Women Who Work In The Criminal Justice Field From A 1975 Report
With regard to women who work in the criminal justice system, The Report of the LEAA [Law Enforcement Assistance Administration] Task Force on Women (hereafter referred to as the 1975 report) focused solely on women employed in the former LEAA [currently the Office of Justice Programs (OJP)]. This chapter takes a different perspective, looking at women working in the criminal justice and juvenile justice systems, such as wardens, attorneys, judges, and police.(1)
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 amended the foundation for occupational opportunities for women. Notwithstanding some gains in the upper ranks of a male-dominated field, improvement is still needed. Issues discussed in this chapter include barriers to recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in the criminal justice system related to gender bias; the "glass ceiling"; sexual harassment; and training and technical assistance opportunities. Since 1975, the number of women working in the criminal justice system has dramatically increased (see exhibit 4-1 for recent figures). Specific areas discussed in this chapter include:
Women working in law enforcement.
Women working in the courts.
Women working in adult corrections.
Women working in juvenile corrections.
Gender bias through the glass ceiling and organizational culture.
Sexual harassment.
Training.
Although women have been involved in police work in the United States for more than 80 years, their concerns regarding participation in law enforcement and career advancement have remained constant for nearly 60 of those years. Not until the 1960s, when legislation and judicial involvement began to support women's demands for equality, did their duties and responsibilities begin to expand (see exhibit 4-2). Since then, opportunities for women in policing have improved, but female police officers continue to make slow progress through the ranks.
Gender inequity is deeply ingrained in the workplace and is based on societal expectations and attitudes. An analysis of gender inequity in the workplace, with emphasis on the employment of women in jails, determined that women face major obstacles in male-dominated areas such as law enforcement and corrections and find it difficult to become managers.(10) Women are denied training, lack agency-sponsored opportunities for networking, and are limited by traditional organizational behavior in these fields.
In a 1991 article, S. E. Martin indicates that, although both court-ordered and voluntary affirmative action policies have had a significant impact on the hiring of female officers, they have not affected the promotion and advancement of women into the higher ranks of law enforcement agencies.(11) The progress made by women in policing has come primarily through legal mandates rather than executive leadership within organizations.(12) According to Amy Ramson's 1993 report for the Police Foundation, no systematic discrimination was found with respect to the recruitment of women into policing.(13) Ramson added, however, that the number of female applicants and recruits remains low, a point underscored by Phyllis MacDonald, a former policewoman and current social science analyst with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ).(14) With a recruitment rate of only 20 percent, it is unlikely that the percentage of women in policing will increase significantly.
Despite advances in supervisory positions, female police chiefs remain exceptions. According to a 1996 interview with Police Chief Carol Mehrling (Montgomery County, Maryland), "Our biggest barriers are often ourselves . . . [You must] realize that you may be ahead of your time and keep moving forward--belief in yourself may be the first impression a person or supervisor sees, [so] make every contact positive and genuine."(15)
Some studies have cited specific problems and coping strategies. In a 1992 article, Harry W. More concludes that the primary obstacle women must overcome concerns male officers' attitudes.(16) More's conclusions are supported by the 1992 findings of Donna C. Hale, who found that the attitudes of male officers and supervisors have been the main obstacle faced by women and can be addressed through specific measures designed to accomplish complete integration of law enforcement agencies.(17) M.C. Brown published the results of a 1994 survey suggesting that policing would benefit from more research regarding gender-related attitudes, active recruitment of women, and the establishment of an all-woman council to review complaints of female police officers.(18)
In 1992, D.G. McCoy examined organizational structures that would support a positive work environment for women.(19) McCoy recommended the development and implementation of policies and practices to create an organizational culture that uses the distinctive qualities of policewomen, thereby enabling them to take advantage of the same career opportunities as male officers. This environment would value the complex role and competing interests that women face in both society and the workplace. The study concluded that most police executives in 1992 had not created organizational cultures that valued the diversity of women within law enforcement. McCoy recommended an executive commitment to creating an organizational structure that provides training on the value of diversity in the workforce and demonstrates agency support for women by providing mentoring for career development.(20)
Female professionals in the court systems have experienced considerable advancements since 1975 (see exhibit 4-3). Nevertheless, today gender bias is still often evident. Forty states and nine federal circuits appointed task forces to investigate the extent of gender bias in their jurisdictions. In several of these reports, it was noted that in court, female lawyers may be called honey, little lady, and little girl or be referred to by their first names when their male colleagues are referred to as "Mr. _______."(21) According to the American Bar Association's Report on the Status of Women in the Legal Profession, sexual bias in the courtroom may affect not only the interpersonal relationship between the judge and the female attorney, but also the outcome of a case.(22) If a female attorney takes an aggressive posture in litigation, a judge may interpret her behavior as unnecessary drama; if a woman appears to be too cool in court, she may be perceived as being unsupportive of her client.(23) Minority female lawyers have the additional burden of being mistaken for clients when they appear in court.(24)
Female lawyers and judges are often assigned to represent or decide cases in areas traditionally considered the purview of women--family and civil matters. Typically, cases in these areas have lower status and fewer contacts for persons seeking political careers than cases in other areas.
Although there have been gains in female employment, corrections remains the most sex-segregated and male-dominated component of the criminal justice system (see exhibit 4-4).(31) Issues of security, inmate privacy, and physical qualifications have been cited in the past as outweighing women's rights to equal opportunity. These barriers have largely been removed, although subtler barriers remain.
According to a 1984 study by R. Etheridge, being hired and assigned to a post is only the beginning. The most important elements that a woman can bring to a job is confidence that she can do the job and a realistic approach to deal with and learn from difficulties.(32) A woman faces overprotection as well as unfair competition. Etheridge found that supervisors' behavior also can be affected by perceptions of a female employee as daughter or wife because those are the female roles they understand.(33)
In a survey of juvenile corrections agencies, Marjorie H. Young examined factors contributing to the successful promotion of women to leadership positions and identified barriers women have encountered while working in these traditionally male-dominated positions (see exhibit 4-5). Factors that the respondents said led to their success included concern for children, a vision for change, an ability to work well with men, and experience in juvenile corrections. Many respondents said that they felt that their employers did not perceive them as working on a career track, that their male colleagues did not take them seriously, and that they constantly had to prove their abilities. Young's findings show that there is a need to address the pressures women face in combining job and family demands, achieving leadership positions, and being accepted as supervisors and managers of men.(38)
Gender Bias: The Glass Ceiling and Organizational Culture
The 1975 report noted a concern for a prevailing, outmoded attitude toward women in the work environment. Myths and stereotypes about women were among the obstacles examined by the report. The continued presence of these obstacles is evident by the relatively small numbers of women gaining employment in the criminal justice system and their difficulty in achieving promotions and leadership positions. In various criminal justice agencies, some levels of employment remain beyond the reach of women and minorities despite the apparent gains women have made in the workforce since 1975. This barrier is known as the glass ceiling.
In the 1991 A Report on the Glass Ceiling Initiative, the U.S. Department of Labor found that attitudinal and organizational barriers are an indication that the progress of minorities and women in corporate America is affected by more than qualifications and career choices.(41)
Several general findings applied to the companies in the study included:
There is a point beyond which minorities and women have not advanced in some companies.
Minorities have plateaued at lower levels of the workforce than women.
Monitoring for equal access and opportunity, especially as managers move up the corporate ladder to senior management, was almost never considered corporate responsibility nor part of the planning for developmental programs and policies.
Appraisal and total compensation systems that determine salary, bonuses, incentives, and prequisites for employees were not monitored.
Among the attitudinal and organizational barriers identified were:
Developmental practices and credential-building experiences, including advanced education, and career-enhancing assignments (such as placement on corporate committees and task forces, traditional precursors to advancement) were often not readily available to minorities and women.
Accountability for Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) responsibilities did not reach senior executives and corporate decisionmakers.
In 1995, the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) conducted an organizational culture survey of all state directors of corrections and directors of large city jails. Findings suggested that gender inequality is real, although men and women perceive the inequality differently. Women believe that to advance to positions of leadership, they have to work harder and take greater risks than men.(42)
Corrections has had to adjust to the growing number of women in the labor pool. In 1991, the American Correctional Association's (ACA's) Women in Corrections Committee surveyed state adult and juvenile corrections agencies' training programs, particularly programs that targeted female employees and that pointed to specific areas of need that had not been met.(43) Thirty-nine agencies were surveyed (19 adult, 16 youth, and 4 combined), and all agencies had formalized training programs. The results showed that:
Forty-six percent of the agencies offered training to address specific needs of female employees.
Seventy-six percent required all staff to take courses in sexual harassment awareness.
Fifty-nine percent offered training to decrease gender and race bias/stereotyping and to increase awareness and understanding of gender differences.
Adult departments of correction that have youth services agencies have taken a more active role in promoting women's training needs. The primary concern, voiced by 36 percent of these agencies, was for training to understand and help eliminate sexual harassment.
Both the federal prison system and the state corrections systems (including maximum-security prisons) have adopted gender-neutral employment policies. In a 1994 study of gender-neutral employment in high-security prisons, R.H. Rison reported that correctional administrators had taken measures to confront gender bias in their managerial practices.(44) States have implemented gender-neutral hiring practices, for reasons ranging from recognition of equal opportunity and requests by female officers to make high-security positions available, to union pressures and court mandates. In instituting gender neutrality in high-security institutions, administrators are encouraged to develop a plan and optimize the timeframe for implementation, provide training and communications, prepare for staff resistance, phase female employees into maximum-security posts, and review their organizational structures for job equality.
Two basic reasons for employing women in corrections are the doctrine of fundamental fairness and the need to expand the talent pool of correctional personnel. This was demonstrated by a study of the gradual changes in policies and practices relating to the employment of women in correctional positions in Michigan over a 20-year period. The presence of women has produced a healthy reexamination of long-standing beliefs and practices in the correctional culture.(45)
Findings from a 1996 study conducted by Joseph R. Rowan support the need to reassess policies pertaining to the assignments of female corrections employees.(46) This study was the first to address the safety of female officers working in maximum security prisons. The data revealed that female correctional officers were less likely than male officers to be assaulted on the job; men were assaulted 3.6 times more often.
In another 1996 study, Rowan demonstrated that female officers are at least as firm as their male counterparts in managing inmates involved in serious incidents. In states with the highest percentage of female officers in the correctional workforce, there were 47 percent fewer assaults on female officers and 41 percent fewer assaults on male officers.(47) When asked to explain the lower rates in assault, the respondents, primarily male administrators, commented that female officers listen better than men, seldom act "macho," have a calming effect, are less confrontational, and often exercise control without using force. The survey mirrors the results of research on the overall performance of female officers in law enforcement agencies nationwide.(48)
The Rowan study concludes that increasing the number of female employees in correctional settings may lower the risk of assault.
As women move up the employment ranks in criminal justice, future lawsuits may center on promotions. When women are fully integrated into both the training and functions of criminal justice agencies, it is likely to favorably affect incidents of sexual harassment, employment obstacles, and other barriers women face. The increasing presence of women in criminal justice agencies has helped broaden the overall perspective of employers.(49)
Sexual Harassment
Two types of sexual harassment have been recognized by statutes and the courts. The first is quid pro quo, "something for something," and usually applies to situations in which a supervisor or manager has made unwelcome sexual advances, requested sexual favors, or engaged in physical conduct of a sexual nature. The second is "hostile work environment," in which the conduct of another employee, a supervisor, or even a nonemployee may be the basis for the claim. Hostility in the work environment is created by sexual jokes, suggestive comments, suggestive pictures, obscene gestures, unwanted physical contact, and other situations that interfere with an employee's work performance.(50) Different agencies and organizations are making their employees aware of the different types of sexual harassment.
At the organizational level, several jail administrators attending the 1990 National Jails Conference, "Setting the Jail Research Agenda for the 1990s," admitted that they were concerned about the entry of women into traditionally male jobs and the potential "problems" such integration might cause.(51) They were concerned about the potential for sexual harassment in their facilities and their liability for such harassment. According to a 1991 survey that examined the incidence of sexual harassment in local government organizations that provided protective services, women were overrepresented in the group of sexual harassment victims relative to men. Coworkers were the source of most victimizations.(52) A 1988 study by the Federal Office of Policy Evaluation reported similar findings.
The seriousness of this issue is recognized at all levels, including county government. Carol Mehrling, Police Chief of Montgomery County, Maryland, finds that supervisors are the key in creating a tension-free workplace: "Department leaders must make it clear that there is ZERO tolerance. . . . [F]raternization issues must be addressed clearly, starting with academy training, and a swift investigation of complaints will show sincere commitments to the issue."(53) Chief Mehrling notes that some women might misuse this issue for better assignments or retaliation, but the reporting of sexual harassment still remains limited because of fear of reprisals from male coworkers and supervisors.
Some agencies that are responsible for enforcing the laws prohibiting sexual harassment also experience such problems. For example, according to a 1993 National Law Journal survey, 73 percent of the responding law firms had a formal written policy for sexual harassment, yet harassment remains a problem.(54) In a 1994 St. Louis Bar Association study, both men and women reported observing at least one incident of sexual harassment by a superior, and more than half of the women surveyed for the 1993 National Law Journal study reported having experienced harassment on the job.(55) (Few attorneys--and few women in any part of the criminal justice system--report harassment to firm management.)
Although many approaches to preventing sexual harassment have been suggested, Susan L. Webb, in Step Forward, states that those companies and organizations that successfully stop or prevent harassment in their workplaces have comprehensive programs in place that include six elements: (1) top management support; (2) a written, posted policy statement; (3) procedures for receiving and handling complaints; (4) experience in handling complaints; (5) training for all employees; and (6) followthrough.(56)
Even when appropriate programs have been developed, successful implementation requires support from the top. Management's attitude toward sexual harassment may be an obstacle to a program's adoption and effectiveness. In fact, management's attitude--refusing to acknowledge, overlooking, or trivializing the issue--may actually contribute to harassment. Studies have found that the best approaches to success addresses problem solving. A 1988 survey by Working Woman magazine reports: "[C]ommitment from the top makes a difference. When senior management is perceived as making the prevention of sexual harassment a top priority, firms are far more likely to offer training programs and to establish mechanisms to encourage the reporting of both formal and informal complaints."
Training
Appropriate training will ensure that women are prepared to meet the challenges facing them as employees in the corrections system.(57) Training is necessary to prevent sexual harassment and to ensure that women have the skills required for career advancement. Studies have shown that women are underrepresented in executive-level positions in the corrections field. In response, NIC funded the development of an executive training program to enhance the ability of women to achieve and function effectively in executive positions in state departments of corrections. NIC, along with K-RAN Design, Inc., established an executive training pilot program in September 1994. Participants included female deputy directors or assistant commissioners of corrections in their states. The overall objectives of the training program were to provide executive leadership development for women in corrections, establish strategies for women's long-term promotional success, and facilitate planning that supports personal learning and career opportunities. The executive leadership and training workshops are a continuing element of NIC's curriculum.(58)
NIC also offers an annual seminar, "Management Development for Women and Minorities," specifically targeted to women and minorities who currently or will possibly occupy middle-level administrative positions in corrections. Topics include problem-solving strategies and identification of individual roles, relationships in the workplace, individual strengths and differences, and identification of managerial and leadership styles, skills, and techniques.
ACA offers an annual course entitled "Change, Challenge, and Choices," designed especially for women new to corrections, including case workers, unit managers, and those working in middle management. Topics include mixed-gender employment in corrections, the history of women in corrections, identification of stereotypes, power and conflict management, mentoring and networking, and development of personalized action plans.
In 1987, A. Morrison, R. White, and E. Van Belsor identified a set of factors that proved to be successful for women in corrections. These factors emphasize strategic planning, communications, and decisionmaking.(59) Some factors serve as "double-edged swords" in many situations. For example, women must take risks, but must also be consistently outstanding; be tough, but not be macho; be ambitious, but not expect equal treatment; and take responsibility, but also follow others' advice. Put simply, to succeed, female managers and executives must find the overlap between acceptable male and female behaviors that the dominant senior executive male culture finds acceptable.(60) The following represents a list of factors female executives have identified as having been important to their career and promotional success.
Help from above--not usually from one person but from several people over time.
Consistently outstanding achievement in technical competence, professionalism, leadership, and the ability to spot and head off problems.
A commitment to success with a determination to push until the job is done.
Superior interpersonal skills and an ability to manage subordinates.
Willingness to undertake risks and the challenges necessary to grow professionally and be visible in the workplace.
The ability to be tough, decisive, and demanding.
Once women have achieved "success," they must continue the work and training effort to keep their levels of advancement. As Helen G. Corrothers observed:
Success has been an elusive quality for women in corrections, and the road to its achievement has been rough. . . . [M]any of the qualities and attributes that enabled women to acquire an initial measure of success remain vital to the retention and advancement or managing of success. The difficulty of the struggle for success places a higher value on its retention.(61)
Conclusion
Significant progress has been made by women employed in the criminal justice field since 1975. This progress has been attributed to such factors as legislation, court decisions, and executive leadership; however, many barriers to the full achievement of women's professional potential still exist. For example, additional career development opportunities should be created in all components of the criminal justice system to handle the challenges of working in male-dominated professions. Mechanisms and initiatives that assist women in career development must be implemented. Financial and familial concerns affect upward mobility and promotional opportunities, as they relate to criminal justice professionals' willingness to relocate. Notwithstanding some progress, the "glass ceiling" remains firmly in place, requiring continued efforts to assist women in career advancement. Finally, efforts that enhance public awareness of the progress made by women must be intensified to encourage their participation in the criminal justice profession.
Recommendations from the OJP Coordination Group on Women
1. Develop strategies to enhance job opportunities for women.
2. Continue researching equity issues relative to the recruitment and advancement of women working in criminal justice.
3. Provide staff development and training programs for criminal justice personnel that include assertiveness training, strategic planning, and workplace diversity initiatives. Emphasize the importance of eliminating sexual harassment in the workplace.
4. Highlight women's accomplishments in the criminal justice system through promotional pieces in the media and in professional publications to ensure public awareness of women's many contributions and responsibilities.
5. Implement policies promoting flexibility in criminal justice agencies to enable all employees to balance careers and family life.
6. Discuss gender-sensitive issues at the highest administrative levels to help dispel myths and stereotypes about women.
Chapter 4 Notes
1. Stephan, James J. 1997. Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 1995, p. 18. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
2. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1996. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1995, p. 103. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
3. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1997. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1996, p. 89. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
4. Perkins, Craig A., James J. Stephan, and Allen J. Beck. 1995. Jails and Jail Inmates, 1993-94. Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin, p. 8. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
5. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1995. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1994, pp. 94-95. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
6. House, Cathryn H. 1993. "The changing role of women in law enforcement." Police Chief 60(10): 142.
7. Ibid.
8. Uniform Crime Reporting Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1996. Crime in the nited States, 1995, p. 283. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
9. Cornish, A.R. 1994. "Impact of the 'Glass Ceiling' on women employed in Florida jails." In Human Resources in Criminal Justice, eds. D.L. Zahm, C. Stiff, et al. Tallahassee, FL: Department of Law Enforcement.
10. Martin, S.E. 1991. "Effectiveness of affirmative action: The case of women in policing." Justice Quarterly 8(4): 489-504.
11. McCoy, D.G. 1993. "Women in law enforcement: A positive work environment." Law Enforcement Tomorrow 2(1): 5-9.
12. Ramson, Amy. 1993. "Women in policing: A success story." Womenpolice 27(4): 15-19.
13. MacDonald, Phyllis. Interview by Jodi Zepp, February 1996.
14. Mehrling, Carol. Interview by Jodi Zepp, via correspondence, April 1, 1996.
15. More, Harry W. 1992. "Male-dominated police culture: Reducing the gender gap." In Special Topics in Policing, 113-137. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Co.
16. Hale, Donna C. 1992. "Women in policing." In What Works in Policing: Operations and Administration Examined, eds. G.W. Cordner and D.C. Hale. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Co.
17. Brown, M.C. 1994. "Plight of female police: A survey of NW patrolmen." Police Chief 61(9): 50-53.
18. McCoy, D.G. 1993. "Women in law enforcement: A positive work environment."
19. McCoy, D.G. 1992. Future Organizational Environment for Women in Law Enforcement. Sacramento, CA: California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
20. Bernat, Francis P. 1992. "Women in the legal profession." In The Changing Roles of Women in the Criminal Justice System, ed. Imogene L. Moyer. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
21. Commission on Women in the Profession. Report on the Status of Women in the Legal Profession. American Bar Association.
22. As cited in Bernat, Francis P. "Women in the legal profession."
23. Ibid.
24. Commission on Women in the Profession. December 1995. "Basic facts from women in the law: A look at the numbers." In Unfinished Business. American Bar Association.
25. Ibid.
26. Ibid.
27. Ibid.
28. Ibid.
29. Federal Judicial History Office, Federal Judicial Center. 1996. Unpublished data. Washington, DC.
30. Feinman, Clarice. 1994. Women in the Criminal Justice System, pp. 159, 165. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
31. Etheridge, R., et al. 1984. "Female employees in all-male correctional facilities." Federal Probation 48(4): 54-65.
32. Ibid.
33. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1995. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1994, pp. 94-95.
34. Stephan, James J. Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 1995, p. 18.
35. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1996, p. 89.
36. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1994, p. 96.
37. Young, Marjorie H. 1992. "Examining keys to success for today's women working in juvenile corrections." Corrections Today 54(6): 106-111.
38. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1994, p. 93.
39. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1996, p.89.
40. U.S. Department of Labor. 1991. A Report on the Glass Ceiling Initiative.
41. K-RAN Design, Inc. 1995. Curriculum Design Summary Report for the National Institute of Corrections Executive Training for Women. Salem, NH. For more information, contact Andie Moss at NIC, 202-307-1300.
42. Bergsmann, Ilene. 1991. "ACA Women in Corrections Committee examines female staff training needs." Corrections Today 53(7): 106, 108-109.
43. Rison, R.H. 1994. "Women as high-security officers: Gender-neutral employment in high-security prisons." Federal Prisons Journal 3(3): 1-23.
44. Johnson, P.M. 1992. "Why employ women?" Corrections Today 54(6): 162-167.
45. Rowan, Joseph R. 1996. "Who is safer in male maximum security prisons?" Corrections Today 58(2): 186-189.
46. Rowan, Joseph R. 1996. "Female correctional officers said to reduce prison violence." In Criminal Justice Newsletter, April, 27(7): 2-3.
47. Ibid.
48. Martin, D. and M. Levine. 1991. "Status of women in law enforcement." Law Enforcement Technology 18(2): 26.
49. Brown, R., Jr. and M. Van Ochten. 1990. "Sexual harassment: A vulnerable area for corrections." Corrections Today 52(5): 62-70.
50. Beck, Ann C. and Mary K. Stohr. 1991 "Sexual harassment and support for Affirmative Action." American Jails 5(5): 15-17.
51. Ibid.
52. Mehrling, Carol. Interview by Jodi Zepp.
53. American Bar Association Commission on Women in the Profession. "Report on the Status of Women in the Legal Profession."
54. Ibid.
55. Webb, Susan. 1991. Step Forward: Sexual Harassment in the Workplace--What You Need to Know. USA: Master Media Limited.
56. Corrothers, Helen G. 1996. "Education and training: The key to enhancement and advancement." In State of Corrections: Proceedings of the ACA Annual Conferences, 1995, pp. 133-142. Lanham, MD: American Correctional Association.
57. K-RAN Design, Inc. 1995. Curriculum Design Summary Report for the National Institute of Corrections Executive Training for Women.
58. Morrison, A., R. White, and E. van Belsor. 1987. "Women with promise: Who succeeds, who fails?" Career Realities and Strategies. Salem, NH: K-RAN Designs, Inc.
59. Center for Creative Leadership. 1994. Career Realities and Strategies. Salem, NH: K-RAN Designs, Inc.
60. Corrothers, Helen G. 1991. "Managing success." In Change, Challenge, and Choices: Women's Role in Modern Corrections, pp. 67-81. Lanham, MD: American Correctional Association.
Although great progress has been made in the area of women seeking criminal justice careers some of the same issues still arise today. Thankfully as society advance these issues arise less and less often.
To read the full report go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/reports/98Guides/wcjs98/chap4.htm .