Classification for Female Inmates: Moving Forward

By K. Farr. 2000

95 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/667763fbefd5479b7535a006f4ef8b51655eae9e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Studying Criminal Career Length Through Early Adulthood Among Serious Offenders (2004, background): “Further work among female offenders is especially important as questions continue to surface regarding the correctional programming of female offenders vis-à-vis male offenders (Farr, 2000).”
The Predictive Validity of a Gender-Responsive Needs Assessment (2009, background): “The omission of gender-responsive factors from current community assessments is attributed to the fact that they too were constructed from research samples of male offenders (Blanchette, 2004; Blanchette & Brown, 2006; Brennan, 1998; Brennan & Austin, 1997; Farr, 2000; Reisig, Holtfreter, & Morash, ”
Sacrosanct or Flawed: Risk, Accountability and Gender- Responsive Penal Politics (2010, background): “…of prison classifications systems inspired a new generation of gender-informed risk-need classification research (Owen and Bloom 1995; Brennan 1998; Farr 2000; Hannah-Moffat and Shaw, 2001; VanVoorhis and Presser 2001; Holtfreter and Morash 2003; Hardyman and Van Voorhis 2004; Brown and Blanchette…”
The Past Is Prologue: Prior Adjustment to Prison and Institutional Misconduct (2010, background): “The current study alludes to the applicability of universal risk classification instruments used to classify both male and female inmates (Brennan, 1998, Burke & Adams, 1991; Farr, 2000).”
Gendered Pathways (2009, unknown): “…in relatively equal frequency but with distinct personal and social effects for women (e.g., Belknap & Holsinger, 2006; Chesney-Lind & Shelden, 2004; Farr, 2000; Funk, 1999; Gavazzi, Yarcheck, & Chesney-Lind, 2006; Holsinger, 2000; Holtfreter & Morash, 2003; Reisig, Holtfreter, & Morash, 2006).”
Achieving Accurate Pictures of Risk and Identifying Gender Responsive Needs: Two New Assessments for Women Offenders 1 (2008, background): “…self-esteem, self-efficacy, abuse and trauma, personal safety, and the confluence of trauma, mental health, and substance abuse (Belknap & Holsinger, 2006; Blanchette, 2004; Blanchette & Brown, 2006; Brennan, 1998; Brennan & Austin, 1997; Farr, 2000; Reisig, Holtfreter, & Morash, 2006).”
The correctional melting pot: Race, ethnicity, citizenship, and prison violence (2006, background): “…to be significantly more violent and antisocial than female inmates (Craddock, 1996; Farr, 2000; Goetting & Howsen, 1983; Harer & Langan, 2001), there is evidence that correctional staff may view female inmates as more demanding, annoying, and challenging inmates to supervise (see Farr, 2000).”
Assessing Recidivism Risk Across Female Pathways to Crime (2006, background): “The context of violence also varies by gender: women are more likely to use violence against family members and intimates, often in response to physical, sexual, or emotional abuse (Farr, 2000, p. 5).”
Evaluating the Predictive Validity of the Compas Risk and Needs Assessment System (2009, unknown): “A major criticism of 2G and 3G approaches is that they largely based their assessment and classification methods on dominantly male samples and then mechanically applied these to female offenders (Blanchette & Brown, 2006; Bloom, 2000; Brennan, 2008b; Farr, 2000; Hannah-Moffatt & Shaw, 2001).”
The predictive validity of risk assessment tools for female offenders: A systematic review (2015, unknown): “It is also suggested that these factors are either not typically seen in men, may be seen in men but occur at a greater frequency in women, or can be seen in men and women but affect women in unique personal and social ways (ChesneyLind & Shelden, 2004; Farr, 2000; Funk, 1999).”
Women’s Risk Factors and Their Contributions to Existing Risk/Needs Assessment (2010, background): “While the above list of risk and need factors may seem comprehensive, gender-responsive scholars note the absence of assessment scales pertaining to relationships, depression, parental issues, self-esteem, self-efficacy, trauma, and victimization (Blanchette, 2004; Blanchette & Brown, 2006; Bloom et”