Introduction
The research done in criminology relies much on male criminals while women and crime has been limited more specifically in the theories of criminal behavior, issues of arrest, trial, prosecution and sentencing to create criminal policies. The policies relied upon in the criminology process are perceived to be gender biased. Research has found that the women offenders’ numbers are increasing with these likely to receive lenity from the system out of research done on treatment of women offenders. However, the need for consideration of the gender differences in crime while at the same time ensuring gender, socio-economic and race neutrality is a difficult process for policy makers. Women offenders face issues of pregnancy, sole parenting roles and responsibilities, the likelihood that they were coerced into crime, among other gender issues of treatment, punishment and offenses. It is worth appreciating that women offenders have their own issues and seek to address them to establish their relevance in the process of criminology for changes to be made.
Issues and Characteristics of Women Offenders
Although the psychological or emotional condition of the offender and his or her role in the offense creates a dilemma in criminal policy interpretation, authorities are of the opinion that these issues are more relevant to the women offenders than to their male counterparts (Nagel & Johnson, 1994). The women offenders are faced by sex stereotyped assumptions regarding the nature of crime committed. For example, offenses that are presumed more gender related such as child abandonment or assault, women offenders are presumed to have committed a higher rime and more harsh judgment is subjected to them. This predominant role of women in care giving raises issues of pregnancy and parenting. The commission guidelines are silent on pregnancy and for neutrality have termed it as usual and that consideration for it would encourage women offenders to get pregnant in the process of carrying out crime (Nagel & Johnson, 1994). The justification given is that pregnancy is not permanent, does not incapacitate one’s ability to commit crime while it cannot be considered over personal responsibility. However, the need for consideration of pregnancy where there is still no absolute leniency as to encourage crime is proposed in terms of conditions in the prison, mitigation of the sentence or increasing the duration waiting for sentence to allow birth.
The issue of sole parenting has been of concern even as statistics show an increasing number of women offenders are single parents although the commission guidelines do not consider it as ground sufficient enough to warrant special consideration (Arrigo, 2006). Sole parenting for women requires the consideration of their children with the need for mitigated sentence or have facilities provided for their children in the prison vicinity. Further, the women offenders with children are faced with the requirement of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 which terminates their parental rights once their children following the imprisonment of their mothers, have been in foster care for fifteen or more of 24 months (Levinson, 2002). The women offenders without children face the issue of a longer sentence when children are considered in judgments (Nagel & Johnson, 1994). Another issue facing women offenders is health and well being where they receive victimization through sexual, emotional and physical abuse, the likelihood of having been coerced into crime, substance abuse, poor nutrition and lack of employment since majority of women offenders have been found to be less educated (Van Wormer, 2010).
Offenses Committed
Levinson (2002) suggests that women offenders are more convicted of property and drug crimes though they range in minor nature with the classification of main women offences as larceny, drug possession, theft, assault and prostitution. Some analysts argue that though the percentage of crimes committed by women is minimal, the amount is alarming even as the number of women offenders arrested increases, the percentage of involvement in violent crime and the involvement of young women rises. The justification to some extent is that female offenders can engage in any type of crime especially when they realize there is considerations for special treatment for them or the crimes that could not be easily associated with women (Arrigo, 2006). Van Wormer (2010) asserts that female offenders are less likely to commit crimes of violence on their own. She points out that for robbery, women offenders target weak women while they use sex as a strategy to rob men. Murder crimes are rare for women as Van Wormer (2010) points out although when committed, women offenders target their intimate victims and family members.
Nagel and Johnson (1994) argue that women offenders are more engaged in drug related crimes which they suggest is due to the perceived leniency towards them. The offenses of embezzlement are high among women as Levinson (2002) assert such as petty and major thefts, shop lifting among others due to the responsibilities on women for their families, poverty while such crimes do not require any kind of financial investment or planning. Larceny also dominates women offenders but sexual offenses such as prostitution are high even as arrests for such crimes rises (Levinson, 2002).
Treatment of Women Offenders
Scholars and researchers are of different opinions regarding the treatment of women offenders. While some argue that women are accorded leniency by the system (Nagel & Johnson, 1994), others believe that women receive harsher treatment due to societal stereotypes on gender and as a punishment for sexual misbehaviors (Van Wormer, 2010), while others still believe the system is neutral to all gender (Arrigo, 2006). The question of the treatment of women offenders poses as relevant even in the increase in the number of women offenders and the category of crimes they engage in. The theories of criminology have tended to focus on men while studies on women have been based on biological and physiological elements with claims for intervention measures on women offenders while others still believe that women offenders have more potential for hiding crime than men hence most are not arrested but treated as not posing much threat compared to the males (Arrigo, 2006). These researchers argue that women are manipulative yet pose as passive hence are treated with a much less sentence. They argue that women offenders do engage in much more crime than presented but overlooked hence not many are arrested.
The research which provides that women are treated more harshly than men, assert that it is due to their inability to fit in the normal norms of femininity and stereotypes expectations (Van Wormer, 2010). The arguments for this is the double deviance treatment where women are not only perceived to have broken the law, but also fallen short of their responsibilities as females due to the subjective categorization of women as good or bad. Women offenders are also perceived to have increased their crime due to added responsibilities on them, while it is perceived that the tendency of concentrating on small crimes which women are more likely to commit is an unfair treatment for women offenders (Levinson, 2002). Further, the crimes committed by women offenders are based on pathological and individual reasons while for men, their criminality if based on agency presenting a different treatment between the genders (Van Wormer, 2010). Women offenders especially those in custody face abuses sexually, emotionally and physically to a great extent (Nagel & Johnson, 1994). Further, women offenders do receive discrimination and negative attitude from society due to the stereotypes that associate them with care giving (Van Wormer, 2010). Additionally, some of the crimes they commit rise leniency and sympathy especially where children and parental responsibilities or coercions was the reason for the crime. However, some crimes are perceived as demeaning and morally wrong such as prostitution and child abandonment (Levinson, 2002).
Punishment Offered to Women Offenders
While society acknowledges and associates women with care giving and as passive and weak, some still perceive women as manipulative and opportunistic (Nagel & Johnson, 1994). The punishments offered to women offenders depend on the crime committed. Since the reasons for the criminality of women offenders is on pathological and individual basis, women offenders are faced with gender stereotypes of double deviance treatment where women are not only perceived to have broken the law, but also fallen short of their responsibilities as females and hence offered harsher punishments for their behaviors (Van Wormer, 2010). However, where women are perceived to have been coerced into crime, punitive measures are less harsh.
Specific crimes are accorded different punishment measures ranging from fines, imprisonment, and capital punishment differing from nations with some inflicting higher gender charges on women offenders (Levinson, 2002). Judgments sometimes consider issues such as family in terms of children and the role of the offender in the crime. In this case, where the woman plays a key role in the crime, punishment is higher unlike in being more passive. Feminists and advocates for gender consideration in the criminal process, argue against punishment imposed on women offenders such as the denial of the custody of their children and separation from them, the long term confining of women offenders in drug related offenses for rehabilitation, the harsh judgments for crimes perceived to be of lesser impact, lack of consideration for pregnancy and vulnerability as well as the demeaning nature of the criminal process (Levinson, 2002).
Summary
The women offenders pose relevant concern even with the increases in their numbers and in crimes they engage in. The gender issues relating to criminology are perceived to be more male oriented where female characteristics and issues are perceived to be more pathological and individual. Some researchers argue that the criminology process needs to be neutral since they assert that women are treated more leniently due to gender stereotypes and perceptions. Others still believe that women offenders are accorded harsher treatments due to their lack of fitting in the femininity roles and the societal expectations and subjective judgments. It is worth appreciating that gender differences are significant enough and though neutrality is the motivation; considerations have to be done for objectivity and fairness. The treatment and punishment of women offenders has been perceived to be more gender biased and this depends on the cultural orientation of the system. In all this analysis, it is worth to note that adjustments need not to create loopholes and excuses for commitment of crime.
Conclusion
This paper has evaluated the concept of women offenders in relation to their unique issue and characteristics, the offenses associated with them, the treatment accorded to them as well as the measures of punishment for their offenses. Emphasis has been made on the need for gender consideration in the criminology process.
Reference List
Arrigo, B. (2006). Criminal Behavior: A Systems Approach. New York: Prentice Hall Publications.
Levinson, D. (2002). Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment. New Bury Park: Sage Publications.
Nagel, I., & Johnson, B. (1994). The Role of Gender in a Structured Sentencing System: Equal Treatment, Policy Choices, and the Sentencing of Female Offenders under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 85(1), 181-221.
Van Wormer, K. (2010). Working with Female Offenders: A Gender Sensitive Approach. New York: John Wiley and Sons Publications.