---

 
CONSTITUTING THE VIOLENCE OF CRIMINALIZED WOMEN
 
Elizabeth Comack and Salena Brickey
Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba
 
Recent efforts to make sense of the Violent Woman have revolved around three different (yet not disconnected) constructs: “victim,” “mad,” and “bad”.  One issue that has been missing in discussions of the Violent Woman, however, is how women who use violence constitute themselves.  In this study, using in-depth interview with 18 criminalized women, we aim to uncover the women’s own discursive constructions and the discourses they draw from in their efforts at framing identity.  How and where is violence situated in the women’s accounts of their lives? How do the women constitute themselves?  What discourses do they draw from (and resist)?  Do the prevailing constructs of the Violent Woman as “victim”, “mad”, or “bad” have resonance for these women?  In the process, we argue that each of these constructs, while having some resonance in the women’s accounts, fails to capture the complexity of their lives.  Because identity is fractured and multiple, violence in the lives of criminalized women (their own violence and that which is directed at them) cannot be rendered plausible by imposing a master status template.  We conclude by considering the implications of the analysis for making sense of women’s violence.
 

---

 
COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTIONS FOR AT-RISK YOUTH IN ONTARIO UNDER CANADA’S YOUTH CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT: A CASE STUDY OF A “RUNAWAY” GIRL
 
Ruth M. Mann
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Windsor
 
Charlene Y. Senn
Department of Psychology, University of Windsor
 
April Girard
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Windsor
 
Salma Ackbar
Department of Psychology, University of Windsor
 
This article presents findings from ongoing research on interventions for violent and at-risk youth in Ontario through partnerships authorized under Canada’s 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA).  After briefly describing and theoretically situating the YCJA’s “preventative partnership” (Garland 2000) strategy, we analyse an interview with a 16-year-old Ontario high school student (one of 85 interviews with female and male youth recruited through high schools, community agencies, youth advocacy networks, and correctional facilities between 2002 and 2006).  In this interview, “Connie” describes her experiences with family and peer violence and her efforts to deal with these experiences through a range of escape and help-seeking behaviours.  Drawing broadly upon governmentality discourses on advanced liberal governance, our analysis focuses on the ways in which victimization, running away, child protection involvement, criminal activity, and social exclusion are linked.  We also discuss the promises and challenges of efforts to address the needs of youth caught up in this trajectory through community partnership strategies.
 

---

 
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TO SENTENCING IN CANADA: EXPLORING RECENT FINDINGS
 
Julian V. Roberts
University of Ottawa & Centre for Criminology, University of Oxford

Nicole Crutcher and Paul Verbrugge
Department of Justice Canada

This article reports findings from two representative public-opinion surveys that explored Canadians’ attitudes toward three important sentencing issues: the severity of sentencing; the purposes of sentencing; and mandatory sentences of imprisonment.  As has been found by polls over the past 30 years, most Canadians believe that sentencing practices are too lenient.  The same result emerged from a poll conducted in 2005: 74% of respondents held the view that sentencing is too lenient – a finding consistent with polls conducted throughout the 1980s.  With respect to the purposes of sentencing, strongest public support emerged for the restorative sentencing objectives of promoting a sense of responsibility in the offender and securing reparation for the crime victim.  There was less support for the more traditional purposes of deterrence and incapacitation.  This finding represents a marked contrast to findings from the last survey that evaluated public reaction to sentencing purposes (in 1985).  Slightly more than half the sample in 2005 expressed support for mandatory sentencing – a result consistent with opinion surveys from the United States and Australia.  However, there was strong public support for mandatory sentencing legislation that also permits a limited degree of judicial discretion.  The public appear aware of the dangers of an absolute mandatory sentence of imprisonment and support mandatory sentences in which courts may impose a lesser sentence where exceptional circumstances exist.   The implications of these findings for sentencing policy in Canada are discussed.
 

---

 
THE SENTENCING OF ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL YOUTH: UNDERSTANDING LOCAL VARIATION
 
Anthony N. Doob
Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto
 
Jane B. Sprott
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Guelph
 
In a recent article in this journal, Latimer and Foss (2005) suggest that Aboriginal youth in five Canadian cities who were sentenced to custody under the Young Offenders Act received longer sentences than did non-Aboriginal youth.  This finding is shown to be an artefact of jurisdictional variation.  When the cities are looked at individually, or when cities are controlled for in other ways, the effect disappears.  This might be seen as an illustration of “Simpson’s Paradox”, whereby an association between two variables can be in one direction when pooled across two or more sub-populations but, when looked at individually (within each sub-population), is non-existent or points in the opposite direction.
 
 

Journal's Home Page | Contents