Predictors of Retention and Recidivism of Justice-Involved Women in a Community-Based Gender-Responsive CBT Program

Published date01 March 2022
DOI10.1177/00938548211040850
Date01 March 2022
Subject MatterArticles
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2022, Vol. 49, No. 3, March 2022, 291 –310.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211040850
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2021 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
291
PREDICTORS OF RETENTION AND RECIDIVISM
OF JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN IN A
COMMUNITY-BASED GENDER-RESPONSIVE
CBT PROGRAM
AMIE ZARLING
ROXANN SCHEFFERT
DAN RUSSELL
Iowa State University
The purpose of this study was to evaluate pretreatment differences between program completers and noncompleters, as well
as those who recidivated and those who did not, among a sample of 112 justice-involved women referred to a gender-
responsive cognitive-behavioral program as part of supervision recommendations. Risk scores, adverse childhood experi-
ences, emotion dysregulation, self-control, and various demographic variables were examined as predictors of program
completion and 1-year recidivism. Results of logistic regression indicated that higher risk scores significantly predicted
program noncompletion and 1-year recidivism, and noncompleters were 6 times more likely to recidivate than completers.
These findings reveal characteristics of women as they relate to the likelihood of completing criminal justice treatment pro-
grams, and indicate a greater need for intensive support among high-risk women.
Keywords: community supervision; female offenders; program evaluation; recidivism; risk; treatment; women offenders
INTRODUCTION
Probation and parole supervision in the community are long-standing practices that cur-
rently constitute the most common correctional interventions. In 2016, the proportion of
women supervised in our communities had increased since 2010, accounting for 25% of
those on probation and 12% of those on parole in the United States (Kaeble & Cowhig,
2018). With this increase, research on best practices for working with justice-involved
women has intensified (Van Voorhis, 2012; Wardrop et al., 2019).
Effectively assessing risk of reoffending in females and providing the appropriate treat-
ment services is important. An accumulating body of research indicates that programs
adhering to the principles of risk, need, and responsivity (RNR; Andrews & Bonta, 2006,
2010) are the most effective at reducing recidivism. The risk principle states that the inten-
sity of treatment should be matched to the client’s risk level, with high-risk clients receiving
the most intense services. The need principle states that effective programs should target
AUTHORS’ NOTE: Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Amie Zarling, Iowa State
University, 1358 Palmer Building, Ames, IA 50011-1084; e-mail: azarling@iastate.edu.
1040850CJBXXX10.1177/00938548211040850Criminal Justice and BehaviorZarling et al. / Retention and Recidivism of Justice-Involved Women
research-article2022
292 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR
criminogenic needs or needs that are crime producing, such as the client’s psychological,
social, and emotional functioning linked to the development and continuation of criminal
behavior (e.g., antisocial attitudes, antisocial peers, substance abuse, and unemployment).
The responsivity principle refers to how service providers can maximize the client’s ability
to learn from the rehabilitative intervention and states that effective programs should be (a)
cognitive behavioral in nature (i.e., general responsivity) and (b) tailored to the learning
style, cognitive ability, motivation, personality, and cultural background of the client (i.e.,
specific responsivity). Within the RNR framework, gender is considered a specific respon-
sivity issue. However, RNR is often framed as “gender neutral” and almost all of the sup-
porting research has either focused exclusively on males or failed to disaggregate the results
by gender.
GENDER-SPECIFIC NEEDS
In parallel and complementary to the RNR framework, there is a vast feminist/gender-
responsive literature that has emerged regarding justice-involved women to address whether
gender-specific needs influence a variety of criminal justice-related outcomes, including
success under correctional supervision and future criminal behavior (e.g., Reisig et al.,
2006). Those arguing from a feminist perspective state that gender-neutral perspectives,
including RNR, fail to acknowledge that women are more negatively impacted by societal
power imbalances and conditions of oppression. These factors influence both the rates of
occurrence and the impact of victimization, parenting and family obligations, economic
marginalization, and substance abuse (Covington & Bloom, 2007; Reisig et al., 2006).
From this view, it is argued that mental health, poverty, trauma, and dysfunctional relation-
ship patterns must be given distinctive attention when working with justice-involved
women. Several lines of research indicate that these factors are most associated with future
offending for women (e.g., Van Voorhis et al., 2010).
In light of the gender-responsive perspective, evidence is accumulating that justice-
involved women have treatment needs that differ from justice-involved males. Many stud-
ies do indicate that risk factors for males and females are similar (e.g., criminal history,
criminal thinking, antisocial peers, employment, poor parental care, externalizing mental
health problems, and lack of family support; Brown et al., 2020). But others indicate that
some factors may be more salient for women. For example, a meta-analysis by Olver et al.
(2014) indicated that substance abuse and personal/emotional well-being both had signifi-
cantly larger effect sizes for females than males in the prediction of general recidivism.
Disrupted social relationships and financial difficulty were found to be greater among jus-
tice-involved women than justice-involved men (Heilbrun et al., 2008). Other research has
indicated that justice-involved females experience greater difficulties with emotion regula-
tion than do justice-involved males (e.g., Brindle et al., 2019). Importantly, the majority of
justice-involved women are mothers and are more likely than men to be the sole supporters
and caregivers of their children (e.g. Brown & Bloom, 2009).
The issue is further complicated when considering that some factors are needs for females
that require attention, but these needs do not necessarily translate to a gender-specific risk
factor. For example, there are mixed findings regarding trauma and its relative impact on
risk for men and women (e.g., Liu et al., 2021; Scott & Brown, 2018), but there is clear sup-
port for prioritizing a trauma-informed approach for justice-involved women (e.g.,
Covington & Bloom, 2007).

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT