Whose Higher Power? Criminalized Women Confront the “Twelve Steps”

Sered, Susan Starr; Norton-Hawk, Maureen

doi:10.1177/1557085111420557

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Along with recovery, religion was the foundational component of the post-incarceration moral order. The twelve-step framework establishes recovery as a moral and spiritual project (Sered and Norton-Hawk 2011, 2014; Tiger 2013; Dodes and Dodes 2014). Echoing this framework, women consistently linked their work to maintain sobriety with their work to develop a relationship with God.…”

Section: Interventionist Penal Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Punishment: The Penal State's Interventionist, Covert, and Negligent Modalities of Control

Kaufman¹,

Kaiser²,

Rumpf³

2018

Law soc. inq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates the involvement of the penal state in the lives of criminalized people as a controlling force that takes multiple forms. We offer the concept of modalities of penal control and identify three such modalities in addition to expressive punishment: interventionist penal control is accomplished in extralegal ways; covert penal control is hidden from public view; and negligent penal control is characterized by the absence of action by state actors. This article illustrates empirical cases of each modality, using data from three distinct projects based in Chicago, southern Wisconsin, and nationwide. The data include observations of post‐prison groups and homes, interviews with criminalized people and nongovernmental organizational (NGO) staff, statutes, and regulations. This expanded understanding of penal state involvement extends beyond the understanding that characterizes discussions of mass incarceration and highlights the need for comprehensive reform.

show abstract

Section: Interventionist Penal Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Punishment: The Penal State's Interventionist, Covert, and Negligent Modalities of Control

Kaufman¹,

Kaiser²,

Rumpf³

2018

Law soc. inq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Statements like these confirm research indicating that criminalized women directly embrace state and dominant cultural strategies of governance that institute "responsibilization" that espouses individual accountability and choice in ways that transcend or elide the social conditions that lead to women's lawbreaking (Sered & Norton-Hawk, 2011). Women whose narratives were dominated by personal responsibility as an ontology of blame often went to great lengths to emphasize how they regarded their individual decisions as the cause of their incarceration, even when they acknowledged the challenging circumstances in which they made their decisions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 52%

“…Structural, institutional, and interpersonal conditions directly affect women’s post-incarceration experiences. State strategies of governance institutionalize “responsibilization,” defined as an emphasis on individual accountability and choice in ways that obfuscate the social conditions that result in criminalization (Sered & Norton-Hawk, 2011). Hence, we attempted to analyze how formerly incarcerated women engage with these dominant cultural values as they discuss their lives prior to, during, and after their incarceration.…”

Section: Feminist Psychology and Gender Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ontologies of Blame and the Cultural Value of Accountability

Dewey

Wesely

Epler

et al. 2017

Psychology of Women Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uniting the perspective of narrative psychology with feminist and narrative criminology, we analyzed interviews with 58 formerly incarcerated women. We identified four distinct ontologies of blame that the women used to characterize the events, actors, and circumstances that resulted in their incarceration. We argue that these four ontologies of blame-personal responsibility, socioeconomic exclusion, relational caregiving associations, and compromised decision-making-each derive from the dominant U.S. cultural value of accountability that accords great social, moral, and personal weight to accepting responsibility for, and expressing willingness to endure the consequences of, wrongdoing. Our findings suggest that academics and therapeutic practitioners could assist the formerly incarcerated women with whom they work by encouraging a critique of dominant cultural values; by expanding accountability from the individual to the community; by situating accountability in past, present, and future contexts; and by facilitating ontologies of security.

show abstract

“…In contrast to early work by Maruna (2001), we have not detected patterns in the presentations of self offered by “persisters” versus “desisters.” The statements that most echo the desistance narratives described in the literature (Giordano et al, 2002; Morash, 2009) tended to be offered early in our fieldwork and while women were actively involved in a court-ordered or therapeutic program. These utterances typically invoke neo-liberal and 12 Step ideas of accepting personal responsibility for one’s problems and absolving intimate others as well as social and political institutions of any blame for the hardships in one’s life (McKim, 2017; Pollack, 2005; Sered & Norton-Hawk, 2011). Joy, for instance, alternates between periods of heavy substance use and living on the streets, and immersion in intensive, residential programs.…”

Section: The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Recidivism and Desistance

Sered

2020

Feminist Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reflecting on research following formerly incarcerated Massachusetts women for more than a decade, this paper questions whether conventional understandings of recidivism and desistance are meaningful frames for understanding women’s life trajectories. Drawing on our ongoing ethnographic work we argue that conventional measures of recidivism and desistance tend to (1) overstate the significance of distinctions between licit and illicit behavior—especially for women, (2) undervalue macro/structural and institutionalized barriers to stable housing and employment, (3) overly focus on individual choices and narratives in contexts where freedoms are constrained by structural and institutional policies and practices, (4) overlook the risks and erratic nature of daily and family life for women and other vulnerable, marginalized and poorly-resourced populations.

show abstract

Whose Higher Power? Criminalized Women Confront the “Twelve Steps”

Cited by 12 publications

References 42 publications

Beyond Punishment: The Penal State's Interventionist, Covert, and Negligent Modalities of Control

Beyond Punishment: The Penal State's Interventionist, Covert, and Negligent Modalities of Control

Ontologies of Blame and the Cultural Value of Accountability

Beyond Recidivism and Desistance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About