Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:04 am
Time: 3:04 am
Results for prison rape
25 results foundAuthor: U.S. National Prison Rape Elimination Commission Title: National Prison Rape Elimination Commission Report Summary: This final report of the the National Prison Rape Commission proposes standards to prevent, detect, respond to and monitor sexual abuse of incarcerated or detained individuals throughout the United States. Nine findings are discussed regarding the problems of sexual abuse in confinement and select policies and practices that must be mandatory everywhere to remedy these problems. Companion volumes include: Standards for the Prevention, Detention, Response, and Monitoring of Sexual Abuse in Adult Prisons and Jails; Standards for the Prevention, Detection, Response, and Monitoring of Standards for Sexual Abuse in Lockups; Standards for the Prevention, Detection, Response, and Monitoring of Sexual Abuse in Community Corrections; and Standards for the Prevention, Detection, Response, and Monitoring of Sexual Abuse in Juvenile Facilities. Details: Washington, DC: National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, 2009. 259p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 115521 Keywords: InmatesPrison RapePrison StandardsPrison ViolencePrisoners, Abuse of |
Author: Smith, Brenda V. Title: Legal Responses to Sexual Violence in Custody: State Criminal Laws Prohibiting Staff Sexual Abuse of Individuals under Custodial Supervision Summary: Many states have sought to address the problem of sexual abuse of individuals under custodial supervision by enacting criminal laws explicitly prohibiting staff sexual interactions with adults and youth under correctional supervision. This publication provides an overview of these laws and examines trends in their enactment and amendment. There are widespread misconceptions about what constitutes staff sexual misconduct. These misconceptions create environments where misconduct flourishes, and makes eradicating it difficult. This publication begins with a brief discussion of staff sexual misconduct, and then examines a variety of definitions of staff sexual misconduct as defined by federal law. Next, the publication explores, in detail, sexual misconduct as defined by state criminal laws in the United States. These laws enacted by state legislatures have informed corrections administrators, correctional staff, and prosecutors about staff sexual misconduct nationally, and within their respective states and localities. This publication provides examples of current state criminal laws on staff sexual misconduct and discusses the legal implications of these statutes. Finally, this publication concludes by reviewing the policy issues that stakeholders and policymakers should consider when evaluating a state criminal law on staff sexual misconduct, and provides recommendations for strengthening state laws to enhance their effectiveness. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2009. 56p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117746 Keywords: Corrections OfficersInmate Sexual AssaultPrison Rape |
Author: English, Kim Title: Sexual Assault in Jail and Juvenile Facilities: Promising Practices for Prevention and Response: Final Report Summary: Public Law 108-79, the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (also known as PREA), issued a call for correctional agencies nationwide to address prisoner sexual assault. This groundbreaking legislation required correctional administrators to identify, prevent, intervene and prosecute these incidents, and to ensure programs and services to meet the complex needs of victims and perpetrators. Soon after the passage of PREA, the National Institute of Justice sponsored several research activities to examine prisoner sexual assault within the culture of correctional institutions, within state department of corrections, and within jails and juvenile correctional facilities (the current project). This report presents the findings from a descriptive study of promising practices to prevent and respond to inmate-on-inmate sexual assault in jails and resident-on-resident sexual assault in juvenile correctional facilities, including a comprehensive literature review of institutional sexual assault which is included as Appendix A. Descriptive studies set the stage for more elaborate investigation later. Details: Denver, CO: Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, Office of Research and Statistics, 2010. 356p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119518 Keywords: Correctional InstitutionsJailsPrison RapePrison ViolencePrisonersSexual Assault |
Author: Smith, Brenda V. Title: Breaking the Code of Silence: Correction Officers' Handbook on Identitying and Addressing Sexual Misconduct Summary: This handbook addresses the issue of preventing and addressing staff sexual misconduct with offenders. The handbook aims to educate correctional professionals at all levels on: 1) why correctional staff and administrators need to be concerned about staff sexual misconduct with offenders; 2) how agency culture and the workplace environment influence staff sexual misconduct; 3) the tools that will help identify and address staff sexual misconduct; 4) the consequences of staff sexual misconduct with offenders; 5) the investigative process that should follow an allegation of staff sexual misconduct; and 6) how correctional staff members can keep the workplace safe. Details: Washington, DC: NIC/WCL Project on Addressing Prison Rape, American University, 2007. 119p. Source: Internet Resource; Accessed August 17, 2010 at: http://www.wcl.american.edu/nic/for_correctional_employees/breaking_the_code_of_silence_correctional_officers_handbook.pdf?rd=1 Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.wcl.american.edu/nic/for_correctional_employees/breaking_the_code_of_silence_correctional_officers_handbook.pdf?rd=1 Shelf Number: 114813 Keywords: Correctional Institutions, Sexual MisconductCorrections Officers, Sexual MisconductCorrections Officers, TrainingPrison RapeStaff-Inmate Relations |
Author: Beck, Allen J. Title: Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2008-2009 Summary: This report resents data from the National Inmate Survey (NIS), 2008-09, conducted in 167 state and federal prisons, 286 local jails, and 10 special correctional facilities (operated by U.S. Armed Forces, Indian tribes, or the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)) between October 2008 and December 2009, with a sample of 81,566 inmates ages 18 or older. The report provides a listing of facilities ranked according to the prevalence of sexual victimization, as required under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-79). The prevalence of victimization as reported by inmates during a personal interview is based on sexual activity in the 12 months prior to the interview or since admission to the facility, if less than 12 months. Included are estimates of nonconsensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contacts, inmate-on-inmate and staff sexual misconduct, and level of coercion. The report also presents findings on reported sexual victimization by selected characteristics of inmates, including demographic characteristics, sexual history and orientation, and criminal justice status. It includes details on victims’ experiences and the circumstances surrounding incidents of sexual victimization. Highlights include the following: 1) An estimated 4.4% of prison inmates and 3.1% of jail inmates reported experiencing one or more incidents of sexual victimization by another inmate or facility staff in the past 12 months or since admission to the facility, if less than 12 months; 2) Female inmates in prison (4.7%) or jail (3.1%) were more than twice as likely as male inmates in prison (1.9%) or jail (1.3%) to report experiencing inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization; and 3) Among inmates who reported inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization, 13% of male prison inmates and 19% of male jail inmates said they were victimized within the first 24 hours after admission, compared to 4% of female inmates in prison and jail. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2010. 91p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 24, 2010 at: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri0809.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri0809.pdf Shelf Number: 119678 Keywords: InmatesJailsPrison RapePrisonsSex OffensesSexual AssaultsSexual Victimization |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. Review Panel on Prison Rape Title: Report on Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Correctional Facilities Summary: Based on survey data and public hearings this report spotlights a total of six juvenile correctional facilities -- three with the lowest rates of sexual victimization, and three with the highest. The report contains observations and recommendations to assist both practitioners and advocates in the juvenile justice community to eliminate sexual victimization in the nation's juvenile correctional facilities. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2010. 86p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 25, 2010 at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/reviewpanel/pdfs/panel_report_101014.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/reviewpanel/pdfs/panel_report_101014.pdf Shelf Number: 120083 Keywords: Juvenile CorrectionsPrison RapeSexual AssaultSexual Violence |
Author: Guerino, Paul Title: Sexual Victimization Reported by Adult Correctional Authorities, 2007-2008 Summary: This report examines 2007 and 2008 data from the Survey of Sexual Violence (SSV). Conducted since 2004, the SSV is an annual collection of official records on incidents of inmate-on-inmate and staff-on-inmate sexual victimization. This report presents counts of nonconsensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contacts, staff sexual misconduct, and staff sexual harassment reported to correctional authorities in adult prisons, jails, and other adult correctional facilities. Appendix tables include counts of sexual victimization, by type, for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, all state systems, and surveyed jail jurisdictions. An in-depth examination of substantiated incidents is also presented, covering the number and characteristics of victims and perpetrators, location, time of day, nature of the injuries, impact on the victims, and sanctions imposed on the perpetrators. Highlights include the following: Correctional administrators reported 7,444 allegations of sexual victimization in 2008 and 7,374 allegations in 2007. About 54% of substantiated incidents of sexual victimization involved only inmates, while 46% of substantiated incidents involved staff with inmates. Female inmates were disproportionately victimized by both other inmates and staff in federal and state prisons, as well as local jails. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2011. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: BJS Special Report: Accessed February 2, 2011 at: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svraca0708.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svraca0708.pdf Shelf Number: 120662 Keywords: InmatesJailsPrison RapePrisoners, Sexual VictimizationPrisonsSexual AssaultSexual Violence |
Author: Weber, Kasey R. Title: Evaluation of the Colorado Department of Corrections' Prison Rape Elimination Program Summary: The Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC) implemented the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) program in 2005. Under this program the department has sought to educate staff and offenders, identify potential victims and predators, and employ procedures with which to respond to all sexual incidents involving inmates and staff. The present study aims to evaluate the implementation of the PREA program in the CEDOC and provide feedback about the current operations specifically identifying the strengths of the program as well as areas needing further attention. Details: Colorado Springs, CO: Colorado Department of Corrections, Office of Planning and Analysis, 2009. 95p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 14, 2011 at: http://cospl.coalliance.org/fez/eserv/co:7587/cr11002r182009internet.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://cospl.coalliance.org/fez/eserv/co:7587/cr11002r182009internet.pdf Shelf Number: 120765 Keywords: Male Rape (Colorado)Prison RapePrison ViolenceSexual Violence |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice Title: Initial Regulatory Impact Analysis for Notice of Proposed Rulemaking -- Proposed National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape Under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) Summary: In the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA), Pub. L. No. 108-79, codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 15601-15609, Congress directed the Attorney General to promulgate national standards for enhancing the prevention, detection, reduction, and punishment of prison rape. In doing so, Congress understood that such standards were likely to require federal, state, and local agencies (as well as private entities) that operate inmate confinement facilities to incur costs in implementing the standards. Given the statute’s aspiration to eliminate prison rape in the United States, Congress expected that some level of compliance costs would be appropriate, and indeed necessary, to foster a zero tolerance approach to prison rape. Nevertheless, Congress insisted that PREA’s aims be balanced against a sensitivity to the “budgetary circumstances” that often challenge the ability of correctional and law enforcement agencies to make major changes to their operating procedures. 42 U.S.C. § 15605(a). In mandating national standards, Congress thus instructed the Attorney General not to adopt any standards “that would impose substantial additional costs compared to the costs presently expended by Federal, State, and local prison authorities.” 42 U.S.C. § 15607(a)(3). This statutory obligation of cost-consciousness requires that the Department investigate the PREA standards’ costs and benefits before implementing a final Rule. Moreover, separate and apart from what PREA itself requires, under Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as amended without substantial change by Executive Order 13258, the Department is required to conduct an Initial Regulatory Impact Analysis (IRIA) to assess the benefits and costs of its proposed rule.1/ Similar requirements are found in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 601-610. Such an analysis must include an assessment of both the quantitative and qualitative benefits and costs of the proposed regulation, as well as a discussion of potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives. The purpose of an IRIA is to inform stakeholders in the regulatory process of the effects of the proposed rule. This IRIA is divided into seven parts. Parts I through IV identify and, where possible, quantify the benefits of reducing prison rape and sexual abuse. Specifically, we estimate the monetary value to society of reducing the prevalence of prison rape and sexual abuse by 1% from the baseline level. This allows us to determine what percentage reduction would need to ensue in order for the expected benefits of the standards to break even with their expected costs. We also take into account an unquantified amount representing the numerous nonmonetizable benefits of reducing prison rape and sexual abuse. Part V then identifies and estimates the costs associated with implementing and complying with the PREA standards. Part VI evaluates the reasonableness of the proposed standards in light of these costs and benefits. Part VII offers some concluding observations. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2011. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Docket No. OAG-131- RIN 1105-AB34: Accessed April 11, 2011 at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/programs/pdfs/prea_nprm_iria.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/programs/pdfs/prea_nprm_iria.pdf Shelf Number: 121294 Keywords: Prison RapePrison Rape Elimination Act (PREA)Sexual Assault |
Author: Gear, Sasha Title: Fear, Violence and Sexual Violence in a Gauteng Juvenile Correctional Centre for Males Summary: During December 2004 and January 2005, the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) conducted fieldwork for a survey with young offenders held at the Boksburg Youth Correctional Centre (BYC), a medium security institution for male juvenile offenders. The aim was to investigate their experiences related to violence, sex and sexual violence in prison. The survey was envisaged as the first step in a pilot project to work with BYC staff to develop strategies to prevent and respond to sexual violence at the youth centre. The stigma, taboo and fear layered into the subject matter (sexual violence and male victims) and the context of the research (prison), as well as the mainly quantatitive survey methodology, likely limited what respondents were willing and able to share with us. Nevertheless, substantial and useful findings emerged. Our intention was not to “expose” conditions in BYC as a specific institution. Rather it was to prepare the way for the pilot and to draw learnings that could also potentially benefit other correctional centres and organisations working with offenders, at the same time as building better understanding of our youth behind our bars. This brief outlines the young men’s reports of fear and violence including sexual violence in the institution. Details: Braamfontein, South Africa: Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, 2007. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: CSVR Criminal Justice Programme, Briefing Report No. 02: Accessed July 8, 2011 at: http://www.csvr.org.za/docs/gender/fearviolence.pdf Year: 2007 Country: South Africa URL: http://www.csvr.org.za/docs/gender/fearviolence.pdf Shelf Number: 122011 Keywords: Juvenile CorrectionsJuvenile DetentionPrison RapePrison Sexual Violence (South Africa) |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Assistance Title: PREA Data Collection Activities, 2011 Summary: The Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79) requires the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to carry out, for each calendar year, a comprehensive statistical review of the incidence and effects of prison rape in randomly selected federal, state, and county correctional facilities. Every year since 2004, BJS has collected administrative records on allegations and substantiated incidents of sexual victimization in correctional facilities nationwide. BJS also conducted interviews with prison and jail inmates in 2007 and 2008-09 and youth held in juvenile correctional facilities in 2008-09. During 2010, BJS in collaboration with the National Institute of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted a feasibility study using clinical indicators to track sexual violence in prisons and jails. This report provides selected findings and status updates on each of these data collection efforts. Details: Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 2011. 4p. Source: NCJ 234183: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2012 at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/pdca11.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/pdca11.pdf Shelf Number: 124579 Keywords: Data AnalysisPrison Rape |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. Review Panel on Prison Rape Title: Report on Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Summary: This Report presents the findings of the Review Panel on Prison Rape (Panel), resulting from the hearings it held in Washington, DC, in the spring and fall of 2011, based on the national survey that the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) published in August 2010, Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails, Reported by Inmates, 2008-09. Under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003, the Panel is responsible for holding public hearings to which it invites, relying on data from the BJS, two correctional institutions with a low prevalence of sexual victimization and three institutions with a high prevalence of sexual victimization. The purpose of the hearings is to identify the common characteristics of (1) sexual predators and victims, (2) correctional institutions with a low prevalence of sexual victimization, and (3) correctional institutions with a high prevalence of sexual victimization. In 2011, the Panel held two sets of hearings. In April of 2011, the hearings addressed federal and state prisons; in September of 2011, the hearings addressed local jails. Hearings on Prisons For the April 2011 hearings on prisons, the Panel invited the following five prisons to appear: (1) Low Incidence: Elkton Federal Correctional Institution, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Elkton, Ohio. (2) Low Incidence: Bridgeport Pre-Parole Transfer Facility, operated by Corrections Corporation of America for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), Bridgeport, Texas. (3) High Incidence: James V. Allred Unit, TDCJ, Wichita Falls, Texas. (4) High Incidence: Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women, Virginia Department of Corrections, Troy, Virginia. (5) High Incidence: Elmira Correctional Facility, Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Elmira, New York. Based on the prison hearings, the Panel identified the following common themes requiring careful consideration: ● Recognizing Common Characteristics of Inmates Who are Vulnerable to Sexual Abuse ● Understanding Common Differences between Male and Female Facilities ● Understanding the Importance of Professional Language in Establishing a Safe Environment ● Recognizing the Vulnerability of Non-Heterosexual Inmates and Their Need for Proper Treatment ● Strengthening the Integrity of the Entire Complaint Process ● Providing Effective Victim Services ● Equipping Staff to Respond Effectively to Inmate Sexual Victimization iii The Panel identified the following topics for further study: ● Why are Homosexuality and Prior Victimization Significant Indicators of Inmate Victims of Sexual Abuse? ● What are the Distinctive Needs of Female Facilities in Preventing Sexual Victimization? Hearings on Jails For the September 2011 hearings on jails, the Panel invited the following five jails to appear: (1) Low Incidence: Hinds County Work Center, Hinds County Sheriff’s Department, Raymond, Mississippi. (2) Low Incidence: David L. Moss Criminal Justice Center, Tulsa County Sheriff’s Office, Tulsa, Oklahoma. (3) High Incidence: Clallam County Corrections Facility, Clallam County Sheriff’s Office, Port Angeles, Washington. (4) High Incidence: Pre-Trial Detention Center, Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department, Miami, Florida. (5) High Incidence: Orleans Parish Prison, Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office, New Orleans, Louisiana. Based on the jail hearings, the Panel identified the following common themes requiring careful consideration: ● Acknowledging the Importance of Facility Design ● Appreciating the Value of Outside Oversight ● Noting the Reluctance to Prosecute Sexual Victimization Cases Involving Inmates ● Recognizing the Resource Challenges that Jails Face ● Employing Well-Trained, Professional Staff The Panel identified the following topics for further study: ● What are the Specific Challenges of Big-City and Rural Jails in Preventing Inmate Sexual Victimization? ● What are the Best Practices in Classifying and Housing LGBTQ Inmates? ● What Would Encourage the Prosecution of Crimes Involving Inmate Sexual Victimization? ● What are the Policies and Practices that Contribute to a Jail Culture that Has Zero Tolerance for Sexual Victimization? ● What are the Best Practices for Monitoring Compliance with a Jail’s Zero- Tolerance Policy for Sexual Victimization? ● What are the Best Practices for Reliably Reporting Sexual Abuse in Jails? Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2012. 97p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 26, 2012 at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/reviewpanel/pdfs/prea_finalreport_2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/reviewpanel/pdfs/prea_finalreport_2012.pdf Shelf Number: 125069 Keywords: Prison RapePrison ViolenceSexual Assault, Prisons and Jails |
Author: Beck, Allen J. Title: Sexual Victimization Reported by Former State Prisoners, 2008 Summary: The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) conducted the first-ever National Former Prisoner Survey (NFPS) between January 2008 and October 2008. NORC at the University of Chicago, under a cooperative agreement with BJS, collected the data. A total of 317 parole offices in 40 states were randomly included in the survey sample. A total of 17,738 former state prisoners who were under active supervision (i.e., required to contact a supervisory parole authority regularly in person, by mail, or by telephone) participated in the national survey. Interviews from an additional 788 former prisoners were included from the survey test sites. These former inmates had been randomly selected from 16 offices sampled. Based on 18,526 completed interviews, the survey achieved a 61% response rate. 9.6% of former state prisoners reported one or more incidents of sexual victimization during the most recent period of incarceration in jail, prison, or a postrelease community-treatment facility Among the 18,526 former state inmates participating in the NFPS survey, 2,096 reported experiencing one or more incidents of sexual victimization during their most recent period of incarceration, including the combined time in local jails, state prisons, or post-release communitytreatment facilities. Because the NFPS is a sample survey, weights were applied to the sampled offices and offenders under their supervision to produce national-level estimates. The estimated number of former state prisoners experiencing sexual victimization totaled 49,000, or 9.6% of all former state prisoners under active supervision at midyear 2008 (table 1). Among all former state prisoners, 1.8% reported experiencing one or more incidents while in a local jail, 7.5% while in a state prison, and 0.1% while in a postrelease community-treatment facility. An estimated 1.4% reported an incident in a facility for which the type could not be determined. 5.4% of former inmates reported an incident with another inmate; 5.3% reported an incident with staff Among former state prisoners, 5.4% (or an estimated 27,300 prisoners nationwide at midyear 2008) reported an incident that involved another inmate, and 5.3% (27,100) reported an incident that involved facility staff. Some inmates (1.1%) reported sexual victimization by both another inmate and facility staff. An estimated 3.7% of former prisoners said they had nonconsensual sex with another inmate, including manual stimulation and oral, anal, or vaginal penetration. An additional 1.6% of former prisoners said they had experienced one or more abusive sexual contacts only with another inmate, including unwanted touching of the inmate’s buttocks, thigh, penis, breast, or vagina in a sexual way. An estimated 1.2% of former prisoners reported that they unwillingly had sex or sexual contact with facility staff. An estimated 4.6% said they “willingly” had sex or sexual contact with staff. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Offi ce of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2012. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 17, 2012 at: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svrfsp08.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svrfsp08.pdf Shelf Number: 125342 Keywords: Prison RapeSexual Assaults, PrisonersSexual Victimization, Inmates (U.S.)Sexual Violence |
Author: Buchanan, Kim S. Title: Engendering Rape Summary: This Article highlights a systematic bias in the academic, correctional, and human rights discourse that constitutes the basis for prison rape policy reform. This discourse focuses almost exclusively on sexual abuse perpetrated by men: sexual abuse of male prisoners by fellow inmates, and sexual abuse of women prisoners by male staff. But since 2007, survey and correctional data have indicated that the main perpetrators of prison sexual abuse seem to be women. In men’s facilities, inmates report much more sexual victimization by female staff than by male inmates; in women’s facilities, inmates report much higher rates of sexual abuse by fellow inmates than by male or female staff. These findings contravene conventional gender expectations, and are barely acknowledged in contemporary prison rape discourse, leading to policy decisions that are too sanguine about the likelihood of female-perpetrated sexual victimization. The selective blindness of prison rape discourse to counter-stereotypical forms of abuse illuminates a pattern of reasoning I describe as “stereotype reconciliation,” an unintentional interpretive trend by which surprising, counter-stereotypical facts are reconciled with conventional gender expectations. The authors of prison rape discourse tend to ignore these counter-stereotypical facts or to invoke alternative stereotypes, such as heterosexist notions of romance or racialized rape tropes, in ways that tend to rationalize their neglect of counter-stereotypical forms of abuse and reconcile those abuses with conventional expectations of masculine domination and feminine submission. Details: Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California Gould School of Law, 2012. 60p. Source: Legal Studies Working Paper Series Paper 93: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2012 at http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1228&context=usclwps-lss&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dengendering%2520rape%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D2%26ved%3D0CCkQFjAB%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flaw.bepress.com%252Fcgi%252Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D1228%2526context%253Dusclwps-lss%26ei%3DWaB8UM37EsKB0AH9tYDQDQ%26usg%3DAFQjCNGUFk7KqCHUNKrSI7jElZK993YZrw#search=%22engendering%20rape%22 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1228&context=usclwps-lss&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dengendering%2520rape%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D2%26ved%3D0CCkQFjAB%26url%3 Shelf Number: 126744 Keywords: Abuse of InmatesCorrectional Institutions, Sexual MisconductCorrections Officers, Sexual MisconductFemale VictimsMale VictimsPrison RapeRapeStaff-Inmate Relations |
Author: Beck, Allen J. Title: Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2011–12 Summary: Highlights Prevalence of sexual victimization In 2011-12, an estimated 4.0% of state and federal prison inmates and 3.2% of jail inmates reported experiencing one or more incidents of sexual victimization by another inmate or facility staff in the past 12 months or since admission to the facility, if less than 12 months. Using the same methodology since 2007, the rate of sexual victimization among state and federal prison inmates was 4.5% in 2007 and 4.0% in 2011-12; but, the difference was not statistically significant. Among jail inmates, the rate of sexual victimization remained unchanged—3.2% in 2007 and 3.2% in 2011-12. Among state and federal prison inmates, 2.0% (or an estimated 29,300 prisoners) reported an incident involving another inmate, 2.4% (34,100) reported an incident involving facility staff, and 0.4% (5,500) reported both an incident by another inmate and staff. About 1.6% of jail inmates (11,900) reported an incident with another inmate, 1.8% (13,200) reported an incident with staff, and 0.2% (2,400) reported both an incident by another inmate and staff. From 2007 to 2011-12, reports of “willing” sexual activity with staff (excluding touching) declined in prisons and jails, while reports of other types of sexual victimization remained stable. Facility rankings Eleven male prisons, 1 female prison, and 9 jails were identified as high-rate facilities based on the prevalence of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization in 2011-12. Eight male prisons, 4 female prisons, and 12 jails were identified as high rate based on the prevalence of staff sexual misconduct. Each of these facilities had a lower bound of the 95%-confidence interval that was at least 55% higher than the average rate among comparable facilities. Seven male prisons, 6 female prisons, and 4 jails were identified as low-rate facilities based on a small percentage of inmates reporting any sexual victimization by another inmate or staff and a low upper bound of the 95%-confidence interval around the rate. Among the 225 prisons and 358 jails in the survey, 13 prisons and 34 jails had no reported incidents of sexual victimization. Two military facilities and one Indian country jail had high rates of staff sexual misconduct in 2011-12. The Northwest Joint Regional Correctional Facility (Fort Lewis, Washington) (6.6%) and the Naval Consolidated Brig (Miramar, California) (4.9%) had high rates of staff sexual misconduct that were more than double the average of prisons (2.4%) and jails (1.8%) nationwide. The Oglala Sioux Tribal Offenders Facility (Pine Ridge, South Dakota) (10.8%) reported the highest rate of staff sexual misconduct among all tribal and nontribal jails in the survey. Variations in victimization rates Patterns of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization in 2011-12 were consistent with patterns in past surveys. Rates reported by prison and jail inmates were higher among females than males, higher among whites than blacks, and higher among inmates with a college degree than those who had not completed high school. Variations in staff sexual misconduct rates were also similar across surveys. Rates reported by inmates were higher among males in jails than females in jails, higher among black inmates in prisons and jails than white inmates in prisons and jails, and lower among inmates age 35 or older than inmates ages 20 to 24 in both prisons and jails. Inmates held for violent sexual offenses reported higher rates of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization (3.7% in prison and 3.9% in jails) than inmates held for other offenses. Special inmate populations In 2011-12, juveniles ages 16 to 17 held in adult prisons and jails did not have significantly higher rates of sexual victimization than adult inmates: • An estimated 1.8% of juveniles ages 16 to 17 held in prisons and jails reported being victimized by another inmate, compared to 2.0% of adults in prisons and 1.6% of adults in jails. • An estimated 3.2% of juveniles ages 16 to 17 held in prisons and jails reported experiencing staff sexual misconduct. Though higher, these rates were not statistically different from the 2.4% of adults in prisons and 1.8% of adults in jails. • Juveniles (ages 16 to 17) and young adults (ages 18 to 19 and 20 to 24) reported similar rates of sexual victimization for most of the key subgroups (sex, race or Hispanic origin, body mass index, sexual orientation, and offense). Inmates with serious psychological distress reported high rates of inmate-on-inmate and staff sexual victimization in 2011-12: • Among state and federal prison inmates, an estimated 6.3% of those identified with serious psychological distress reported that they were sexually victimized by another inmate. In comparison, among prisoners with no indication of mental illness, 0.7% reported being victimized by another inmate. • Similar differences were reported by jail inmates. An estimated 3.6% of those identified with serious psychological distress reported inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization, compared to 0.7% of inmates with no indication of mental illness. • Rates of serious psychological distress in prisons (14.7%) and jails (26.3%) were substantially higher than the rate (3.0%) in the U.S. noninstitutional population age 18 or older. • For each of the measured demographic subgroups, inmates with serious psychological distress reported higher rates of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization than inmates without mental health problems. Inmates who reported their sexual orientation as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or other were among those with the highest rates of sexual victimization in 2011-12: • Among non-heterosexual inmates, 12.2% of prisoners and 8.5% of jail inmates reported being sexually victimized by another inmate; 5.4% of prisoners and 4.3% of jail inmates reported being victimized by staff. • In each demographic subgroup (sex, race or Hispanic origin, age, and education), non-heterosexual prison and jail inmates reported higher rates of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization than heterosexual inmates. • Among inmates with serious psychological distress, non-heterosexual inmates reported the highest rates of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization (21.0% of prison inmates and 14.7% of jail inmates). Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2013. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: National Inmate Survey, 2011–12: Accessed May 25, 2013 at: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri1112.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri1112.pdf Shelf Number: 128828 Keywords: Inmate Sexual AssaultsPrison RapePrison ViolenceSexual Victimization (U.S.) |
Author: Beck, Allen J. Title: Sexual Victimization Reported by Adult Correctional Authorities, 2009-2011 Summary: This report presents counts of nonconsensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contacts, staff sexual misconduct, and staff sexual harassment reported to correctional authorities in adult prisons, jails, and other adult correctional facilities in 2009, 2010, and 2011. An in-depth examination of substantiated incidents is also presented, covering the number and characteristics of victims and perpetrators, location, time of day, nature of the injuries, impact on the victims, and sanctions imposed on the perpetrators. Companion tables in Survey of Sexual Violence in Adult Correctional Facilities, 2009-11 - Statistical Tables, include counts of types of sexual victimization reported for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, state prison systems, facilities operated by the U.S. military and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, sampled jail jurisdictions, privately operated jails and prisons, and jails in Indian country. Data are from the Bureau of Justice Statistics' Survey of Sexual Violence (SSV), which has annually collected official records on allegations and substantiated incidents of inmate-on-inmate and staff-on-inmate sexual victimization since 2004. Highlights: Correctional administrators reported 8,763 allegations of sexual victimization in prisons, jails, and other adult correctional facilities in 2011, a statistically significant increase over the number of allegations reported in 2009 (7,855) and 2010 (8,404). About half of all allegations (51%) involved nonconsensual sexual acts (the most serious, including penetration) or abusive sexual contacts (less serious, including unwanted touching, grabbing, and groping) of inmates with other inmates. Nearly half (49%) involved staff sexual misconduct (any sexual act directed toward an inmate by staff) or sexual harassment (demeaning verbal statements of a sexual nature) directed toward inmates. In 2011, 902 allegations of sexual victimization (10%) were substantiated (i.e., determined to have occurred upon investigation). The total number of substantiated incidents has not changed significantly since 2005 (885). Victims were physically injured in 18% of substantiated incidents of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization, compared to less than 1% of incidents of staff-on-inmate victimization. More than half (54%) of all substantiated incidents of staff sexual misconduct and a quarter (26%) of all incidents of staff sexual harassment were committed by female staff. Overall, more than three-quarters (78%) of staff perpetrators were fired or resigned. Nearly half (45%) were arrested, referred for prosecution, or convicted. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2014. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 29, 2014 at: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svraca0911.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svraca0911.pdf Shelf Number: 132156 Keywords: InmatesJailsPrison RapePrisoners, Sexual VictimizationPrisonsSexual AssaultSexual HarassmentSexual Violence |
Author: Smith, Brenda V. Title: Policy Review and Development Guide: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex Persons in Custodial Settings Summary: This guide includes information that will help adult correctional facilities and juvenile justice agencies to assess, develop, or improve policies and practices regarding LGBTI [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex] individuals in their custody. The guide is not meant to be a quick reference for writing policies appropriate for all agencies and/or facilities. It is intentionally vague on "how to" advice and "plug and play" policy guidance. Guides for writing policies exist in many forms. Rather, the purpose of this guide is to (1) define agencies' obligations to LGBTI populations, both legally and in accordance with PREA [Prison Rape Elimination Act] standards, (2) begin a dialogue within agencies regarding the safety and treatment needs of LGBTI populations, and (3) guide agencies in asking good questions about practices and implementation strategies for meeting the needs of LGBTI populations" (p. 1). It is made up of three chapters: introduction and overview-introduction, evolving terminology and definitions, core principles for understanding LGBTI individuals in custody, and emerging data on LGBTI individuals in custodial settings and the challenges they face; LGBTI youth under custodial supervision-the law, PREA standards, other governing principles (state human rights laws and professional codes of ethics), and elements of legally sound and effective policy and practice; and LGBTI adults under custodial supervision-the law, PREA standards, and elements of legally sound and effective policy and practice. Appendixes provide: glossary; case law digest; additional resources; webpages with sample policies; and a training matrix Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2013. 79p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2014 at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/027507.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/027507.pdf Shelf Number: 132227 Keywords: Correctional InstitutionsInmate Sexual AssaultPrison RapeSexual Violence |
Author: Smith, Brenda V. Title: Addressing Sexual Violence Against Youth in Custody: Youth Workers' Handbook on Identifying and Addressing Sexual Violence in Juvenile Justice Settings Summary: Sexual abuse in custody can and often does have lifelong effects on youth. Youth who are sexually abused or experience sexual violence can suffer higher rates of drug use, have disproportionate contact with the criminal justice system into adulthood, become victimizers, and/or have higher rates of mental illness than youth who do not suffer sexual abuse. In addition, sexual abuse by staff or other youth in custody compromises safety and security as well as the overall mission of juvenile justice systems-to protect and rehabilitate youth. According to the American Medical Association, youth who are the victims of sexual abuse may experience chronic depression, low self-esteem, sexual dysfunction, and multiple personalities. One-fifth of all victims develop serious long-term psychological effects, including dissociative responses, posttraumatic stress disorder, nightmares, flashbacks, disease, and anxiety. This may be magnified for youth abused in custodial settings. Preventing sexual abuse of youth in custody should be an ongoing effort involving partners from all juvenile sectors-advocates, staff, judges, prosecutors, social service providers, and families. Sexual abuse of youth in custody is a problem that occurs in community facilities and detention centers. Sexual abuse in custody affects youth, administration and staff at all levels, as well as outside stakeholders such as youth advocates, law enforcement, the legislature, families, and the community at large. It has legal consequences as well as long-lasting emotional, mental and physical health, and economic effects. This handbook aims to educate juvenile justice professionals about the following: - Why juvenile justice professionals should be concerned about sexual abuse of youth in custody. - How culture and environment contribute to sexual abuse of youth in custody. - Tools that will help identify, address, and respond to sexual abuse of youth in custody. - How to investigate allegations of sexual abuse of youth in custody. - Useful legal tools for prosecuting sexual abuse of youth in custody. - Preventive measures for juvenile justice agencies. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2013. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 29, 2015 at: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/026309.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/026309.pdf Shelf Number: 134487 Keywords: Inmate Sexual AssaultJuvenile InmatesPrison RapeSexual Abuse (U.S.)Sexual ViolenceYouth in Custody |
Author: Commission on Sex in Prison (U.K.) Title: Sex in Prison: Experiences of former prisoners Summary: In England and Wales, there has been minimal research into consensual and coercive sex in prison. In order to begin to address this knowledge gap, the Howard League for Penal Reform established an independent Commission on Sex in Prison, comprising eminent academics, former and serving prison governors, lawyers, former prisoners and health experts. Over two years, the Commission received written and oral evidence from voluntary and statutory agencies, prison staff, and serving and former prisoners on all aspects of sexual activity in prison and the healthy sexual development of children. Previous briefing papers have documented this evidence. This final briefing paper reports findings from interviews conducted with 26 former prisoners during the summer of 2014. Former prisoners no longer under the supervision of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) were invited to contact the Commission's academic consultant if they would be interested in being interviewed about 'their knowledge about or personal experience of sexual activity in prison' or 'if your experience is that sex between prisoners or with staff does not happen in prison.' People who contacted the researcher were motivated to discuss their own experiences and/or their knowledge of sexual activity among other prisoners; often with the stated intention of raising awareness of the reality of sex in prison and the health implications for those participating in unsafe sex and their sexual partners. Research aims To supplement the evidence gathered by the Commission on Sex in Prison, the aim of the primary research was to learn from former prisoners about their perspectives, experiences, and knowledge of consensual or non-consensual sexual activity and sexuality in prisons in England and Wales. Key findings - Nearly all interviewees managed their sexual needs in prison either wholly or partially through masturbation - Eight male interviewees, seven of whom described their sexuality as either gay or bisexual, had had consensual sex with other male prisoners. While these seven interviewees had been open about their sexuality in prison, they conducted their sexual activities and relationships discreetly - Some men who self-identified as heterosexual participated in same-sex activity but did not acknowledge this. Heterosexual men who engage in sexual activity with men 'out of necessity' do not perceive that this affects or alters their sexual identity - The availability of condoms varied considerably between prisons - Interviewees perceived that prison officers were sometimes aware of sexual activity but exercised their discretion not to intervene - Most interviewees thought that coercive sex rarely occurs in British prisons. Three male interviewees disclosed they had been raped in prison by other prisoners, and none of these rapes were officially reported. Rape in prison is certain to be significantly under reported - Some male prisoners had been known to trade sex in return for drugs, tobacco, food, or other valuable commodities. Recommendations - Coherently formulated and consistently applied policies, which recognize and respond to the reality of consensual and coercive sex in prison, are urgently needed. These must be set within a clear and concise ethical and operational framework which prioritises the protection of prisoners vulnerable to coerced sexual activity or unsafe sexual practice, and results in instructions to staff which are practical and enforceable - Prisoners should receive equivalent healthcare services to those available in the community and NOMS should ensure that prisoners have easy and confidential access to condoms and other forms of protection against sexually transmitted infections (STIs) - Prison staff need training and clear guidance on how to respond appropriately to consensual sexual activity and how to pro-actively prevent, detect, and respond to allegations and incidents of sexual assault - To understand better the extent of the scale of consensual and coercive sex in prison, and the issues arising from sexual activity in prison, a national, statistically representative survey of both the serving prison population and of former prisoners, eliciting quantitative and qualitative data, and fully supported by but independent of NOMS, is urgently required. Details: London: Howard League for Penal Reform, 2015. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 19, 2015 at: https://d19ylpo4aovc7m.cloudfront.net/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/Sex_in_prison_web.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://d19ylpo4aovc7m.cloudfront.net/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/Sex_in_prison_web.pdf Shelf Number: 134970 Keywords: Consensual Sexual ActivityInmate Sexual AssaultPrison RapeSex in Prison (U.K.) |
Author: Commission on Sex in Prison (U.K.) Title: Women in prison: coercive and consensual sex Summary: Key points - Women in prison are particularly vulnerable and are more likely than men to have a history of being a victim of violence or sexual abuse. Many women seek comfort in prison to cope with their vulnerabilities - Relationships between women prisoners are very different to those found in men's prisons. Relationships with staff also differ - There is evidence that some women have sexual relationships with other women prisoners - Prison staff reported that women were more overt than men about their friendships and relationships with other prisoners - The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman found that intimate relationships between women could be a source of comfort or of bullying or abuse - Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons found that there was a lack of tolerance in some prisons to non-sexual physical contact between women - Women are at greater risk than men of entering prison with a sexually transmitted infection including HIV - Women in prison have different sexual health needs to men in prison. They should have access to dental dams to prevent the spread of STIs - Some women prisoners had been coerced into sex with prison staff in return for favours such as cigarettes or alcohol - There is evidence that assaults known as 'decrotching', where women prisoners forcibly retrieve drugs hidden inside a woman's vagina, occur in women's prisons. Details: London: Howard League for Penal Reform, 2014. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Briefing paper 2: Accessed April 1, 2014 at: http://www.commissiononsexinprison.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/Women_sex_commission.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.commissiononsexinprison.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/Women_sex_commission.pdf Shelf Number: 135101 Keywords: Female InmatesFemale Prisoners (U.K.)Prison RapeSex in PrisonSexual Assaults |
Author: Hastings, Allison Title: Keeping Vulnerable Populations Safe Under PREA: Alternative Strategies to the Use of Segregation in Prisons and Jails Summary: Incarcerated people at risk for sexual victimization need to be housed safely without losing access to programming, mental and medical health services, and group activities. The National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape emphasize that isolation be used to protect at-risk populations only when no other alternatives are available and all other options have been explored. To help agencies achieve compliance with these standards, Vera's Center on Sentencing and Corrections, in conjunction with the National PREA Resource Center, has developed guidelines to provide prison and jail administrators and staff with promising strategies for safely housing inmates at risk of sexual abuse without isolating them. This guide includes approaches for managing the housing of populations at particularly high risk for sexual abuse in confinement: women; youthful inmates in adult facilities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex (LGBTI) individuals; and people who are gender nonconforming. Details: New York: National PREA Resource Center, Vera Institute of Justice, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 15, 2015 at: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/housing-vulnerable-populations-prea-guide-april.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/housing-vulnerable-populations-prea-guide-april.pdf Shelf Number: 135217 Keywords: Administrative SegregationCorrectional AdministrationPrison RapePrisoners (U.S.)Sexual Victimization |
Author: Commission on Sex in Prison (U.K.) Title: Coercive sex in prison Summary: - There has been minimal research on sexual abuse in prison and the nature and extent of the problem is not known - Sexual violence in prison is hidden and under- reported - Research by Banbury (2004) found that 1 per cent of prisoners had been raped and 5.3 per cent were victims of coerced sex - Annual data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics show that 2 per cent of prisoners in the US had been the victim of a non-consensual sex act and 4 per cent had been sexually victimised - HMIP data show that 1 per cent of prisoners reported being sexually abused in prison. Extrapolating from prison population and reception figures, this means that between 850 to 1650 prisoners could be victims of sexual assault while inside - Ministry of Justice data show that the number of recorded sexual assaults in prison rose in 2013 and is now at the highest recorded level since 2005 - Gay and transgender prisoners are at higher risk of sexual assault than heterosexual prisoners - Good staff prisoner relationships are fundamental in preventing sexual abuse. Staff shortages and overcrowding can undermine professional relationships and put prisoners at risk - Investigations into sexual assaults can be slow and the police are not routinely notified about allegations of abuse - Prisons are closed institutions. It is complacent to assume that sexual exploitation and abuse by staff never happens in prison. Details: London: Commission on Sex in Prison, 2014. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Briefing paper 3: Accessed May 21, 2015 at: http://www.commissiononsexinprison.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/Coercive_sex_in_prison_web.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.commissiononsexinprison.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/Coercive_sex_in_prison_web.pdf Shelf Number: 135738 Keywords: Prison RapePrison ViolencePrisoner MisconductSexual Assault |
Author: Gammill, Erica Title: A Texas-Sized Failure: Sexual Assaults in Texas Prisons Summary: Every person, including individuals in jail or prison, deserves to be free from sexual violence. Sexual victimization is not included in a prison sentence, and it should not be part of the punishment. States bear legal responsibility under the Constitution and federal law for protecting prisoners in its facilities from sexual violence and other serious harm. Yet, people in prison are at heightened risk of sexual assault. In particular, the State of Texas and the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) have failed to protect prisoners in their custody from sexual assaults. Despite more than a decade of federal legislative efforts and oversight by the U.S. Department of Justice—including the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA)—the prevalence of sexual assault remains high in Texas prisons. Several prisons in Texas have among the highest rates of sexual victimization in the nation. Regardless of claims that PREA standards are being implemented in Texas prisons, reports from prisoners themselves indicate that sexual assaults in Texas correctional facilities remain a serious problem. The alarming frequency of sexual assault in Texas prisons not only contributes to conditions in Texas facilities that are abhorrent to human dignity, but also violates the constitutional and human rights of prisoners in the TDCJ. Details: Austin, TX: Prison Justice League and Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, 2016 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2017 at: http://taasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/BK_A-Texas-Sized-Failure-SA-in-TX-Prisons-Final.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://taasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/BK_A-Texas-Sized-Failure-SA-in-TX-Prisons-Final.pdf Shelf Number: 147769 Keywords: Prison RapePrison ViolenceSexual AssaultsSexual Violence |
Author: Owen, Barbara Title: Critical Issues Impacting Women in the Justice System: A Literature Review Summary: Passed in 2003, the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) serves as the framework for collecting descriptive data, improving policy and practice, and developing standards surrounding sexual violence in all correctional facilities. Over a decade later, practitioners and researchers alike acknowledge that implementing the Act should recognize that gender differences between female and male inmates require specific attention to female facilities. The 2012 Report of Review Panel on Prison Rape confirms the distinctive needs of female facilities in preventing sexual victimization with this statement: The Panel is aware of the paucity of resources that are available to female correctional facilities when it comes to serving the particular needs of female offenders. The Panel encourages additional research into ways of creating healthy female prisons based on data that show the relationship between institutional practices (e.g., policies on touching between inmates) and the incidence of sexual victimization. The Panel also encourages the development of training tools especially tailored to helping staff who work in female facilities in addressing such issues as maintaining proper professional boundaries and creating an environment free of verbal harassment (Mazza, 2012, p. 60). This summary literature review is but one step in the development of these training tools. In the following, we review the literature relevant to the study of violence and safety in women's prison. We begin with the demographic and background characteristics of female offenders. The pathways model is then described, which emphasizes the life experiences of women that contribute to criminal behavior. This review will then describe the subcultural elements of women's prisons that influence vulnerabilities, victimization, and violence. The types and prevalence of violence in women's prisons, particularly sexual assault, are also summarized. A summary of the National Inmate Survey, a PREA-mandated data collection that measures inmate self-reports is provided. This review then provides a summary of recent research by the authors that examines the context of gendered violence and safety in women's correctional facilities and results from a project that sought to validate an instrument intended to measure women's perceptions of safety and violence. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2014. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed April 2, 2018 at: https://nicic.gov/sites/default/files/033010.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://nicic.gov/sites/default/files/033010.pdf Shelf Number: 149651 Keywords: Female InmatesFemale OffendersGender-Related IssuesPrison AdministrationPrison RapePrison ViolenceWomen Offender |
Author: Awad, Jasmine Title: Is It Enough? the Implementation of PREA's Youthful Inmate Standard Summary: This September marks the 15th Anniversary of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), a federal law enacted to address the problem of sexual assault and rape in U.S. detention centers, jails, lock ups, and prisons. Regulations for the law specifically address one of the most vulnerable populations in adult jails and prisons: youth under age 18. PREA's Youthful Inmate Standard was developed to create a minimum standard that protects youth in adult facilities from being raped or sexually assaulted by requiring that youth are held in housing where they are sight and sound separated from adults. The standard also requires supervision when youth are outside of housing units with incarcerated adults. The challenges associated with keeping youth sight and sound separated under the standard has helped contribute to a growing number of state legislatures passing bills to create a presumption or a requirement that youth under 18 are held in juvenile placements even when they are prosecuted as adults. However, for the youth who remain in adult facilities, there are ongoing limitations associated with implementation of the law. In light of the 15th Anniversary of PREA, the Campaign for Youth Justice (CFYJ) reviewed over 800 audits of adult correctional facilities to identify how the facilities are complying with the Youthful Inmate Standard. The key findings of that review, will be released in a forthcoming brief entitled Is It Enough: The Implementation of PREA's Youthful Inmate Standard. These findings include the following: Most states do not collect or publish PREA audits for local jails, which is where most youth tried as adults are likely to be held. Only 81 adult facilities with publicly available PREA audits previously held, currently hold, or have the capacity to hold youth in the future. Of the 81, only 6 exceeded the PREA Youthful Inmate Standard. Out of the audits reviewed, the two facilities that did not meet the Youthful Inmate Standard were two jails in Texas where 17-year-olds are still automatically treated as adults in the criminal justice system. The adult facilities that exceeded the Youthful Inmate Standard most often held youth under 18 in separate units or separate buildings from adults. After examining the PREA audits, CFYJ found that generally even facilities that exceeded the Youthful Inmate Standard were providing basic necessities that could be better provided in a juvenile facility where youth would have greater access to educational and vocational programs. Compliance with the Youthful Inmate Standard, is costly for many states, especially as states struggle to retain qualified correctional officers to staff these facilities. As a result, a growing number of states and localities are finding alternatives to adult facilities for youth. The number of youth in adult jails on any given night has declined by over 50 percent from 2000 to 2016 according to data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. While PREA's Youthful Inmate Standard was a step in the right direction, when it comes to providing youth what they need to develop into productive adults, it's not nearly enough. For many young people who remain in adult jails, compliance with the standard has resulted in prolonged solitary confinement, and continued threats to their physical safety. To ensure safety and rehabilitation, youth should not be held in places that were not designed or programmed with them in mind. Details: Washington, DC: Campaign for youth Justice, 2018. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 16, 2018 at: http://www.campaignforyouthjustice.org/images/nationalreports/Issue_Brief___Is_It_Enough__The_Implementation_of_PREAs_Youthful_Inmate_Standard_FINAL.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.campaignforyouthjustice.org/images/nationalreports/Issue_Brief___Is_It_Enough__The_Implementation_of_PREAs_Youthful_Inmate_Standard_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 152962 Keywords: Juvenile InmatesPrison RapeSexual AssaultYouth in Adult Prisons |