1995). Oppression. In M. L. Anderson & P. Hill Collins (Eds.), Race, class, and gender (pp. 1–16). New York, NY: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  19. Glaser, D. (2000). Child abuse and neglect and the brain—A review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 97–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hochhausen, N. M., Lorenz, A. R., & Newman, J. P. (2002). Specifying the impulsivity of female inmates with borderline personality disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111, 495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Javdani, S. (2006). Challenging the dominant narrative surrounding female juvenile delinquency: Toward a new problem definition. The Community Psychologist, 36, 36–39.Google Scholar
  22. Javdani, S., Sadeh, N., & Verona, E. (2011). Gendered Social Forces: An examination of the impact of the justice systems’ response on women and girls’ criminal trajectories. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17, 161–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kruttschnitt, C. (1996). Contributions of quantitative methods to the study of gender and crime, or bootstrapping our way into the theoretical thicket. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 12, 135–161. doi: 10.1007/BF02354413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lenssen, S. A. M., Doreleijers, T. A. H., van Dijk, M. E., & Hartman, C. A. (2000). Girls in detention: What are their characteristics? A project to explore and document the character of this target group and the significant ways in which it differs from one consisting of boys. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 287–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lorber, J. (1994). Paradoxes of gender. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Mauer, M., Potler, C., & Wolf, R. (1999). Gender and justice: Women, drugs, and sentencing policy. Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project.Google Scholar
  27. McCabe, K., Lansing, A. E., Garland, A., & Hough, R. (2002). Gender differences in psychopathology, functional impairment, and familial risk factors among adjudicated delinquents. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 41, 860–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miller, S. (2001). The paradox of women arrested for domestic violence: Criminal justice professionals and service providers respond. Violence Against Women, 7, 1–24. doi: 10.1177/10778010122183900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Miller, J. (2008). Getting played: African American girls, urban inequality, and gendered violence. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  30. Miller, S. L., & Meloy, M. L. (2006). Women’s use of force: Voices of women arrested for domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12, 89–115. doi: 10.1177/1077801205277356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Rutter, M., & Silva, P. A. (2001). Sex differences in antisocial behavior: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and violence in the Dunedin longitudinal study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Muftic, L. R., & Bouffard, J. A. (2007). Evaluation of gender differences in the implementation and impact of a comprehensive approach to domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 13, 46–49. doi: 10.1177/1077801206295131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mullis, R. L., Cornille, T. A., Mullis, A. K., & Huber, J. (2004). Female juvenile offending: a review of characteristics and contexts. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 13, 205–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nagel, I. H., & Johnson, B. L. (2004). The role of gender in a structured sentencing system: Equal treatment, policy choices, and the sentencing of female offenders. In P. J. Schram & B. Koons-Witt (Eds.), Gendered (in)justice: Theory and practice in feminist criminology. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  35. Odgers, C. L., & Moretti, M. M. (2002). Aggressive and disruptive girls: Research update and challenges. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 1, 103–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pollock, J. M., & Davis, S. M. (2005). The continuing myth of the violent female offender. Criminal Justice Review, 30, 5–29. doi: 10.1177/0734016805275378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rhee, S. H., & Waldman, I. D. (2002). Genetic and environmental influences on antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis of twin and adoption studies. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 490–529. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.3.490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ryan, W. (1972). The art of savage discovery: How to blame the victim. In Blaming the victim (pp. 3–30). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  39. Schur, E. M. (1983). Labeling women deviant: Gender, stigma, and social control. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Snyder, H. N. (2005). OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin: Juvenile Arrests 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  41. Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  42. Stacey, J., & Thorne, B. (1985). The missing feminist revolution in sociology. Social Problems, 32, 301–316. doi: 10.1525/sp.%201985.32.4.03a00010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tubman, J. G., Montgomery, M. J., Gil, A. G., & Wagner, E. F. (2004). Abuse experiences in a community sample of young adults: Relations with psychiatric disorders, sexual risk behaviors, and sexually transmitted diseases. American Journal of Community Psychology, 34, 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wasco, S., & Bond, M. A. (2010). The treatment of gender in community psychology research. In J. Chrisler & D. McCreary (Eds.), Handbook of gender research in psychology. New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1467-5_26.Google Scholar
  45. Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699–727. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zorza, J., & Woods, L. (1994). Mandatory arrest: Problems and possibilities. New York: National Center on Women and Family Law.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human DevelopmentNew York UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations