We are upgrading the repository! A content freeze is in effect until December 11, 2024. New submissions or changes to existing items will not be allowed during this period. All content already published will remain publicly available for searching and downloading. Updates will be posted in the Website Upgrade 2024 FAQ in the sidebar Help menu. Reach out to escholarship@umassmed.edu with any questions.
Authors
DeLanders, RobertUMass Chan Affiliations
Commonwealth Medicine, Health and Criminal Justice ProgramDocument Type
Blog PostPublication Date
2018-05-23Keywords
womenincarceration
inmates
women's health
Dignity for Incarcerated Women Act
Community Health and Preventive Medicine
Criminology and Criminal Justice
Health Economics
Health Law and Policy
Health Policy
Health Services Administration
Health Services Research
Maternal and Child Health
Women's Health
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
One of the most compelling arguments for improvements to healthcare for individuals who are incarcerated is the fact that “[a]t least 95% of all state prisoners will be released…”1 Further, pursuant to a 2014 study by the Sentencing Project, more than 215,332 women and girls are now incarcerated in the U.S.2 This figure represents both a record percentage of the total prison population in the U.S. and an eight-fold rise in the incarceration of females since 1980.3 Critically, more than two thirds of these women are mothers and 60% of these women have a minor child.4 Based on these figures, it is clear that women’s health is not only a community health concern, but a criminal justice concern.DOI
10.13028/hq27-4p56Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/26966Notes
Blog post to Commonwealth Medicine's website - View blog post online
Rights
© 2018 University of Massachusetts Medical Schoolae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.13028/hq27-4p56
Scopus Count
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Evaluation of the American Heart Association cardiovascular disease prevention guideline for womenHsia, Judith; Rodabough, Rebecca J; Manson, JoAnn E.; Liu, Simin; Freiberg, Matthew S.; Graettinger, William; Rosal, Milagros C; Cochrane, Barb; Lloyd-Jones, Donald; Robinson, Jennifer G.; et al. (2010-03-01)BACKGROUND: The 2007 update to the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in women recommend a simplified approach to risk stratification. We assigned Women's Health Initiative participants to risk categories as described in the guideline and evaluated clinical event rates within and between strata. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Women's Health Initiative enrolled 161 808 women ages 50 to 79 years and followed them prospectively for 7.8 years (mean). Applying the 2007 AHA guideline categories, 11% of women were high risk, 72% at-risk, and 4% at optimal risk; 13% of women did not fall into any category, that is, lacked risk factors but did not adhere to a healthy lifestyle (moderate intensity exercise for 30 minute most days and 20% (area under receiver operating characteristic curve for Framingham risk, 0.724; for AHA risk, 0.664; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Risk stratification as proposed in the 2007 AHA guideline is simple, accessible to patients and providers, and identifies cardiovascular risk with accuracy similar to that of the current Framingham algorithm. Clinical Trial Registration- clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT00000611.
-
Women veterans' reproductive health preferences and experiences: a focus group analysisMattocks, Kristin M; Nikolajski, Cara; Haskell, Sally G.; Brandt, Cynthia A.; McCall-Hosenfeld, Jennifer; Yano, Elizabeth M.; Pham, Tan; Borrero, Sonya (2011-03-01)OBJECTIVE: Although women veterans are seeking care at the Veterans Administration (VA) in record numbers, there is little information regarding women veterans' experiences and preferences for reproductive health care services. We sought to characterize women veterans' experiences with, and preferences for, reproductive health services in the VA. METHODS: We conducted five focus groups with a total of 25 participants using a semistructured interview guide to elicit women veterans' experiences and preferences with reproductive health care. Women veterans' utilizing VA health care at two VA facilities who responded to advertisements were selected on a first-come basis to participate in the study. We analyzed transcripts of these audio-recorded sessions using the constant comparative method of grounded theory. RESULTS: Five main themes emerged from the focus group discussions: 1) Women veterans prefer VA women's clinics for comprehensive medical care; 2) Women veterans have had both positive and negative reproductive health experiences in the VA; 3) Women veterans experience knowledge gaps regarding VA coverage for reproductive health services; 4) Women veterans believe the VA should provide additional coverage for advanced infertility care and for newborns; and 5) Perceived gender discrimination shapes how women veterans view the VA. CONCLUSION: As the VA continues to tailor its services to women veterans, attention should be given to women's reproductive health care needs. All rights reserved.
-
Preventive healthcare use, smoking, and alcohol use among Rhode Island women experiencing intimate partner violenceLemon, Stephenie C; Verhoek-Oftedahl, Wendy; Donnelly, Edward F. (2002-09-13)OBJECTIVE: Intimate partner violence (IPV) poses major health threats to women, including increased risk for several chronic health conditions. The impact of IPV on use of preventive health services is not well understood. Although several studies indicate that female victims of IPV have higher rates of alcohol abuse, this has not been replicated in population-based studies. The association of IPV with smoking has not been a major research focus. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between physical and psychological IPV in the past 12 months and preventive healthcare use, smoking, and alcohol use among women. METHODS: Data on 1643 women aged 18-54 from the 1999 Rhode Island Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were analyzed. Logistic regression, controlling for age, race, marital status, education, insurance status, and functional disability, was used to model the associations of IPV with (1) checkups, (2) clinical breast examinations (CBEs), (3) Pap smear screening, (4) cigarette smoking, and (5) high-risk alcohol use. RESULTS: Prevalence of physical IPV was 4.1%. The prevalence of psychological IPV, in the absence of physical IPV was 4.5%. Physical IPV was associated with receiving regular Pap smears odds ratio ([OR] = 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-5.70), current smoking (OR = 2.07, 95% CI 1.03-4.18), and high-risk alcohol use (OR = 4.85, 95% CI 2.02-11.60). Psychological IPV was associated with high-risk alcohol use (OR = 3.22, 95% CI 1.46-7.09). CONCLUSIONS: Women experiencing IPV regularly access preventive healthcare, providing healthcare providers with opportunities to assess and counsel women for IPV in addition to smoking and high-risk alcohol use.