Dignity for Incarcerated Women Act Benefits Us All
The “Dignity for Incarcerated Women Act of 2017” (Dignity Act), which improves the treatment of federal prisoners who are primary caretaker parents,…
October 31, 2017 at 11:25 AM
5 minute read
The “Dignity for Incarcerated Women Act of 2017” (Dignity Act), which improves the treatment of federal prisoners who are primary caretaker parents, particularly women, is a much-needed, long overdue federal prison reform bill.
Until 2016, there has been little research on or attention given to the specific needs of incarcerated women. In the national dialogue concerning prison reform, virtually all research and all new reforms and programs that address the growing jail populations in the U.S., such as assessment tools, pretrial supervision and probation programs, are based on men's experience in jail. Understanding and addressing women's needs is particularly important because the increase of women being jailed in the U.S. has far exceeded the increase of male prisoners, and the existing system has failed to meet their needs.
A 2016 study by Vera Institute of Justice focused on women in prison. Since 1980, the number of women in U.S. jails has increased by more than 700 percent, which is much greater than that of men. Studies show women enter the prison system in a more vulnerable and disadvantaged position than men. Women are more economically disadvantaged in general than men and are less likely to be able to afford the bail, fines and fees that often trap them in jail or lead them back to jail following their release. Like their male counterparts, the majority of women in jail are black and Hispanic. Unlike men, however, nearly half of all single black and Hispanic American women have zero or negative net wealth. A greater percentage of women are using drugs, unemployed or receiving public assistance at the time of arrest.
Unlike men, the majority of women in jail are charged with lower-level offenses, mostly nonviolent property and drug-related crimes, and “public order” offenses that include prostitution. According to the report, 86 percent of women in jail are victims of past sexual violence, which is about four times the rate of all women in the U.S., and 77 percent are victims of partner violence. Other studies showed that a quarter of women in state prison were sexually abused as children. While incarcerated, women remain at a disadvantage for sexual abuse. They constitute most of the victims of staff-on-inmate sexual assault. Almost half of women in jail suffer from mental health problems. Approximately one-third of all women in jail have a serious mental illness, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or major depression, more than twice the rate for incarcerated men and about six times more than women in general.
Nearly eight out of 10 of female prisoners are mothers, most with children under age 18. Unlike their male counterparts, the majority of these women are single parents. In the federal system, incarcerated women can be shipped hundreds of miles away from their children. It is not uncommon for incarcerated mothers to be forced to choose between using any money they have to call home to speak with their children and buying necessities, such as sanitary products.
The Dignity Act requires the Bureau of Prisons, among other things, to place a prisoner who has children in a prison as close to the children as possible, to expand visitation rights between primary caregiver parents and their families, including no less than six visits per week with as many as five adult visits and an unlimited number of children per visit and permits physical contact with those visitors. The act prohibits BOP from placing a pregnant prisoner (or one in post-partum recovery) in segregated housing and from shackling or restraining them. It directs BOP to provide trauma-informed care and officers trained to identify prisoners with trauma and make proper referrals and requires certain health care products to be available at no cost, including tampons, sanitary napkins, soap, shampoo, body lotion, toothpaste and toothbrushes. It also prohibits officers from conducting a strip search of an opposite-sex prisoner or entering a restroom reserved for the opposite-sex prisoners.
Connecticut has been a leader in prison reform and Gov. Dannel Malloy's initiatives have helped curb incarceration. Since 2011, there are fewer prisoners and fewer prisons in Connecticut. The state's male prison population has decreased by about 20 percent, but the female prisoner population has declined by only 7 percent.
Connecticut also has its own problems with meeting the needs of incarcerated women. For example, in 2016, women inmates at York, which is the only women's prison operated by the state, were more likely than men at other facilities to be unsentenced. In 2015, 36 percent of the women at York were detained but unsentenced, compared with 24 percent of men at all other facilities. One in six women at York were held for violations of probation or some other form of conditional discharge, as compared to one in nine men. One study concluded the median bond amount for violation of probation for women is about $25,250 and for possession of narcotics it is $20,000. Twenty-five percent of women charged with possession face a bond of more than $75,000. Many Connecticut simply women do not have the money to be released on bond.
Understanding the specific needs of female prisoners leads to more effective alternatives that build better futures for women and their families. Addressing those needs allows female prisoners and their families to be treated with dignity and basic support. The Dignity Act is a critical step toward addressing the needs of women federal prisoners, reducing recidivism and increasing community safety. Of note, BOP recently decided to provide sanitary products to female inmates free of charge, implementing one of the reforms outlined in the Dignity Act. Connecticut should continue to be a leader in prison reform and specifically in understanding and addressing the needs of female state prisoners.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readTrump Mulls Big Changes to Banking Regulation, Unsettling the Industry
Trending Stories
- 1Georgia Supreme Court Honoring Troutman Pepper Partner, Former Chief Justice
- 2Insurer Not Required to Cover $29M Wrongful Death Judgment, Appeals Court Rules
- 3Slideshow: Jewish Bar Association of Georgia Marks 1st Year With Hanukkah Party
- 4Holland & Knight Launches Export Control Disputes and Advocacy Team
- 5Blake Lively's claims that movie co-star launched smear campaign gets support in publicist's suit
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250