Academy of Architecture for Justice

by Kerry Feeney B.E.S., B. Arch, MAA, LEED AP

When we hear the words “accused”, “offender” or “convict” our mind’s-eye typically pictures a man—whereas age, race, background and other specifics are often more diversely represented in our imaginings of a “bad guy”.  The difference seems to depend on our individual experiences and environment, but what about sex?  Who we almost never picture when we hear these words are: “women”^[1].

As a woman, I am guilty of this as well.  A few years ago, we took a break from creating contract documents for the Women’s Correctional facility we were working on, to tour a police station.   It was a quiet morning and we asked whether we could enter the holding area, as we were told earlier in the walkabout that they had an individual in custody. Before gaining entry to the secured area I asked: “Have they have the chance to transport him yet?” The sergeant replied: “She actually, and yes.”  So here I was completely immersed in a project designed and intended for female inmates, learning and studying their needs and behaviors, and I still had the prejudice that the detained individual must have been a man.  Was I simply being sexist? 

In my defense, women offenders are virtually invisible in most communities. The crimes of women are simply not reported as readily or often as those of men.  The media makes mention of women’s crimes when they can be sensationalized, as with stories of women murderers in particular. ^[2]  For the most part, the crimes of the average female offender are boring: they are frequently drug or property related offenses and are mostly non-violent, especially when compared to their male counterparts.

However, the numbers don’t lie: reinforcing the argument that female inmates are at the periphery of the prison and corrections systems, considerably fewer women are incarcerated than men on a global scale. ^[3]

Just as the female offender is not at the forethought of our mind’s-eye, The Canadian Human Rights Commission points out: “she is largely invisible to prison administrators in critical ways and that their needs and interests continue to be unmet in a correctional system designed primarily for…sentenced men.”^[4]

Because this population is relatively unseen, situations within our women’s prisons and jails often need to come to a boiling point before capitol funds, commitment, and effort are mobilized to create meaningful responsive architecture for female inmates.  Since investment in infrastructure and the built environment is often instigated by pressing matters such as riots, extreme overcrowding or human rights litigation, the building of our female correctional institutions (which in some case only happens every century) often needs to happen very quickly.  Given how rarely these facilities exclusive to women are constructed, we don’t always have the opportunity or the time to distill the best architectural practices for women. So, all too often the more familiar male model is repackaged, prettied or softened and represented as the answer. Alternatively, another architectural response to female incarceration is to provide cottages or a domestic model reinforcing the notion that a “woman’s place is in the home”.  I would offer that there are inherent problems in each of these strategies and would suggest that a more appropriate solution is not so broad stroked.

Barbara Zaitzow, a professor of criminal justice, explains: “Repression [in women’s prisons] is every bit as strong as in men's prisons; it is simply much more subtle… Despite the less threatening appearance of women’s prisons, the conditions for women prisoners are usually worse than those for male prisoners. For example, women prisoners have more restricted access to legal libraries, medical and dental care, and vocational and educational opportunities.”

All in all, our culture is arguably uncomfortable with the idea of imprisoning women, and in response to ease that discomfort, we design professionals use our skill sets to humanize the correctional environment with the language of architecture and that is to be applauded; but we always need to remember that the building is consistently and foremost a device for control. In any correctional environment the security of staff and inmates is paramount, and when the public has the perception that the female facilities are watered down versions of men’s facilities or are demeaned as “camp cupcake,” they appear not to take the imprisonment of women seriously.

Complicating matters even further, one of the more significant differences between male and female offenders is that no one is keeping the “home fires burning,” as it were, for these women.  They are far more likely to lose their home and children because of imprisonment.

The “Corsten Report” out of the UK explains: “Men go into Prison and they expect the women will maintain the house and family…the great majority are more concerned about themselves and what will happen when they come out than what is happening out there.  Women have an entirely different mental approach to it when they go in.  They are concerned, will the house still be there:  what is happening to the children?”^[5]

As many as three quarters of all female inmates are mothers. If women inmates are the invisible subjects of incarceration, then their children are also potentially forgotten victims of incarceration and are indeed among the most at-risk people in our communities.

Does it not become even more urgent, then, to examine the strategies both architectural and otherwise to rehabilitate and reduce recidivism rates within the female prison population? 

These questions and others cannot be ignored for a community of female inmates that is growing at an alarming rate—faster than any other population within Canadian and American prisons.

What can we do to design specifically for female offenders? 

Here are a few small practical points of consideration (in addition to good humane design):

• In a double occupancy setting, women do better when the beds are placed side by side, rather than one atop the other. They are, on average, shorter than their male counterparts and often lack the same upper body strength; this makes the climb into an upper bunk more difficult and accidents more frequent.  It is virtually impossible to climb when pregnant.^[6]

• Incorporating privacy for toileting where possible. As I’ve argued elsewhere:

Women have a different relationship with the toilet and tend to be less destructive of them.  Not only do women sit on the toilet at each use unlike their male counterparts and but they need to disrobe more significantly each time as well.  Consequently, for the female inmate, sometimes dressed in a standard issue jump suit, the simple task of urinating not only becomes incredibly cumbersome– but also leaves the offender quite exposed especially when the toilet is positioned near the windowed cell door.  This exposure is amplified and complicated by the fact that women menstruate. ^[7]

• For safety and control of facility management, it is important to have unhindered access to systems for repair and maintenance. Avoid crossover with inmates as much as possible to limit the number of lockdowns, the possibility of complaints including harassment, and opportunities for offenders to access tools or other potentially dangerous items left behind.  To promote this separation, the use of a full crawlspace or service mezzanine, separate from inmate areas is encouraged.  We also suggest the placement of ceiling mounted equipment in corridors and other public areas to limit disruption to programs.

• Some of the perks an offender would receive would include better access to phones. As previously mentioned, women have stronger attachments to the community and the phone is often the conduit to those people and resources.  Some women even run their households from prison over the phone.  We try to provide one phone for every 4-10 inmates, a much higher ratio than their male counterparts. 

• Providing a sense of time is of crucial importance in correctional environments. Natural light and digital clocks provide “time markers” throughout the day and impart a rhythm to what is usually a bland routine.  Understanding time and place promotes control and calm. This is especially true for women who will be concerned with the rhythm of their home lives. We specifically used digital clocks, as many of the female offenders do not have the educational background to read analogue.

• Having connectivity to the outdoors that offers glimpses of the season, the weather, and time of day is therapeutic for all incarcerated persons. Meaningful connectivity to the outdoors can be achieved using small yards and/or green spaces adjacent to the Living Units where small numbers of offenders can step outside as needed.  This enables some inmates to retain some control over their own access to the outdoors and thus offers them a much more normative scenario than experienced by male offenders who are often carefully scheduled group by group and escorted to a single large exterior yard or gym space. 

• Furthermore, women often exercise differently than men. Rather than weights, machines, and large gymnasiums or fields, consider the use of treadmills, stationary bicycles, and spaces to practice yoga. In a recent female facility, the superintendent provided a Nintendo Wii, which was well used, but Richard Simmons “Sweatin’ to the Oldies’ was the offenders favorite exercise program.

• Lastly, women tend not thrive as well in dormitories as men do. Perhaps because they are more accustomed to being the managers in the home, the women have real difficulties transitioning to dormitories where they have very little control over their own space. They do not get along and housekeeping issues escalate existing frictions. 

What happens post incarceration?

The key to avoiding recidivism is to think about what happens for women post incarceration.  For example, should additional Transitional Housing be provided for newly released female offenders? There is a deficit of this building type for women and the situation is exacerbated when children in tow also need to be housed.

I see the opportunity to have an impact on Low-Income Housing. So much of our inventory is based on the nuclear family.  In this economy, it seems even low-income housing requires dual incomes.  Can we envision building temporary housing for two single mothers, living perhaps platonically, co-parenting and sharing fiscal responsibilities?  After all, it is all too easy to return to a life of crime if one is struggling to meet the basic needs of food and shelter for themselves and their children.

Women’s shelters, rehab centers, and clinics aimed at addressing trauma and/or mental health issues are also critical infrastructure pieces to reduce the incarceration of women.  Architects who design compassionate correctional centers have a lot of the same skill sets to impact these kinds of buildings too.

Not only is it time to understand this part of the prison population to provide better gender-responsive policy and practice and to look at alternatives to incarceration; but as design professionals we need to grasp the needs of this unique demographic within the justice system and provide the appropriate architectural response to empower and aid these women to the best of our abilities. 

[1] Consider the parallel phrase “bad girl,” for instance, which often draws associations from a sexual rather than a legal or criminal context.

^[2] The Irish Times - Thursday, February 17, 2011, “Media focusing on murders by women” by Carol Coulter, Legal Affairs Editor.  This article goes on to quote Ms Justice Catherine McGuinness, who states: “Practically the only female offences that attract widespread media and therefore public attention are murders committed by women.” In addition, Dr Christina Quinlan Dublin City University, (author of Ireland's Womens Prisons, Past & Present) said:  of the 1,000 women in prison during her study, only 12 received media attention, all of them for committing sensational crimes.

^[3] Source:  International Profile of Women’s Prisons, International Centre for Prison Studies, King’s College London, The University of London, London, UK, April 2008.

^[4] Canadian Human Rights Commission

Protecting Their Rights:  A Systemic Review of Human Rights in Correctional Services for Federally Sentenced Women.  http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/legislation_policies/chapter1-eng.aspx

[5] https://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/corston-report-march-2007.pdf

[6] I know this first hand from being quite pregnant while doing a site review.  I had to be delicately removed from a cell’s ladder with some assistance from a very kind and strong site superintendent. 

[7] Number TEN Architectural Group, “An Architectural Viewpoint on Female Incarceration,” AIA Academy of Architecture for Justice Conference, Los Angles, November 2011.