Feminist Jurisprudence — or Women-Wise Penology?
| Published date | 01 September 1989 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455058903600304 |
| Date | 01 September 1989 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Feminist
Jurisprudence —
or Women-Wise
Penology?
Pat Carlen, Professor of
Criminology at the
University of Keele, argues
that ’women-wise’ penal
strategies should be devised
to right some of the wrongs
presently suffered by
women
in the criminal
justice system.
am
often asked
values, justice, neutrality and
whether 1 think it is possible (and/or
objectivity.’
desirable) to develop a distinct and dif-
Yet although Smart
ferent
argues that we do
way of thinking about female
indeed need to theorise women’s
lawbreakers and state punishmentZ
whether
oppression she expresses many reserv-
a ’feminist jurisprudence’ can
ations about the
or should be developed to inform the
quest for a ’feminist
management of women’s prisons, the
jurisprudence’, not the least among
writing of social enquiry reports for
them relating to the knowledge that
women, and the running of female of-
’once enacted, legislation is in the
fenders’ hostels or probation groups
hands of individuals and agencies far
etc. The question is an important one.
removed from the values and politics
For as Carol Smart’ has recently
of the women’s movement’. For this
observed:
and several other reasons she sounds
’The search for
a ’warning to feminism to avoid the
a feminist juris-
prudence signals the shift
siren call of law’. Avoidance of law,
away
from a concentration on law reform
however, is not an option open to those
and ’adding women’ into legal con-
women
who
stand before it not volun-
siderations to a concern with fund-
tarily seeking remedy but involuntarily
110
amental issues like legal logic, legal
awaiting punishment.
A Feminist Penology?
be answered by withdrawal of the ex-
isting facilities in question from their
The question of how to think about
male clients. Likewise, a competent
women
lawbreakers has been a thorny
probation officer might know both that
one for feminists. It is one thing to
her client will gain advantage if it can
:
search for a ’feminist jurisprudence’ ...
be demonstrated that she is a good
~
but who wants a feminist penology?
housewife and mother2, and that by
Well, people involved in the criminal
~
privileging that woman’s housewifely
justice and penal systems might, for a
’
and mothering performances she will
start. Concerned women (and men)
also be colluding in, and promoting,
working in the courts, prisons and
the stereotype of the criminal woman
non-custodial agencies might find it
who is NOT a wife and mother, and
helpful to have some general feminist
thereby possibly disadvantaging single,
guidelines on penal policy, while
lawbreaking women might find them-
’Offence-focused groups can slowly
selves to be less frequently written out
gain knowledge of the combinations
of the judicial and penal scripts if a pro-
of circumstances in which wormed
gramme of criminal justice for women
were to be
most
among other (j~rispruden-
frequently choose to break the
tial) paradigms informing the ad-
law and develop therapies relevant to
ministration of criminal and penal
their needs/
justice.
I take Carol Smart’s point that a
divorced, childless and lesbian female
’feminist jurisprudence’ might merely
offenders.
replace one closed and global system
a
that such dilemmas exist should
of ’Truth’ with another and...
To continue reading
Request your trial