LIFE IN PRISON

Female Inmates’ Adaptation and/or Subscription to Inmate Code (prisionization)

PRISIONIZATION: “the taking on, in greater or lesser degree, of the folkways, mores,

customs and general culture of the penitentiary.” – Donald Clemmer

The Invisible Criminal Historical implications

Gender was secondary Imprisonment followed male guidelines Different type of care than male convicts

Imprisoned and then forgotten No programs

No medical attention No supervision Few opportunities to work

Today there is more parity in policy but is there equality?

PRISON CULTURE

Subjugation Institutionally paternalistic Systematically repressive/arbitrary Symbolizes oppressive authority Intensifies powerlessness Strips away identity Dysfunctional environment

PAINS OF IMPRISONMENT

Separation from family Freedom of choice and activity limited Apprehension Stigma Lack of experience

Ward & Kassebaum, 1964

FOUR RESPONSES TO PAINS OF IMPRISIONMENT

DEATH INSTITUTIONALIZATION SELF-MUTILATION MADNESS

INSTITUTION EFFECTS

Below quality of men’s prisons Provide fewer programs/reinforce traditional roles Less access to lawyers & outside contacts Unspecialized prison More severe impact Experience two emotions

Surprise Fear

Look to staff Information Material goods

INSTITUTION EFFECTS (cont)

Inmate Code Not as salient for females as for male prisoners

Reaction to deprivation Identity as women Internalization of delinquent subcultures

Importation vs. deprivation: direct effect on subscription to code Importation: criminal history and personal characteristics Deprivation: situational or prison-specific variables

Low subscription End of term ??? 1st arrest after age 25

High subscription Middle of sentence ??? Younger and urban inmates Prior imprisonments More serious convictions (verbally) Married Short-timers/early phase End of term???

INSTITUTION EFFECTS (cont) Also…

Low subscription indicated by little role playing Merchants Politicians Gorilla

Reflects male needs for status, independence, and masculine self-image

Less predatory inmate population More like medium security men’s prison Less tense Less violent

Subculture: Men vs Women Men’s exist to protect from each other Neutralize rejection Emotional support

Gender Women experience incarceration differently

Likely to be rule-breakers Gender-based frameworks Less social capital Subverts mother-child bond Do not maintain group solidarity

Informing on others characteristic Not relevant for women

Roles differentiated along sexual lines Emotional/ manipulative coping strategies

Dramatically different from men’s Perpetuate gender stereotypes inside Engage in self-aggression

Suicide Self-mutilation

Seen as less respectful to authority Willing to argue

Written up twice as much as men For less serious infraction

OTHER OBSERVATIONS

Jenson and Jones Examines prisonization during 1970s

Studies career phase No issue of overcrowing addressed Did not consider “other” impact of “public institutions”

Social services experiences Foster care Welfare recipients

Continue to use male oriented questions Women’s need’s not considered

McCorkel’s article suggests View of women prisoners have changed

Redefining of dependency Marriage of welfare and criminal justice policies- maybe

more to come Reform efforts replaced with punishment

Different internal and external pressure for change Solution to overcrowding Replace penal paternalism

Made prisonlike Treat women like men – masculine

More punitive

CONCLUSION

Inmates tend to undergo some degree of

prisonization irrespective of race, education,

urban-nonurban status, prior prison experience,legal status and offense. (Jensen & Jones, 1976)

However, the deceptive nature of women’s

prisons… while subtle, is stronger than in men’s institutions. (Chapter 1, p.20)