Putting on the Same Shoes: Lived Experiences of Women Who Are Reincarcerated
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women are discharged daily from correctional institutions across the world. Many of these women cycle in and out of jail and experience the "revolving door syndrome," characterized by release, reimprisonment, and subsequent rerelease into the community. Although many factors contribute to this phenomenon, there is limited understanding of its impact on imprisoned women, including their perceptions of returning to community life. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: This phenomenological study examined the lived experiences of women who were imprisoned, released to the community, and returned to custody. METHOD: Twelve women, nine of whom were Indigenous were interviewed at the Women's Correctional Centre in Manitoba. Individual, face-to-face, in-depth interviews were employed using a woman-centered conversational approach. Qualitative thematic analysis, informed by van Manen's approach, was used to inductively arrive at themes. FINDINGS: Themes and subthemes organized around van Manen's existentials (temporality, spatiality, relationality, and corporeality) highlight the barriers and challenges women face as they try to sustain change in their lives to avoid the revolving door. Threaded through their accounts are experiences of personal and historical trauma, painful childhoods, difficult relationships, and ineffective or absent personal and systemic supports. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the need for trauma-informed comprehensive health care and programing sensitive to women's experience of trauma in their complex lives. Nurses need to partner with service providers and policy makers to address the social/economical inequities that impede the positive life changes these women need to make to prevent reimprisonment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".