The society regards justice in terms of proportionality, the fit between the consequence and the offense, equal treatment, imposition of punishments without regard to personal characteristics such as gender, social class, or race. Yet, there is the view of justice in the second sense considering gender characteristics in terms of program and service provision (Heilbrun, et al, 2008). This essay provides an outlook in the inmate gender programs and services. Over the past few years, observers and players in the justice field have provided comparisons in the conditions under which inmates are confined basing on gender. They have come to concurring conclusions that the female programs and services are different and inferior to the services and programs in male correctional facilities. Despite the public popular belief that the female inmates have less rigid living conditions, the actual sense is that they have high security levels and strict discipline. Since the beginning of the prison system, there has been differential and less adequate care for the female inmates. However, the incarcerated women have begun to challenge the state in courts. Most of the cases regard to the treatment and conditions of the male and female prisons with claims of contravening the Fourteenth Amendment regarding the Equal rights clause.
Heilbrun, et al (2008) argue that the difference between the programs and the services emanate from the fact that there are differences between the gender issues. For instance, prison wardens confess that the female inmates have multiple issues such as children issues, drug withdrawal, and mental health issues, among others. Prison wardens claim that the female inmates are extremely needy; hence, forces the services and the programs to differ. The fact that men and women function differently emotionally, physiologically, physically, and mentally forces the programs to differ according to gender. The respond of men and women to stress differ with men tending to externalize stress and become physically aggressive and develop combative behavior, while women tend to internalize stress; hence, developing behavior that results to self-harm, suicide attempts, among others. These, among other factors results in disparities between the services and programs provided to the inmates. The programs and services depend upon the challenges ensued in supervision of the cross-gendered populations.
Over the past years, programs and services for the female inmates have been geared towards harm avoidance or criminogenic needs, which constitute the risk management policy. However, the current system constitutes of the rehabilitation program, which moves away from the criminogenic needs of the female offenders and emphasizes on enhancing the capabilities of the offenders to live the normal lives. Unlike the male offenders’ program, the enhancement program constitutes of the issues affecting the female inmates such as sexual and physical abuse, families, and children, life skills, and mental health (Crittenden, 2013). The program aims at reduction of female inmate recidivism and improvement of the wellbeing of the female inmates.
According to Rafter (1989), the theories that minimize and those that exaggerate the differences between the male and the female programs in correctional facilities are rooted in feminist ideologies. Most of the theories exaggerating the tension present the female as the inferior, while the theories that minimize the differences present symmetry and equivalence between the genders and obscures the discrepancies in value and power. Nevertheless, there are many foundations in arguments within the theoretical overview, which have real world implications demanding complicated solutions. In the United States of America, research indicates that the programs designed for women are lenient in terms of severity of the offences despite the Supreme Court having provided guidelines requiring male and female offenders with the same crime to receive equal sentences.
References
Rafter, N. H. (1989). Gender and Justice. The American Prison: Law, society and policy, 4(2), 89-109.
Heilbrun, K., DeMatteo, D., Fretz, R., Erickson, J., Yasuhara, K., & Anumba, N. (2008). How "Specific" Are Gender-Specific Rehabilitation Needs? An Empirical Analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(11), 1382-1397.
Crittenden, C. A. (2013, January 1). Gender and Programming: A Comparison of Program Availability and Participation in U.S. Prisons for Men and Women. Scholar Commons. Retrieved December 24, 2013, from http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/609/
