Citation

Hannah-Moffat K. Soc. Polit. 2004; 11(3): 363-385.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Swedish Council for Social Research, Publisher Oxford University Press)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The recent emphasis in the scholarly literature and in social policy arena on gender-responsive interventions raises theoretical and applied questions about how gender responsiveness is interpreted in penal policy and by local decision makers. This article examines how gender-neutral developments in welfare and penal policy intersect with and shape gender-responsive strategies. Using data extracted from 144 federal female parole candidates' case files and the National Parole Board's decision registry, it shows how members of Canada's National Parole Board, operating in a broader culture of gender-responsive policy and cultural sensitivity, construct and use gendered knowledges of risk to interpret women offenders' experiences when making release decisions. The article analyzes the gendered nature of interpretations of four types of risk information—criminal history, victimization, mental health, and responsibility—that dominate practitioners' parole decision narratives. It shows how these gendered knowledges of risk reframe victimization and mental health difficulties and transform them into issues of choice and responsibility.