The Experiences of Women Reintegrating After Prison: An Explorative Qualitative Study on Women Released from Prisons and Jails in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women are among the fastest growing prison populations in Canada, often with adverse backgrounds, complex life circumstances, and unique criminogenic needs. However, limited criminological and sociological inquiry focusses on the experiences of criminalized and formerly incarcerated women in Canada. Given associations between criminogenic needs and reintegration outcomes upon community re-entry, this study explores the experiences of formerly incarcerated women and staff involved in a novel reintegration program (Women Reintegrating After Prison: WRAP) designed specifically for criminalized women in Canadian settings. More specifically, this project considers two research questions: (1) what are the experiences of formerly incarcerated women reintegrating from prison or jail; and (2) does reintegrative programming and/or interventions designed for formerly incarcerated women impact experiences of re-entry? Through 12 qualitative interviews with staff and participants of the WRAP program, this work explores the experiences of incarceration for women, community release/reintegration, and the impacts of reintegrative programming. Findings suggest that rehabilitative needs are often unmet in Canadian federal and provincial custody, with system-related, economic and social needs for reintegration enduring following community re-entry. Insights from this project support the development of targeted programming to address gender-specific needs, such as individualized and holistic service, trauma-informed approaches, empowering choice, and criminogenic barrier alleviation for clients, while also revealing gaps in existing custodial practices, reintegrative supports, and social advocacy.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".