Working With Female Offenders

1
Working With Female Offenders

• What Does Science Tell Us?
• Kimberly Gentry Sperber, Ph.D.

2
Setting the Stage

• Growing number of women under correctional
  supervision
• Increases in correctional supervision greater for
  women than for men
• Number of women under correctional supervision
  increased 81 from 1990-2000 number of men
  increased 45.
• 85 of women under correctional supervision are
  in the community.

3
Setting the Stage

• Major factor in prison growth for women drug
  offenses
• Major factor in prison growth for men violent
  offenses

4
What Does This Mean for Practitioners?

• More women entering into the system.
• Women entering into the system faster than men.
• More research being done on women.
• Push to implement evidence-based approaches for
  all offenders
• More pressure to implement gender-responsive
  approaches with females.

5
So Where Do We Start?

• Getting to Know the Women

6
Characteristics of Female Offenders

• More likely to have experienced physical and
  sexual abuse
• Estimates range from less than 40 to over 80
  depending on the study and the setting.
• Depression, anxiety, self-harm more prevalent in
  women
• Dual diagnoses more prevalent
• More likely to be primary caregiver of a minor
  child

7
Characteristics of Female Offenders

• Less likely to have been convicted of a violent
  offense
• When they do commit violent offenses, more likely
  to involve an intimate or family member (true of
  girls as well)
• More likely to have been convicted of property or
  drug offense.
• Girls more likely to be charged with status
  offenses.
• Women more likely to abuse drugs men more likely
  to abuse alcohol (BJS data).
• Womens substance abuse has been shown to be
  correlated to trauma and mental health issues.
• Often more likely to be unemployed.
• If they are employed, low-skill, low-pay jobs.

8
Characteristics of Female Offenders

• Women often have different physical health issues
• For example, female inmates more likely to be HIV
  positive.
• Women more likely to have certain types of cancer
  (implications for residential settings)
• Women have higher rates of STDs

9
Characteristics of Female Offenders

• Setting Matters
• Women on probation more likely to have committed
  a property offense.
• Women in prison more likely to have committed a
  drug or violent offense.
• Incarcerated women more likely than men to have
  had a family member incarcerated.
• Incarcerated women typically have shorter
  criminal histories than incarcerated men.

10
Pathways Into Crime

• Runaways
• Substance Abuse
• Poverty
• Relationships

11
Applying the Traditional Model to Females

• Risk, Need, Responsivity, Treatment

12
Risk Principle

• Predicting future criminal behavior
• Matching levels of treatment/services to the risk
  level of the offender
• Tells us who to target

13
Factors Correlated to Risk
14
Factors Correlated to Risk
15
The LSI-R and Women

• Does it work?
• At least 6 studies demonstrating that the
  LSI/LSI-R predicts re-offending in women
• Coulson et al. (1996) found the tool predicted
  recidivism for women with sentences of less than
  2 years.
• McConnell (1996) found the tool predicted
  recidivism for women with sentences of more than
  2 years.
• Retrospective study

16
The LSI-R and Women

• Lowenkamp et al. (2001) found that the tool
  predicted reincarceration for both males and
  females.
• Palmer and Hollin (2007) found that the tool
  predicted reconviction for a sample of English
  prisoners.
• Women scored higher on 5 subscales
  accommodations, companions, family/marital,
  substance abuse, and emotional/personal.

17
The LSI-R and Women

• Folsom and Atkinson (2007) found that the tool
  predicted recidivism for women with sentences of
  more than 2 years.
• Age at 1st arrest and prior convictions were
  strongest predictors.
• Hubbard (2007) found that the LSI-R predicted
  recidivism for both men and women (arrest and
  incarceration).

18
The LSI-R and Women

• At Talbert House
• One study demonstrating that LSI-R scores
  positively correlated with recidivism.
• Sample comprised of adult women from 3 treatment
  settings
• Residential drug court program
• Halfway house
• Jail-based treatment program
• Second study demonstrating that higher LSI-R
  scores predict AWOLs in halfway house sample.

19
LSI-R and Women

• One study that found the LSI-R did not perform
  well for women (Reisig et al., 2006)
• LSI-R misclassified a significant number of women
  who were economically marginalized
• Misclassified a significant number of
  drug-connected women
• More likely to correctly classify women who
  looked male in terms of offending (behaviors
  and context)

20
Comparing the LSI-R to Gender-Responsive Tools

• Study comparing traditional risk tools to
  gender-responsive risk tools (Van Voorhis et al.,
  2008).
• Most of the traditional risk variables were
  predictive across most of the samples
• Criminal attitudes was the least consistent
  predictor across the samples
• Many of the gender-responsive risk variables were
  also predictive, although there was some
  variation depending on setting (e.g., community
  versus institution).
• Adding the gender-responsive items to the
  traditional tools increased predictive power.

21
Conclusions About the Risk Principle With Women

• Women differ in terms of risk to reoffend (as do
  men)
• Service delivery is aided when we can classify
  women into smaller more homogeneous groups based
  on shared characteristics (as with men)
• The LSI-R does appear to predict re-offending in
  women (as it does for men)
• The LSI-R (and tools like it) are likely NOT
  capturing all of the variables predictive of
  reoffending for women
• Therefore, supplemental assessments are likely
  warranted.

22
Need Principle

• Distinguishes between criminogenic needs and
  non-criminogenic needs
• Dynamic risk factors become the criminogenic
  needs
• By definition, these are factors that can change
• Since they are criminogenic, changing them
  changes the probability of re-offending
• Criminogenic needs become the treatment targets
• Tells us what to target

23
Traditional Criminogenic Needs

• Criminogenic
• Antisocial Attitudes
• Antisocial Peers
• Substance Abuse
• Employment

• Non-Criminogenic
• Anxiety
• Low Self-esteem
• Medical Needs
• Creative Abilities
• Physical Conditioning

24
Traditional Criminogenic Needs

• Antisocial Attitudes
• Sperber and Smith (forthcoming) 9 of the 11
  subscales of the How I Think Questionnaire
  positively correlated with the LSI-R score in a
  sample of halfway house women.
• Current clinical norms for the tool not relevant
  for women, however.
• Van Voorhis et al. (2008) antisocial attitudes
  not consistently correlated with recidivism
  (varied by sample).
• Antisocial Peers
• For men, peers often provide a learning
  opportunity. For women, antisocial peers are
  often intimate partners, or a reflection of
  unhealthy relationships (Van Voorhis).
• Regardless of the manifestation, relationships
  with antisocial others puts both men and women at
  risk.

25
Traditional Criminogenic Needs

• Substance Abuse
• Research tends to demonstrate that this is a
  strong correlate of offending for women.
• Often commit crimes to support habit.
• Employment
• Focus is on ability to secure jobs that pay a
  decent wage and allow the woman to support
  herself, and often her minor children.
• Housing
• Additional consideration of housing safety

26
Criminogenic Need or Responsivity?

• Depression
• Hubbard (2007) depression was not correlated
  with recidivism for both males and females.
• Van Voorhis et al. (2008) depression correlated
  to recidivism in both community and institutional
  settings for females.
• Benda (2005) depression correlated to
  recidivism for women but not for men.

27
Criminogenic Need or Responsivity?

• Self-Esteem
• Lariviere (1999) found relationship between low
  self-esteem and antisocial behavior in women.
• Hubbard (2007) low self-esteem was not
  correlated to recidivism for both males and
  females.
• Sperber and Carter (forthcoming) self-esteem
  was not correlated to recidivism in a sample of
  adult women.
• Self-esteem was correlated to LSI-R score,
  however (lower self-esteem, higher LSI-R score).
• Self-efficacy was correlated to recidivism
  (higher self-efficacy, lower recidivism)

28
Self-Esteem vs. Self-Efficacy

• GRT contains scales for both self-esteem and
  self-efficacy
• Research question was about the relative
  importance of self-esteem versus self-efficacy as
  a predictor of recidivism for women.

29
Defining Self-Esteem

• An individual's sense of his or her value or
  worth.
• The most broad and frequently cited definition of
  self-esteem within psychology is Rosenberg's
  (1965), who described it as a favorable or
  unfavorable attitude toward the self.

30
Defining Self-Efficacy

• The concept of self-efficacy lies at the center
  of Banduras social cognitive theory.
• Self-efficacy is a persons belief in his or her
  ability to succeed in a particular situation.

31
GRT at Talbert House

• Participated in validation study
• Sample comprised of 147 women residing in 4
  community-based correctional programs
• Halfway House
• Residential Drug Court Program
• Jail-Based Assessment Program
• Jail-Based Treatment Program

32
Measures

• LSI-R
• Demographics/Clinical Attributes
• GRT
• Self-Esteem
• Self-Efficacy
• Relationships
• Abuse
• Parenting
• Recidivism
• New charge
• New conviction

33
Bivariate Results

• Significant positive correlation between
  self-esteem and self-efficacy.
• Both self-esteem and self-efficacy positively
  significantly correlated with relationships.
• Both self-esteem and self-efficacy negatively
  correlated with abuse.

34
Bivariate Results

• Both self-esteem and self-efficacy were
  significantly negatively correlated with a number
  of LSI domains
• Education/Employment
• Leisure/Recreation
• Alcohol/Drugs
• Emotional/Personal
• Both also negatively correlated with overall LSI
  composite risk score.

35
Bivariate Results

• Self-Efficacy also significantly negatively
  correlated with 2 additional LSI domains
• Companions
• Accommodations

36
Bivariate Correlations With Outcomes

• Self-esteem was not significantly correlated to
  new charge or new conviction post-discharge.
• Self-efficacy was significantly correlated with
  both new charge and new conviction
  post-discharge.
• Women with higher self-efficacy were less likely
  to recidivate.

37
Conclusions

• Self-esteem was significantly correlated with a
  number of criminogenic risk domains but not with
  actual offending.
• Appears that self-esteem may impact recidivism
  indirectly through its impact on these domains.
• Self-efficacy was significantly correlated with a
  larger number of criminogenic risk domains and
  actual offending.
• Appears that there is a direct relationship
  between self-efficacy and offending in women.

38
Implications for Practitioners

• Study offers some support for idea that
  self-esteem operates as a responsivity factor,
  while self-efficacy may be a criminogenic need.
• Self-esteem versus self-efficacy
• Self-efficacy is easier to target for change
  through traditional CBT programs which focus on
  increasing skills (i.e., increased skills likely
  lead to improved confidence in ones ability).
• Improvements in self-efficacy are likely to net
  gains in self-esteem as well given they are
  positively correlated.

39
Criminogenic Need or Responsivity?

• Lowenkamp et al. (2001) abuse not related to
  recidivism for males or females.
• UC study examining relationship between child
  abuse and recidivism for adolescent sample also
  found no relationship.
• Other studies have found a correlation between
  prior abuse and recidivism for women, however.

40
Talbert House Abuse Data

• GRT validation sample
• Abuse correlated with
• New Charge
• New Conviction
• Days to Re-Conviction

41
Conclusions About Criminogenic Needs

• Focusing on traditional criminogenic needs is
  still warranted.
• Need to understand that they may manifest or
  originate differently in women than in men.
• Need to widen pool of treatment targets to
  include items that have traditionally been
  characterized as responsivity issues.

42
Approaches to Working With Females

• CBT
• Promoted as most effective method for reducing
  recidivism.
• Teaches people to change antisocial attitudes, to
  make more responsible choices, how to
  problem-solve, etc.
• Uses skill-based exercises
• Some have questioned utility for women

43
Approaches to Working With Females

• Meta-Analysis by Andrews and Dowden (1999) on the
  principles of effective interventions and
  females.
• Found that programs that followed these
  principles had greater recidivism reductions.
• Targeted higher risk offenders for services
• Focused on traditional criminogenic needs
• Utilized approaches based on CBT and structured
  social learning

44
Approaches to Working With Females

• Study of 4 residential programs using CBT by
  Hubbard (2007)
• 2 male, 2 female (Talbert House programs)
• After controlling for risk, women performed
  better than men in terms of recidivism
• Possible conclusion is that women responded more
  favorably to CBT than men
• Other variables were not predictive of
  recidivism
• Depression
• Self-Esteem
• IQ

45
Approaches to Working With Females

• Relational Approaches
• Premise that womens maturity is built on
  motivation to build a sense of connection with
  others.
• Self-worth is based on connections to others.
• Growth occurs when these relationships are
  mutual, empathetic, and empowering
• Growth is stunted when relationships are abusive
  or nonmutual.

46
Approaches to Working With Females

• Relational Approaches
• Significant for women due to amount of
  disconnection and violations in their
  relationships.
• Need healthy relationships to change and grow.
• Relational context is seen as important in
  understanding why women offend, their motivations
  for change, and their needs for reintegration.

47
Conclusions About Approaches

• CBT and relational approaches are not mutually
  exclusive
• Relationships can be a focus of CBT programming
  (focus on how women choose friends and intimates
  and consequences of those choices so they can
  make better choices)
• Programs can help foster healthy relationships
  for women

48
Examples From the Field

• Passages Program for Girls
• Residential Substance Abuse Program
• Primary modality is CBT (Corrective Thinking)
• Milieu management model is Teaching Family Model
  (TFM) social learning theory
• Recently adopted VOICES curriculum - relational
• Provides MH counseling
• Used to provide groups specific to relationships
  and self-esteem re-examining these services.
• Provides some family therapy and case management

49
Relationship Between Intermediate Outcomes and
Recidivism

• Preliminary Results for Successful Completers
• Increased self-esteem 62.5
• Change from pre to post statistically significant
• Increased self-efficacy 61.4
• Change from pre to post statistically significant
• Reduced antisocial attitudes 82.5
• Change from pre to post statistically significant
• Significant changes in family functioning
• Cohesion
• Conflict
• Intellectual-Cultural Orientation,
• Moral-Religious Emphasis
• Organization

50
Examples From the Field

• Hamilton County Probation GEMS Unit
• Girls Empowered and Motivated to Succeed
• Girls only caseload
• Caseloads capped at 25
• Staff trained in gender responsivity
• Provide more intensive interaction with PO and
  for longer periods of time
• Provide girls-only groups (Girls Circle)
• Focus is on relationship building
• Specialized risk assessment (HRAF)

51
Examples From the Field

• MCC Womens Center CHANGE Program
• Offer traditional CBT groups (T4C)
• Offer Moving On curriculum (Van Dieten)
  developed specifically for women
• DSAT program for women substance abusers
• Offer Seeking Safety groups for trauma
• Offer parenting classes
• Offer college classes
• Work programs are breaking gender stereotypes and
  training women in professions that have higher
  chance of earning a good wage

52
Examples From the Field

• Unique aspects of the unit
• Women housed separately from the men.
• Women were involved in the design of the new unit
  from the beginning
• Women were given tours of the new unit as it was
  being built/designed
• Women were on committees to help structure the
  new unit and still run these committees for
  ongoing operations
• Weekly town hall meetings with residents and
  staff
• Residents provide tours to visitors to the unit.
• All of these give a voice to the women and
  represent a relational method of operation.
• They also help build self-efficacy and
  self-esteem of the women.

53
Operational Issues for Discussion

• Negative stereotypes of women
• Often perceived as more difficult to work with
• Staff gender
• Risk management issues
• Vulnerability to sexual misconduct of staff
• Vulnerability to being triggered by staff conduct
• Some needed services may be outside scope of
  practice
• Training requirements
• How to choose curricula
• Resource allocation for traditional model versus
  gender-responsive model
• Resource allocation for services for men and
  women (does equitable mean equal?)
• Reentry considerations

54
Conclusions

• There is support for use of the traditional RNRT
  model with female offenders.
• There is a growing body of research that also
  recognizes that certain responsivity variables
  may actually be criminogenic needs for females
  and therefore warrant more attention.
• The application of specific treatment models or
  curricula is still under-studied for females.
• Agencies need to build a strong base of service
  delivery drawing from both the traditional
  approach and a gender-responsive approach.