Quiescence in women's prisons litigation: Some exploratory issues
- 1 June 1984
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Justice Quarterly
- Vol. 1 (2) , 253-276
- https://doi.org/10.1080/07418828400088141
Abstract
Despite the increase in prisoner civil rights litigation in the past decades, we know relatively little about the bases of such suits, let alone the differences between male and female litigants. Judging from existing literature, we would expect women to join male litigants in challenging the conditions of their confinement. But it seems that there has been a remarkable quiescence among women prisoners in civil rights litigation. Despite such factors as poor living conditions, overcrowding, internal disciplinary problems, lack of job training programs, and unbalanced racial composition (all positively associated with high civil rights litigation rates), it would seem that women are filing proportionally far fewer suits than their male counterparts. Further, women sue for somewhat different reasons. Using data from one federal district in Illinois and two Illinois prisons, we will argue that, compared to their male counterparts, women do not choose litigation for problem resolution, and we will suggest that gender and organizational constraints may account for much of this quiescence.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- Black attitudes in prison: A sociological analysisJournal of Criminal Justice, 1986
- Adult Education In Correctional Settings: Symbol or Substance?Adult Education Quarterly, 1984
- Judicial Decisions and Prison Reform: The Impact of Litigation on Women PrisonersSocial Problems, 1983
- Women prisoners and the law: Which way will the pendulum swing?Journal of Criminal Justice, 1982
- Sexism and Medical Care in a Jail SettingWomen & Health, 1982
- Administrative Justice in the Penitentiary: A Report on Inmate Grievance ProceduresAmerican Bar Foundation Research Journal, 1982
- When Prisoners Sue: A Study of Prisoner Section 1983 Suits in the Federal CourtsHarvard Law Review, 1979
- Why the “Haves” Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal ChangeLaw & Society Review, 1974
- California Prisoners: Rights without RemediesStanford Law Review, 1972