Race Class and Gender in a Correctional Context - Essay Example

Race, and Gender in a Correctional Context Affiliation Race, and Gender in a Correctional Context In all spheres of life, race, class and gender are constants that always remain supreme. Over the years, policies have shaped and directed how correctional facilities run and operate. Some of these policies focussed on gender, race and class. These crucial issues can not be singled and analyzed separately, however, in the context of the correctional policy enactment; they always play a major determinant role. This paper seeks to address ways in which sentencing policy changes have impacted the U.S criminal justice system in recent decades. The paper also looks at the future, and the way these policies may affect the system, and the future implications of such changes. Since the U.S has different policies for different states, this paper will use the example of Minnesota. The Minnesota example of sentencing reform extends beyond the state. Over 19 states use this model. The District of Columbia has also used the model. Notably, the federal courts currently employ some form of sentencing guidelines. The American Bar Association has since endorsed this approach in initial drafts of anticipated amendments of the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code (Frase, 2014). Racial Disparities The most notable sentencing policy change was the replacement of the indeterminate system of sentencing with the sentencing guidelines (Frase, 2014). In 1980, the state of Minnesota legally adopted compulsory sentencing guidelines. It became the first state to do this. It also became the first state to institute a stable, sovereign sentencing commission. The work of the commission was to develop guidelines on sentencing. The Commission would also monitor its implementation as well as make necessary recommendation in relation to sentencing. The state also instituted the practice of employing guidelines and a commission which set policies prioritizing the use, and working within the limits of, available correctional capacity (Frase, 2014).  These guidelines styles are extensively applauded and emulated not just aimed at reducing the disappointingly great racial and other discrepancies in sentencing, but because the style is more predictable, data-informed as well as politically independent. Guidelines from a commission of this nature ease the task of states in managing the ever diminishing prison space and hence avoid the over-crowded prison scenarios. The effect of this style of policy was indicated by the slow prison population growth in the state of Minnesota as compared to the national prison population growth in the 1980s (Frase, 2014). Considering the poverty and race concentrations in the state as well as the rising criminal case loads of the time, this was a notable change.  However, in matters of racial disparity in U.S custody populations (as calculated by the ratio of the White to the Black rate per capita incarceration rate) Minnesota’s is rates highest in the nation (Frase, 2014). In the 1980s and 1990s studies into the national prison population revealed that Minnesota’s ratios of Black-to-White incarceration-rate stood at 19:1 rising up to 23:1; no other state rated that high. However, over the years those ratios had dropped significantly. Studies revealed that the ratio dropped from about 18:1 by the year 2001 to about 11:1 in by 2006 (Frase, 2014). In addition to this, when jail inmates and Hispanic inmates are included and tallied independently instead of including them in the Black and White race categories, the ratios drop even further.  On Gender The US has registered an increased number of people incarcerated; this may be a result of policy changes in the past few decades (Freudenberg, 2002). Evidently, the ratio of men to women incarcerated is higher. However, there has been a notable, dramatic increase in the rate of women in recent years (Pollock, 1997). This increase in the rate of women incarceration may be the result of bigger factors that have influenced crime policy in the US. The exponential rise in the populations in the nation’s prison system rests on the belief that society has turned more corrective than preventive. It has also been blamed on the war on crime, drugs and the mandatory sentencing laws on drugs. The rate on incarceration of African American women has increased than that of their male counterparts (Pollock, 1997). Even in cases where the rates level off, the rate for black women still stand higher than those of their counterparts; the whites and Hispanics. The ratios are quite staggering. In comparison to one white woman incarcerated in a cluster of a thousand, there is one in 300 black women. For the Hispanic females, the ratio stands at one in every 704 (Freudenberg, 2002). It may appear that policy on sentencing is harsher towards the black population. State sentencing policies directly impact the racial composition of prisons. These are embodied in the Guidelines rules which define crime severity, history of criminal scores, and recommended incarceration periods. Therefore, the cumulatively Guidelines rules encompass a harsh impact on individuals of color (Frase, 2014). To add weight to this hypothesis, by the year 2005, the percentage ratio of blacks, whites, Hispanics, Asians and Native Americans offenders, who recommended incarceration sentences under the guidelines. Stood at 39:25:31:33:35 respectively (Freudenberg, 2002). Racial disparities in conviction crime severity are much lesser than in former conviction records – in 2005, the average severity scores for the Blacks were 3.9 while they stood at 3.8 for the Whites (Frase, 2014).  There exists limited or no data in Minnesota on charging as well as on plea bargaining processes. Is it, however, possible that systematic prejudices in these practices overstate the conviction crime severity. This may be true also for criminal history scores pertaining to the Black offenders. There also lingers the reason to suppose that severity intensities and criminal history scores afford a fairly precise gauge of current and former crimes (Frase, 2014). Studies nationally have often revealed increased rates of black offending. Studies nationally have revealed consistently that the rates of Black offending, particularly for violent crime, are higher (Frase R. S. 2013). The state of Minnesota is no exception. The arrest rates also exemplify a high racial disparity nationally, particularly for violent crime, as well as inequality in the fundamental social associate of crime. This is gauged in rates of socio-economic avenues strongly linked with crime. Unemployment and poverty also appear to be in favour of the black society and hence the higher crime rate. It is, however, difficult to gauge that the Model Minnesota Policy on sentencing is biased (Frase R. 2014). This is to the degree that Guidelines crime severity and criminal history scores echo real crime deeds. The use of prisons for brutal and habitual offenders is an exceptionally justifiable choice. It is also a choice that ensures protection of non-whites. This is an opinion derived from the belief that since crime is intra-racial, non-whites will more often commit crimes against other non-whites as compared to whites. In matters of space economy in the ever filling up incarceration facilities, it is debatable to use more space for drug offenders. This gained much consideration when it came to drug offenders, who were mostly black in Minnesota and elsewhere. Studies have shown that black youth face a higher possibility of incarceration for a first time drug-offence than whites (Wise, 2009). However, today drug offenders incarcerated are less likely to be black (Frase R. 2014). Judges in Minnesota and other states boast the power to deviate from standard Guidelines sentences, and in exercise they usually do so, in particular to moderate sentences (Frase R. 2014). This research has established slight proof of racial discrimination in exit decisions, after factoring other sentencing practices. On the other hand, a number of these aspects are of debatable legitimacy, especially, the propensity to give less harsh sentences to individuals who take the guilty plea. Most black offenders seldom take the guilty plea. Finally, on racial disparity, it is doubtful that a smaller number of non-White wrongdoers would be imprisoned if Minnesota and the other states, which followed suit had reserved the earlier indeterminate system sentencing system. Instead of weakening the system, it bestowed more weight on the former conviction record. There exists no reason to suspect that judges in such a system, or parole officials for that matter, would be soft towards non-white wrongdoers. Some states are not lenient on such state officers (Kurtz & Koepsell, 2007).  Societal attitudes on sentencing policy changes In the Minnesota model, which many other states consequently adopted and employed, public opinion has played a limited direct part in the process of developing and implementing the Minnesota’s Sentencing Guidelines (Frase R. 2014). However, this was by design since independent commissions on sentencing are coupled with expertise as well as research capacity. This favours the promotion of a long-term policy which is fiscally-responsible. Since public opinion changes and shifts unexpectedly triggering political pressures, commissions help insulate policy development from such occurrences. Nonetheless, the governing body and the Guidelines Commission have put measures to ensure that the public is privy of the Commission’s work (Frase R. 2014). It has also ensured to take into consideration the input and perspectives of the public.   In conclusion, the Minnesota sentencing policy has proven viable over the years. It has undoubtedly passed the racial test. The model has performed well in other states, which borrowed a leaf from it for their own policy developments. Whereas, this paper did not delve much into the nature of the policy in matters of gender, it is believed that it treats this issue as fairly as it treats the racial one. Probably the most critical question would be the future of indeterminate sentencing, and whether it will extend to other crimes. In the occurrence of this, then future sentencing will not only be disparate but unpredictable. Read More