Vengeful Equity
This paper will address the issues surrounding the criminal incarceration of women in American society through the discussion of the views of Meda Chesney-Lind in her 1997 paper "Vengeful Equity: Sentencing Women to Prison." It will present critical reasons of incarceration dealing with the onset of the "Rockefeller Laws," problems with translation, and results. In the paper I will also present solutions of Chesney-Lind as well as my own opinion for possible options other then common prison sentencing as it is practiced today. The United States in recent times has seen the sudden rise of females in our prison systems. This is most solely due to the introduction of the Rockefeller Laws and its guidelines of mandatory minimum sentencing of criminals for specified crimes. The law was designed to reduce bias in the ever volatile world of race relations and eliminate harsher sentencing for equal crimes based on color. In the female world, consideration of possible mitigating circumstances surrounding an individuals' crime has been taken away from the presiding judge's discretion. Important factors are not allowed to enter in the decision process such as why the crime was committed and by who.
Thus, without the proper attention to these issues, a large portion of the inmates will most likely return to their old lifestyle and ultimately return to the prison system to be failed again. Their hands are tied to levy mandatory sentences for even first time offenders. The proportion of women in state prisons for violent offences declined from 48. Providing group therapy for those who abused relatives and/or their loved ones. I do not know of any man who goes to a doctors office hoping to get a hands on anal probe to check his prostate gland. Women, for the most part, fall into crime for the same three reasons as men; Drugs, poverty, and greed. Some of these women are imprisoned for property crimes, such as stealing for their drug habit, or often these women have been busted for drug trafficking, often referred to as drug mules (individuals caught moving drugs for someone else). I do not believe any of these topics creates a stellar difference between male and female needs with correction. I also present the question, "Are you not ultimately responsible for your own actions?" If you can not control these actions, regardless of the reason why, you are a threat to society, therefore in need of correction. I find it a terrible shame that men are lumped together with only the benefit of a few psychology behavioral surveys damning them. Stating the magnitude of women who are previously sexually abused and their inability to mentally manage a strip search is just silly. Chesney-Lind states that every dollar spent locking up women could be better spent on services that would prevent women from resorting to crime. The ever annoying friction (at least in my head) between prison as correction or punishment, or both must be further addressed by the goevernments. To attempt to regulate this dilemma overall, I would suggest that no contact of any child is to be given to the inmate during the term of the sentence.
Common topics in this essay:
Rockefeller Laws,
Bloom Stienhart,
Idiot Chesney-Lind's,
Half Chesney-Lind's,
,
Women Prison,
idiot women,
Meda Chesney-Lind,
vengeful equity sentencing,
Equity Sentencing,
Sentencing Women,
Vengeful Equity,
sentencing women prison,
paper vengeful,
women bars,
vengeful equity,
women prison,
sentencing women,
equity sentencing women,
rockefeller laws,
paper vengeful equity,
term sentence,
drug addiction,
halfway houses,
|
Acceptance Essays
