Feminist prison abolitionism

Abstract

Reform) in Sweden in 1966, and the publication of Thomas Mathiesen's (1974) Politics of Abolition. In Aotearoa New Zealand, the abolitionist group Movement Against Prisons (MAP) NZ formed in the early 1970s and continued until the late 2000s to advocate for abolition and, later, reform of prisons. However, contemporary prison abolitionism is arguably most influenced by the work of the Black Marxist feminist Angela Davis, particularly her book Are prisons obsolete? (Davis 2003). The influence of Davis is felt beyond the United States and is explicitly acknowledged as key to the formation of the prison abolitionist organisation People Against Prisons Aotearoa (Lamusse 2020). Davis also speaks at every biannual conference in Australia of the feminist prison abolitionist organisation Sisters Inside.Although its meaning is contested by abolitionist scholars and activists, prison abolitionism can generally be taken to mean the moral, political and criminological project that seeks the end of prisons. For some, abolition simply means the end of prisons as the main form of punishment, while, for others, abolition involves the creation of an entirely different society in which prisons are impossible to imagine (Davis , 2014. Indeed, for these abolitionists, abolition is about more than getting rid of prisons. Prisons are a tool for the reproduction of colonisation, capitalism, racism, patriarchy and other forms of oppression, but those forms of oppression are not limited to imprisonment. From this perspective, abolitionism "is based on economic and social justice for all, concern for all victims, and reconciliation within a caring community" (Knopp et al. 1976, p. 7). With this in mind, abolition is a long-term strategy to not only close down prisons but also create social and economic conditions that encourage empowerment, healing and reciprocity.Prison abolitionism can be contrasted with prison reformism. While both abolitionists and reformers see prisons as flawed and often violent institutions, reformers argue that they can be improved to become more humane, rehabilitative or effective. On the other hand, abolitionists argue that prisons are fundamentally inhumane and violent institutions that reproduce suffering and oppression. In other words, prison reformers seek to improve prisons, while abolitionists aim to end them.Understanding this distinction between reformism and abolitionism leads us to ask why abolitionists argue that prisons are fundamentally flawed? Lamusse and McIntosh (2020) argue there are "pragmatic," criminological arguments for abolition, as well as moral and political ones. The rest of this section discusses the pragmatic reasons for abolition, while the next section discusses the moral and political reasons.The pragmatic reasoning for abolition assesses prisons according to the standards of their supposed purposes of rehabilitation, safety, deterrence, and justice for victims. Abolitionists argue that imprisonment not only fails to achieve each of these purposes, but also ultimately entrenches in...

Gender Inequality and Discrimination within Aotearoa New Zealand’s Criminal Justice System: Some Professional Support Workers’ Perspectives

“…Prison Spaces in Aotearoa New Zealand ANZ's approach to incarceration reflects the impact of both colonisation and patriarchal relations (Bentley, 2014;Gibson, 2022;Jackson, 1990;Lamusse, 2022;McIntosh & Workman, 2017;Taylor, 1997). Together these help explain who ends up in the CJS, how institutions within the CJS operate and the experiences people have when leaving prison.…”

Queering the Courts

“…Marginalised identities purportedly may seek redress for this discrimination through the justice system (Cappelletti & Garth, 1978). However, some scholars claim that the institutions of justice support structures of oppression, such as the gender binary and the cisheteropatriarchy (Lamusse & McIntosh, 2021;. How the justice system affects the perceptions and experiences of its participants may help to understand how it perpetuates oppression against them (Primeaux, Karri, & Caldwell, 2003).…”