Drawing upon focal concerns and familial paternalism frameworks, we explore the effects of motherhood, various maternal indicators, and type of offense on prison sentences using official and self-report data on 419 incarcerated women in the United States. Results revealed that drug offenders were sentenced more leniently than other offenders, whereas mothers were not sentenced differently from women without children. Mothers who lived with their children received shorter prison terms than mothers who were absent prior to arrest. This study fills gaps in knowledge on discretion in punishment in light of growing rates of female imprisonment.
AlbonettiC. A. (1997). Sentencing under the federal sentencing guidelines: Effects of defendant characteristics, guilty pleas, and departures on sentence outcomes for drug offenses, 1991-1992. Law and Society Review, 31, 789-822.
2.
ArdittiJ. A. (2012). Parental incarceration and the family: Psychological and social effects of imprisonment on children, parents, and caregivers. New York: New York University Press.
3.
BarnesS. L.StringerE. C. (2014). Is motherhood important? Imprisoned women’s maternal experiences before and during confinement and their postrelease expectations. Feminist Criminology, 9, 3-23.
4.
BelknapJ. (2014). The invisible woman: Gender, crime, and justice (4th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
5.
BerryP. E.Smith-MahdiJ. (2006). Doing mothering behind bars: A qualitative study of incarcerated mothers. Journal of Crime and Justice, 29, 101-121.
6.
BickleG. S.PetersonR. D. (1991). The impact of gender-based family roles on criminal sentencing. Social Problems, 38, 372-394.
7.
BlackwellB. S.HolleranD.FinnM. A. (2008). The impact of the Pennsylvania sentencing guidelines on sex differences in sentencing. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 38, 372-394.
8.
BloomB.BrownM. (2011). Incarcerated women: Motherhood on the margins. In LawstonJ. M.LucasA. E. (Eds.), Razor wire women: Prisoners, activists, scholars, and artists (pp. 51-66). Albany: State University of New York Press.
9.
BontragerS.BarrickK.StupiE. (2013). Gender and sentencing: A meta-analysis of contemporary research. Journal of Gender Race & Justice, 16, 349-372.
10.
BrennanP. K. (2009). Race and sentencing outcomes among female drug offenders in North Carolina: An exploratory consideration of earlier case processing outcomes. Journal of Crime and Justice, 32, 77-115.
Chesney-LindM. (1995). Crime control and ethnic minorities: Legitimizing racial oppression by creating moral panics. In HawkinsD. F. (Ed.), Ethnicity, race and crime: Perspectives across time and place. Albany: State University of New York Press.
CullenF. T.JonsonC. L. (2011). Rehabilitation and treatment programs. In WilsonJ. Q.PetersiliaJ. (Eds.), Crime and public policy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
15.
DalyK. (1987a). Discrimination in the criminal courts: Family, gender, and the problem of equal treatment. Social Forces, 66, 152-175.
16.
DalyK. (1987b). Structure and practice of familial-based justice in a criminal court. Law & Society Review, 21, 267-290.
17.
DalyK. (1989). Neither conflict for labeling nor paternalism will suffice: Intersections of race, ethnicity, gender, and family in criminal court decisions. Crime & Delinquency, 35, 136-168.
18.
DalyK.BordtR. L. (1995). Sex effects and sentencing: An analysis of the statistical literature. Justice Quarterly, 12, 141-175.
19.
DalyK.TonryM. (1997). Gender, race, and sentencing. In TonryM. (Ed.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 22, pp. 201-252). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
20.
DoernerJ. K.DemuthS. (2010). The independent and joint effects of race/ethnicity, gender, and age on sentencing outcomes in US federal courts. Justice Quarterly, 27, 1-27.
21.
DoernerJ. K.DemuthS. (2014). Gender and sentencing in the federal courts are women treated more leniently?Criminal Justice Policy Review, 25, 242-269.
22.
DrakulichK. M.KirkE. M. (2015). Public opinion and criminal justice reform: Framing matters. Criminology & Public Policy, 15, 171-177.
23.
EmbryR.LyonsP. M. (2012). Sex-based sentencing discrepancies between male and female sex offenders. Feminist Criminology, 7, 146-162.
24.
FarnworthM.TeskeR. H.Jr. (1995). Gender differences in felony court processing: Three hypotheses of disparity. Women & Criminal Justice, 6, 23-44.
25.
FarrellA. (2004). Measuring judicial and prosecutorial discretion: Sex and race disparities in departures from the federal sentencing guidelines. Justice Research and Policy, 6, 45-78.
26.
FreiburgerT. L. (2010). The effects of gender, family status, and race on sentencing decisions. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 378-395.
27.
FreiburgerT. L. (2011). The impact of gender, offense type, and familial role on the decision to incarcerate. Social Justice Research, 24, 143-167.
28.
GentyP. (1995). Termination of parental rights among prisoners: A national perspective. In GabelK.JohnstonD. (Eds.), Children of incarcerated parents (pp. 167-182). New York, NY: Lexington Books.
29.
GlazeL. E.MaruschakL. M. (2008). Parents in prison and their minor children. Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
30.
GreeneS.HaneyC.HurtadoA. (2000). Cycles of pain: Risk factors in the lives of incarcerated mothers and their children. The Prison Journal, 80, 3-23.
31.
GriffinT.WooldredgeJ. (2006). Sex-based disparities in felony dispositions before versus after sentencing reform in Ohio. Criminology, 44, 893-923.
32.
HaganJ.DinovitzerR. (1999). Collateral consequences of imprisonment for children, communities, and prisoners. In TonryM.MorrisN. (Ed.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 26, pp. 121-162). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
33.
HanlonT. E.O’GradyK. E.Bennett-SearsT.CallamanJ. M. (2005). Incarcerated drug-abusing mothers: Their characteristics and vulnerability. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 31, 59-77.
34.
HarperR. L.HarperG. C.StockdaleJ. E. (2002). The role and sentencing of women in drug trafficking crime. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 7, 101-114.
35.
HerzogS.OregS. (2008). Chivalry and the moderating effect of ambivalent sexism: Individual differences in crime seriousness judgments. Law & Society Review, 42, 45-74.
36.
Koons-WittB. A. (2002). The effect of gender on the decision to incarcerate before and after the introduction of sentencing guidelines. Criminology, 40, 297-328.
37.
KruttschnittC. (1984). Sex and criminal court dispositions: The unresolved controversy. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 21, 213-232.
38.
KruttschnittC. (2010). The paradox of women’s imprisonment. Daedalus, 139, 32-42.
39.
KruttschnittC.GartnerR. (2003). Women’s imprisonment. In TonryM. (Ed.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 30, pp. 1-81). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
40.
KruttschnittC.GreenD. E. (1984). The sex-sanctioning issue: Is it history?American Sociological Review, 49, 541-551.
41.
KruttschnittC.McCarthyD. (1985). Familial social control and pretrial sanctions: Does sex really matter. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 76, 151-175.
42.
MaherL.DalyK. (1996). Women in the street-level drug economy: Continuity or change. Criminology, 34, 465-491.
43.
MartinM. E.HesselbrockM. N. (2001). Women prisoners’ mental health: Vulnerabilities, risks and resilience. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 34, 25-43.
44.
MillerJ.Carbone-LopezK. (2015). Beyond ‘doing gender’: Incorporating race, class, place, and life transitions into feminist drug research. Substance Use & Misuse, 50, 693-707.
45.
MumolaC. J. (2000). Incarcerated parents and their children (Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
46.
MustardD. B. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in sentencing: Evidence from the US federal courts. Journal of Law and Economics, 44, 285-314.
47.
PaternosterR.BrameR.MazerolleP.PiqueroA. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859-866.
48.
PierceM. B. (2013). Examining the impact of familial paternalism on the sentencing decision: Gender leniency or legitimate judicial consideration? In RussellB. (Ed.), Perceptions of female offenders (pp. 181-190). New York, NY: Springer.
49.
PierceM. B.FreiburgerT. L. (2011). Assessing the influence of familial paternalism on child neglect sentencing decisions. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 421-433.
50.
RaederM. S. (2006). Gender-related issues in a Post-Booker federal guidelines world. McGeorge Law Review, 37, 691-756.
51.
RobbinsC. A.MartinS. S.SurrattH. L. (2009). Substance abuse treatment, anticipated maternal roles, and reentry success of drug-involved women prisoners. Crime & Delinquency, 55, 388-411.
52.
RodriguezN. (2016). Bridging the gap between research and practice: The role of science in addressing the effects of incarceration on family life. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 665, 231-240.
53.
RodriguezS. F.CurryT. R.LeeG. (2006). Gender differences in criminal sentencing: Do effects vary across violent, property, and drug offenses?Social Science Quarterly, 87, 318-339.
54.
RyderJ. A.BrisgoneR. E. (2013). Cracked perspectives: Reflections of women and girls in the aftermath of the crack cocaine era. Feminist Criminology, 8, 40-62.
55.
SpohnC. (1999). Gender and sentencing of drug offenders: Is chivalry dead?Criminal Justice Policy Review, 9, 365-399.
56.
SpohnC.BeichnerD. (2000). Is preferential treatment of female offenders a thing of the past? A multisite study of gender, race, and imprisonment. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 11, 149-184.
57.
SpohnC.SpearsJ. W. (1997). Gender and case processing decisions: A comparison of case outcomes for male and female defendants charged with violent felonies. Women & Criminal Justice, 8, 29-59.
58.
StaceyA. M.SpohnC. (2006). Gender and the social costs of sentencing: An analysis of sentences imposed on male and female offenders in three U.S. district courts. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 11, 43-76.
59.
SteffensmeierD. (1980). Assessing the impact of the women’s movement on sex-based differences in the handling of adult criminal defendants. Crime & Delinquency, 26, 344-358.
60.
SteffensmeierD.DemuthS. (2006). Does gender modify the effects of race–ethnicity on criminal sanctioning? Sentences for male and female White, Black, and Hispanic defendants. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 241-261.
61.
SteffensmeierD.KramerJ.StreifelC. (1993). Gender and imprisonment decisions. Criminology, 31, 411-446.
62.
SteffensmeierD.UlmerJ.KramerJ. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, Black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763-798.
63.
SterkC. E. (1999.). Fast lives: Women who use crack cocaine. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
SundtJ.CullenF. T.ThieloA. J.JonsonC. L. (2015). Public willingness to downsize prisons: Implications from Oregon. Victims & Offenders, 10, 365-378.
66.
TillyerR.HartleyR. D.WardJ. T. (2015). Differential treatment of female defendants: Does criminal history moderate the effect of gender on sentence length in federal narcotics cases?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42, 703-701.
67.
TuranovicJ. J.RodriguezN.PrattT. C. (2012). The collateral consequences of incarceration revisited: A qualitative analysis of the effects on caregivers of children of incarcerated parents. Criminology, 50, 913-959.
68.
UlmerJ. T.KramerJ. H. (1996). Court communities under sentencing guidelines: Dilemmas of formal rationality and sentencing disparity. Criminology, 34, 383-408.
69.
Van VoorhisP. (2012). On behalf of women offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 11, 111-145.
70.
WestH. C.SabolW. J.GreenmanS. J. (2010). Prisoners in 2009 (Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
71.
ZatzM. S. (2000). The convergence of race, ethnicity, gender, and class on court decision making: Looking toward the 21st century. Criminal Justice: The National Institute of Justice Journal, 3, 503-552.
72.
ZingraffM.ThomsonR. (1984). Differential sentencing of women and men in the USA. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 12, 401-413.
