Research Example #3

The article I found this week comes from the William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law. Written by Flyn L. Fresher, “Cross-Gender Supervision in Prison and the Constitutional Right of Prisoners to Remain Free from Rape”, examines cross-gender supervision in prisons as a lead cause of sexual assault, especially towards women, and the political actors that may hinder a prisoner from reporting their assault. This search took a more meta-analysis form in the sense that it pulled from previous research as well as public records and demographic data in order to explain the gender make up of prison staff and the reasons that allow for cross-gender supervision. The article explains that the problem with cross-gender supervision is that it exacerbates the problem by placing women in situations in which they cannot escape their attacker. Additionally, pat frisks and body cavity checks are more traumatizing for women, since a majority percentage of women prisoners have a history of sexual abuse. Furthermore, certain laws, like the Prison Litigation Reform Act, restrict prisoners from what they can and cannot litigate in court. This, in my opinion, not only takes away certain rights from prisoners, but discourages them from reporting events of assault and other conditions. The article concludes that there should be set laws that actually address the issue of sexual assault in prisons and make it concrete that it should not happen especially by male staff who are supposed to uphold the law. It is this absence of a law that specifically addresses sexual assault in prison that allows for male prison staff to continue their abuse and makes it difficult to hold them accountable.

 

Flyn L. Flesher. “CROSS-GENDER SUPERVISION IN PRISONS AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF PRISONERS TO REMAIN FREE FROM RAPE.” William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law 13 (April 1, 2007): 841–867.