Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Theoretical Criminology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carlen, P.
Right arrow Articles by Tombs, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reconfigurations of penality

The ongoing case of the women’s imprisonment and reintegration industries

Pat Carlen

University of Kent, UK and University of Stirling, UK

Jacqueline Tombs

University of Kent, UK and University of Stirling, UK

Illustrating their arguments with empirical examples drawn from two recent research projects—one cross-European, the other Scottish—the authors argue that the new multi-layering of carceral forms in both prison and the community is one major, but under-explored, cause of continuing increases in women’s prison populations. Whether it is because sentencers believe the reintegration industry’s rhetoric about the effectiveness of in-prison programmes in ‘reintegrating’ ex-prisoners, or whether, conversely, it is because sentencers are reluctant to award transcarceral and over-demanding community sentences which set women up to fail, the result is the same—more women go to prison.

Key Words: imprisonment • reintegration • sentencing • transcarceralism • women

Theoretical Criminology, Vol. 10, No. 3, 337-360 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1362480606065910
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Punishment SocietyHome page
E. Donohue and D. Moore
When is an offender not an offender?: Power, the client and shifting penal subjectivities
Punishment Society, July 1, 2009; 11(3): 319 - 336.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
S. Pollack
Labelling Clients 'Risky': Social Work and the Neo-liberal Welfare State
Br. J. Soc. Work, May 30, 2008; (2008) bcn079v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]