This article examines how risk discourses carry specific gendered meanings within the context of women-centered correctional practices. Based on interviews with 52 women who served federal prison sentences in Canada, the author examines how abused women are constructed as violent and the discursive and practical implications of this construction. Feminist-informed victimization narratives merge with correctional risk discourses to govern criminalized women's relationships once they are released into the community. Correctional policy and programming encourages self-regulatory strategies that constitute abused women as at risk of being violent in the context of relationships.
Baker, T. , & Simon, J. (2002). Embracing risk. In T. Baker & J. Simon (Eds.), Embracing risk: The changing culture of insurance and responsibility (pp. 1-25). Chicago: University of Chicago Press . Bloom, B. , Owen, B. , & Covington, S. (2003). Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders: Gender responsive strategies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections .
2.
Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies. (2003). Submission of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies (CAEFS) to the Canadian Human Rights Commission for the Special Report on the discrimination on the basis of sex, race and disability faced by federally sentenced women. Retrieved June 19, 2006, from http://www.elizabethfry.ca/submissn/specialr/1.htm
3.
Comack, E. (1996). Women in trouble. Halifax, Canada: Fernwood .
4.
Comack, E. (2006). The feminist engagement with criminology. In G. Balfour & E. Comack (Eds.), Criminalizing women (pp. 22-55). Halifax , Canada: Fernwood .
5.
Correctional Service of Canada. (2006a). Correctional corrections activities. Retrieved June 19, 2006 , from http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/faits/fac03-10_e.shtml
6.
Correctional Service of Canada. (2006b). Risk management. Retrieved June 19, 2006, from http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/faits/fac03-08_e.shtml
7.
Correctional Service of Canada. (2006c). Ten year status report. Ten-year status report on women's corrections, 1996-2006 . Retrieved August 19, 2006, from http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/prgrm/fsw/wos24/index_e.shtml
8.
Cruikshank, B. (1996). Revolutions within: Self-government and self-esteem . In A. Barry , T. Osborne , & N. Rose (Eds.), Foucault and political reason: Liberalism, neo-liberalism and rationalities of government (pp. 231-251). Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
9.
Faith, K. (1999). Transformative justice versus re-entrenched correctionalism: The Canadian experience. In S. Cook & S. Davies (Eds.), Harsh punishment: International experiences of women's imprisonment (pp. 99-122). Boston : Northeastern University Press .
10.
Fortin, D. (2004). A correctional programming strategy for women. Forum on Corrections Research. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada . Retrieved February 5, 2005 , from http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/
11.
Fox, K. ( 2001). Self-change and resistance in prison. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Institutional selves: Troubled identities in a postmodern world (pp. 176-192). Oxford , UK: Oxford University Press .
12.
Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
13.
Gilfus, M. (2002). Women's experiences of abuse as a risk factor for incarceration. Retrieved March 12, 2004, from http://www.vaw.umn.edu/
14.
Haney, L. (2004). Introduction: Gender, welfare, and states of punishment . Social Politics, 11(3), 333-362 .
15.
Hannah-Moffat, K. (2001). Punishment in disguise. Penal governance and federal imprisonment of women in Canada. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press .
16.
Hannah-Moffat, K. (2004). Losing ground: Gendered knowledges, parole risk, and responsibility . Social Politics, 11(3), 363-385 .
17.
Hannah-Moffat, K. , & Shaw, M. (Eds.). (2000). An ideal prison? Critical essays on women's imprisonment in Canada. Halifax, Canada: Fernwood .
18.
Hudson, B. (2002). Gender issues in penal policy and penal theory . In P. Carlen (Ed.), Women and punishment: The struggle for justice (pp. 21-46). Cullompton , UK: Willan .
19.
Jordan, J. (1997). A relational perspective for understanding women's development. In J. Jordan (Ed.), Women's growth in diversity: More writings from the Stone Center (pp. 9-24). New York: Guilford .
20.
Kemshall, H. (2002). Effective practice in probation: An example of “advanced liberal” responsibilisation . The Howard Journal, 41(1), 41-58 .
21.
Kendall, K. (2002). Time to think again about cognitive-behavioural programs. In P. Carlen (Ed.), Women and punishment: The struggle for justice (pp. 182-198). Collompton , UK: Willan .
22.
Laishes, J. (2002). The 2002 mental health strategy for female offenders . Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, Mental Health, Health Services .
23.
McCorkel, J. (2003). Embodied surveillance and the gendering of punishment . Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 32(1), 41-76 .
24.
McCorkel, J. (2004). Criminally dependent? Gender, punishment, and the rhetoric of welfare reform . Social Politics, 11(3), 386-410 .
25.
O'Malley, P. (1996). Risk and responsibility. In A. Barry , T. Osborne , & N. Rose (Eds.), Foucault and political reason: Liberalism, neo-liberalism and rationalities of government (pp. 189-207). Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
26.
Owen, B. (1998). “In the mix”: Struggle and survival in a women's prison. Albany: State University of New York Press .
27.
Pollack, S. (2000a). Dependency discourse as social control. In K. Hannah-Moffat & M. Shaw (Eds.), An ideal prison? Critical essays on Canadian women's imprisonment (pp. 72-81). Halifax , Canada: Fernwood .
28.
Pollack, S. (2000b). Reconceptualizing women's agency and empowerment: Challenges to self-esteem discourse and women's lawbreaking . Women & Criminal Justice, 12(1), 75-89 .
29.
Pollack, S. , & Kendall, K. (2005). “ Taming the shrew”: Regulating prisoners through “women-centred” mental health programming. Critical Criminology: AnInternational Journal, 13(1), 71-87 .
30.
Richie, B. (1996). Compelled to crime: The gender entrapment of battered Black women. New York: Routledge .
31.
Richie, B. (2001). Challenges incarcerated women face as they return to their communities: Findings from life history interviews . Crime & Delinquency, 47(3), 368-389 .
32.
Rose, N. (1996). The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government . Economy and Society, 25(3), 327-356 .
33.
Rose, N. (2000). Government and control . British Journal of Criminology, 40, 321-339 .
34.
Rose, N. (2002). At risk of madness. In T. Baker & J. Simon (Eds.), Embracing risk: The changing culture of insurance and responsibility (pp. 209-237). Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
35.
Roth, R. (2004). Searching for the state: Who governs prisoners' reproductive rights?Social Politics, 11(3), 411-438 .
36.
Silver, E. , & Miller, L.L. (2002). A cautionary note on the use of actuarial risk assessment tools for social control . Crime & Delinquency , 48(1), 138-161 .
37.
Smith, D. (1987). The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press .
38.
Snider, L. (2003). Constituting the punishable woman: Atavistic man incarcerates postmodern woman . British Journal of Criminology , 43, 354-378 .
39.
Strauss, A. , & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage .
40.
Sudbury, J. (2005). Introduction: Feminist critiques, transnational landscapes, abolitionist visions. In J. Sudbury (Ed.), Global lockdown: Race, gender, and the prison-industrial complex (pp. xi-xxviii). New York: Routledge .
41.
Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women. ( 1990). Report of the Task Force on Federally Sentenced Women—Creating choices. Ottawa , Canada: Ministry of the Solicitor General .
