Official statistics show that overall males commit or, are charged with, more crimes than females (Scottish Prison Service, 2002). However it has also been shown, that in certain areas of criminality such as theft and fraud, female offence rates seem to be rising faster than males. (Steffensmeir & Allan,1996). The reason for this apparent discrepancy in criminality between the genders is the subject of much debate and ongoing research with in Forensic Psychology and for both psychologists and sociologists and. In particular, the increased growth of female crime in direct proportion to male crime, is highly contested by both disciplines with regards to its causation and existence. Research into the causes of crime and gender has produced differing explanations. These range from proposals such as the rise in female criminality is merely an artefact of reporting and prosecuting procedures, to biological and sex role theories of crime, which attempt to depict females as being fundamentally different in nature, thus less likely than males to commit crime.
[...] One difference between the groups however is the tendency for female offenders to have a greater number of dependant children. These theories often see female crime as a response to detrimental economic factors. Studies by Carlen show that poverty may be a major factor in criminality. In her study of female inmates she found 82% of the women had always been poor were unemployed and only had good jobs. However Carlen acknowledges this study is limited in being unable to consider the factors of white collar crime. [...]
[...] He found that if the results are more effectively controlled for variables of female status, economic marginality, opportunity for traditional female consumer crime and the formalisation of social control, then the relationship between female arrest rates and development are greatly weakened. For example, upon considering the influence of the equalization of the gender roles as being causational in the rise of female arrest rates, he suggests that in general research has typically only looked at or indeed highlighted the countries that suit the equation. [...]
[...] These studies additionally highlight how research into gender and criminality is obscured by stereotypical thinking, both by official agencies and the wider population as a whole, as effectively it acts to hinder research and constructive analysis of what may actually be occurring in society These early theories often reflect a common belief that females who commit crime are somehow temporarily acting out of character or affected by social influences, either positively or negatively in relation to crime. There seems to be confusion over our perception of the degree of female criminality, as we hold the opposing view that females are both less likely to commit crime and also that large amounts of female criminality goes unrecorded. [...]
[...] Early theorists such as Price and Adler held a similar view regarding the processing of female crime in the developed world. They propose female crime rates were in actuality higher than recorded as agencies and males in general often take a chivalrous approach regarding the punishment of women. "women offenders may have existed for some time in proportions larger than we care to acknowledge these statistics support the contention that the criminal justice system has related to women differently from the way it does men at every stage in the process" (Price 1977, p.105) The idea of chivalry in female prosecution has a long history of investigation, for example Box & Hale (1983) Campbell( 1981) A study by Allen(1989 ) of 1987 official statistics claimed to show leniency towards women in sentencing, she reported that 73% of women but only 54% of males guilty of motoring offences received fines rather than imprisonment. [...]
[...] Steffensmeir therefore proposed that female crime should be seen as the outcome of complex socio-economic political and historical factors and that factors other than gender equality associated with development, may help explain cross national variance. However, this basis for female criminality is one of necessity or increased opportunity. Whilst evidence from Carlen (1995) shows some women enjoy crime. In her work with female prisoners Carlen found women attribute their criminality to four factors: drugs (including alcohol) a quest for excitement or being brought up in care and poverty. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
