Introduction
The Institute on Women and Criminal Justice of the Women’s
Prison Association is releasing the first volume of The
Punitiveness Report, a national study by Dr. Natasha
Frost, assistant professor at Northeastern University College
of Criminal Justice. Her report presents the first state-by-state
compendium of data charting the dramatic increase in the
incarceration of women over the past 27 years in the United
States. A second volume will look more deeply at factors
that increased the risk of imprisonment for women arrested
for felony offenses and increased the amount of time spent
behind bars.
While
women comprise just a small segment of all the people serving
prison terms in the U.S., their number is rising at a far
faster rate than that of men. Incarceration of women has
profound impacts on the families and communities left behind.
Dr. Frost’s findings should spark a national dialogue about
how women are affected by incarceration. Her findings should
also motivate policymakers to examine the trends and prospects
for reform in their states.
Growth Trends and Recent Research Findings is presented
as a companion to Dr. Frost’s exhaustive study. It provides
a brief overview of recent research that provides context
for her findings regarding the increased incarceration of
women, and discusses the multitude of problems incarceration
presents for women and their children. This report also
takes a closer look at growth patterns, regional trends,
and how states rank on various measures of female imprisonment.
Over
the final quarter of the 20th century, U.S. criminal
justice policies underwent a period of intense politicization
and harsh transformation. Draconian sentencing laws and
get-tough correctional policies led to an unprecedented
increase in jail and prison populations, driving the United
States’ rate of incarceration head and shoulders above that
of other developed nations.
The
imprisonment boom that began in the late 1970s has swelled
the state and federal prison system to more than 1.4 million
prisoners. Adding those held in local jails and other lockups
(juvenile facilities, immigrant detention, etc.) the total
number of people behind bars rises to almost 2.3 millionof
which seven percent are women. [1] At the end of 2004, 96,125 women were serving
state or federal prison sentencesalmost nine times
the number in prison in 1977. [2]
National
prison population growth trends
Female
state prison population growth has far outpaced male growth
in the past quarter-century. The number of women serving
sentences of more than a year grew by 757 percent between
1977 and 2004nearly twice the 388 percent increase
in the male prison population. Although the size of the
gap varies, female prison populations have risen more quickly
than male populations in all 50 states. The trend has also
been persistent, with median annual growth rates for women
exceeding growth rates for men in 22 of the last 27 years,
including each of the past 11 years.
[3]
In
part, this is due to the small number of women who were
incarcerated at the beginning of the boom relative to the
number of men, so that increases show up as larger proportional
growth against smaller base figures.
Womens
higher growth rate is also due to an increase in the number
of women arrested. For example, between 1995 and 2004, arrests
of women were up 13 percent while the number of women behind
prison bars rose by 53 percent. Female imprisonment
rates jumped 36 percent over the same period, compared to
an increase of 17 percent for men. Women’s share of
the prison population rose from 6.3 percent to 7.2 percent.
While
the number of women prisoners has soared, the proportion
of women convicted of violent offenses has declined since
1979, when they comprised 49 percent of the women in the
state prison system.
[4] One-third of the women serving state prison
sentences in 2002 were incarcerated for violent offenses,
compared to more than half of the men. Drug offenses now
account for nearly one-third of women (up from one in 10
in 1979), compared with just one-fifth of men.
Male
prison populations catch cold while women get pneumonia
The
rise of the female state prison population has been constant
but uneven over the past quarter-century, punctuated by
growth spurts in the early and late 1980s and mid-1990s.
Median annual growth rates fell after 1995 and have remained
in the single digits since then. Nonetheless, many states
continue to see significant population growth, including
nine where numbers shot up by over 10 percent in 2004.
The
pattern of growth in female prison populations generally
tracks changes in male prison populations, which also underwent
periods of rapid expansion in the early and late 1980s.
But women have been hit much harder, experiencing growth
spikes that reached higher, lasted longer and often began
earlier than those affecting men.
For
example, while the growth rate for male prisoners shot up
a little more than twofold between 1980 and 1981, from 5.4
percent to 14 percent, the growth rate for female prisoners
increased four-fold, from 3.8 percent to 17 percent. The
following year, the male growth rate fell below 12 percent
while the female growth rate kept climbing to more than
18 percent.
An
even more remarkable growth spurt took place between 1987
and 1990. Both the men’s and women’s prison populations
began and ended the four-year period with annual growth
rates hovering around seven to eight percent. In between,
however, annual growth in the women’s prison population
hit record levels, topping 25 percent, compared to a peak
rate of less than 14 percent for males. To paraphrase the
old saying, when the male prison population caught cold,
women came down with pneumonia.

The
gap between male and female prison population growth rates
has widened recently, producing an annual rate of increase
for women that roughly doubled the rate for men in six of
the last seven years. The number of women added to the
state prison populations each year remains high despite
lower growth rates. In fact, the expansion that has taken
place since 1999 (11,689 new female prisoners) exceeds the
total female state prison population in 1980 (11,113 women).

Regional
prison population growth trends
National
trends play a significant role in patterns of state prison
population expansion, as evidenced by the simultaneous growth
spurts that took place at the beginning and end of the 1980s.
Three in five states saw female prison population growth
rates reach a 25-year high-water mark in 1981 (six states),
1982 (six states) or 1989 (14 states). The latter year
was an extraordinarily punitive one for women: 43 states
saw population increases in the double digits while half
saw their numbers jump by more than 25 percent. But growth
in women’s prison populations also varies by geographic
region.
[5]
The
Northeast: Turning the corner on female prison population
growth?
Northeastern
states logged extraordinarily rapid growth during the 1980s
followed by below-average growth during the 1990s.
[6] The region saw record growth in 1989 when
most states saw their female prison population jump by more
than a third. Between 1999 and 2004, however, the total
number of women housed in Northeastern state prisons fell
by 11 percent (976 prisoners), driven by prison population
declines in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Connecticut.

The
Pacific states: From boom to bust and back
Pacific
states also saw unusually high rates of growth during the
1980s, including nine years with median growth rates in
the double-digits. [7] The pattern in the years that followed has been
erratic. The region’s female prison population actually
fell slightly in 1991 but resumed its climb the following
year. The turn of the century ushered in a more substantial
1,347-person decrease in the region’s female prison population,
reflected in every Pacific state but Oregon. But by the
end of 2004, the decline had been erased by the addition
of 2,003 women to prisons in Pacific states.

The
Midwest and South: Setting the national growth trend
Depending
on how one looks at it, women’s prison populations in the
Midwest and South either set the national trend or tracked
it closely, rising rapidly in the early and late 1980s and
mid-1990s.
[8] Southern states (excluding Texas) were
more likely to see below-average growth rates during the
1980s, but the region has nearly matched national median
rates since then. Midwestern states’ median growth rates
have hovered at or below those of the nation as a whole
since 1999 with the exception of 2004, when the region’s
annual growth rate shot to more than 8 percent.
The
number of women added to Southern prisons each year remains
substantial. The region recorded its second-largest annual
increase in 1999 (2,007 women), and its fourth-largest increase
took place in 2002 (1,853 women). Almost a quarter (23
percent) of Southern female prison population growth since
1979 took place in the last five years.


The
Mountain states: Speeding ahead
Every
region has seen women’s prison populations increase by leaps
and bounds. But the pace and persistence of growth in the
Mountain states set the region apart from the rest of the
country. Over the past 27 years, the total female prison
population of the Mountain states has risen by 1,600 percenttwice
the national population growth rate of 757 percent.
The
explosion of women’s prison populations in the Mountain
states began in the 1980s and has continued in recent years.
The region’s total female prison population has increased
by 56 percent since 1999four times the 13 percent
increase felt nationally. Fully 38 percent of the growth
in the Mountain states’ female prison population over the
past quarter-century occurred during the last five years.

Tough,
tougher, toughest: Mountain and Southern states lead the
rise in female imprisonment rates
Analysis
of median incarceration rates for the various regions shows
similar patterns with some critical differences. Southern
states experienced the smallest proportional growth in female
imprisonment rates. But because the South began the 27-year
period with much higher rates than the rest of the countrya
median of 11 per 100,000 residents compared to a median
of five per 100,000 residents elsewhereincreased use
of incarceration had a greater impact there.
While
the typical Midwest state added 40 female prisoners for
every 100,000 residents between 1979 and 2004, and the typical
Pacific state added 46 per 100,000, the median incarceration
rate for Southern states grew by 57 per 100,000second
only to a Mountain state increase of 77 per 100,000. As
for the Northeastern states, it took a decade of breakneck
growth to reach the place where Southern states started
in 1977.

State
variance in the use of imprisonment for women
The
use of imprisonment for women varies enormously by state
as well as by region. 129 of every 100,000 women in Oklahoma
are serving a state prison sentence while Massachusetts
imprisons 11 women for every 100,000 female state residents.
Women make up over 12 percent of state prisoners in Montananearly
four times their 3.2 percent share of Rhode Island’s prison
population. A handful of statesincluding Colorado,
Hawaii, Idaho, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire and North
Dakotahave seen a greater than 20-fold increase in
their female prison populations since 1977. [9] Michigan and North
Carolina, by contrast, experienced comparatively “modest”
four-fold growth over the same period.
The
measures employed in the following comparative analysis
of statesthe female imprisonment rate, the
female proportion of the prison population, and female
prison population growthhelp us identify patterns
and trends that can guide future research exploring how
and why the extent of female imprisonment varies so greatly
among states. Each of these measures captures a different
facet of the extent of female imprisonment and how it has
changed over time. Used together, the measures pinpoint
states where sentencing and correctional policies and trends
appear to have fallen harder, or less hard, on women. Ultimately,
they help to highlight both positive trends as well as unmet
opportunities to reduce costs and improve outcomes.
How
states stack up
States
stack up differently based on the measure used to compare
them. Louisiana has the nation’s third-highest female imprisonment
rate (103 per 100,000 residents) but women’s share of the
state’s prison population (6.5 percent) falls below the
national median (7 percent). New Hampshire ranks third
in female prison population growth (up 5,850 percent since
1977) yet the state’s female imprisonment rate (18 per 100,000)
remains the fourth-lowest in the nation. The chart at the
end of this section presents state statistics and ranks
across all three measures (including measures of population
growth over two different time periods).
A
handful of states, however, stand among the nation’s “toughest”
on multiple measures of female imprisonment. Trends in
these states should be of particular interest to researchers,
policymakers and advocates who are concerned about the damage
that imprisonment can cause to women, their families and
their communities.
Heading
the list is Montana, which devotes by far the largest
share of its prison beds to women. Montana’s female prison
population has grown at the fastest rate in the nation since
1977 and its female imprisonment rate (102 per 100,000)
ranks fourth nationwide.
Several
other Mountain states also appear to be particularly tough
on women. Idaho and Colorado rank among the
top 10 on every scale of female imprisonment, including
population growth over the last five years. Wyoming
devotes the second-largest share of prison space to women
and imprisons them at the ninth-highest rate in the nation.
Arizona boasts the nation’s seventh-leading female
imprisonment rate and has seen its female prison population
jump by more than 60 percent since 1999.
Among
Southern states, Oklahoma and Mississippi
merit special attention. Not only do they imprison women
at the highest rates in the nation, but Oklahoma is also
one of six states where women make up at least 10 percent
of the prison population, and Mississippi’s population has
grown 28 times larger since 1977.
Three
Midwestern states and one Pacific state demand also deserve
notice, each for a different set of reasons. Women are
heavily overrepresented in South Dakota prisons compared
to rest of the nation, and the state’s incarceration and
growth rates are well above average. Missouri imprisons
women at the eighth-highest rate in the nation and also
ranks poorly on the other scales of female imprisonment.
North
Dakota has a comparatively low female imprisonment rate
but devotes over 10 percent of its prison beds to womena
population whose numbers have shot up 6,350 percent since
1977 and doubled over the past five years. Women also comprise
over 10 percent of prisoners in Hawaii and, despite
an 8 percent drop in its female prison population since
1999, the Pacific state ranks fourth in population growth
over the past 27 years.
On
the other end of the spectrum are several states that have
made much less extensive use of prisons for women. Rhode
Island lands at the bottom by nearly every measure.
Women comprise just over three percent of Rhode Island’s
prison population and are imprisoned at a rate of 11 per
100,000 residents despite more than four-fold growth in
the number of female prisoners since 1977. Neighboring
Massachusetts is also remarkable for its equally
low incarceration rate; the small share of prison beds the
state devotes to women (4.3 percent); and a 9 percent reduction
in the female prison population that has taken place in
the last half-decade.
New
York and Michigan follow Rhode Island and Massachusetts,
devoting a slightly higher proportion of prison beds to
women and imprisoning women at significantly higher but
still below-average rates. The growth rate of Michigan’s
female prison population over the past 27 years was the
second-lowest in the nation (five percent per year on average)
and not far above the growth rate for men. New York claimed
the ninth-slowest growth rate as well as the most significant
drop in its female prison population since the turn of the
century.
Several
other Northeastern states, including New Hampshire, New
Jersey and Pennsylvania, fall near the bottom
of most female imprisonment scales. The Garden State recorded
the second-largest female prison population reduction over
the last five years. New Hampshire, as previously mentioned,
has maintained a low female imprisonment rate despite huge
proportional growth in its women’s prison population.
Maryland
and North Carolina deserve mention for another reason.
Both states have experienced unusually slow growth in their
female prison populations since 1977, bringing imprisonment
rates that were once among the nation’s highest into the
bottom ranks.
|
Measures of state use of imprisonment
for women
|
|
State
|
Imprisonment
rate:
2004
|
Proportion
of all
prisoners: 2004
|
Prison
population growth:
1977 to 2004
|
Prison
population growth:
1999 to 2004
|
|
Rate
|
Rank
|
%
female
|
Rank
|
Growth
|
Rank
|
Growth
|
Rank
|
|
Alabama
|
71
|
15
|
6.6%
|
32
|
645%
|
35
|
3%
|
39
|
|
Alaska
|
55
|
25
|
6.6%
|
30
|
729%
|
32
|
31%
|
24
|
|
Arizona
|
89
|
7
|
8.2%
|
16
|
1261%
|
13
|
62%
|
9
|
|
Arkansas
|
65
|
19
|
6.7%
|
28
|
900%
|
24
|
17%
|
29
|
|
California
|
61
|
22
|
6.6%
|
31
|
1522%
|
9
|
1%
|
41
|
|
Colorado
|
83
|
10
|
9.4%
|
8
|
2539%
|
6
|
57%
|
10
|
|
Connecticut
|
44
|
33
|
6.0%
|
39
|
1010%
|
18
|
-3%
|
45
|
|
Delaware
|
51
|
28
|
5.3%
|
43
|
424%
|
43
|
0%
|
42
|
|
Florida
|
64
|
20
|
6.6%
|
29
|
551%
|
39
|
48%
|
16
|
|
Georgia
|
77
|
11
|
6.7%
|
27
|
596%
|
38
|
32%
|
22
|
|
Hawaii
|
69
|
16
|
10.5%
|
3
|
3029%
|
4
|
-8%
|
47
|
|
Idaho
|
93
|
6
|
10.1%
|
5
|
2211%
|
7
|
62%
|
8
|
|
Illinois
|
43
|
34
|
6.2%
|
35
|
893%
|
25
|
-2%
|
44
|
|
Indiana
|
59
|
23
|
7.9%
|
19
|
1347%
|
12
|
54%
|
11
|
|
Iowa
|
50
|
29
|
8.9%
|
10
|
801%
|
27
|
40%
|
19
|
|
Kansas
|
45
|
32
|
6.9%
|
26
|
597%
|
37
|
9%
|
35
|
|
Kentucky
|
69
|
17
|
8.4%
|
14
|
949%
|
21
|
32%
|
23
|
|
Louisiana
|
103
|
3
|
6.5%
|
33
|
1000%
|
19
|
5%
|
37
|
|
Maine
|
18
|
48
|
6.1%
|
37
|
757%
|
31
|
114%
|
1
|
|
Maryland
|
39
|
41
|
5.0%
|
44
|
353%
|
48
|
13%
|
30
|
|
Massachusetts
|
11
|
49
|
4.3%
|
48
|
382%
|
45
|
-9%
|
48
|
|
Michigan
|
41
|
37
|
4.3%
|
49
|
293%
|
49
|
4%
|
38
|
|
Minnesota
|
21
|
46
|
6.2%
|
36
|
625%
|
36
|
54%
|
12
|
|
Mississippi
|
107
|
2
|
8.2%
|
15
|
2711%
|
5
|
25%
|
26
|
|
Missouri
|
85
|
8
|
8.1%
|
17
|
1484%
|
11
|
33%
|
21
|
|
Montana
|
102
|
4
|
12.2%
|
1
|
23550%
|
1
|
80%
|
6
|
|
Nebraska
|
39
|
40
|
8.6%
|
12
|
377%
|
46
|
44%
|
17
|
|
Nevada
|
77
|
12
|
7.8%
|
20
|
1251%
|
14
|
20%
|
27
|
|
New
Hampshire
|
18
|
47
|
4.9%
|
45
|
5850%
|
3
|
2%
|
40
|
|
New
Jersey
|
33
|
42
|
|