Drugs and crime : a study of incarcerated female offenders

Holly Johnson
ISBN 0 642 53861 1 ; ISSN 1326-6004
Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology: 2004
(Research and public policy series, no. 63)

Chapter 3 : Characteristics of the women interviewed

The DUCO female study comprised 470 women who were incarcerated in prisons in South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria, Queensland, Tasmania and Northern Territory. Face-to- face interviews with these women took place between July 2003 and January 2004 (details about the methodology and limitations of the study are provided in the Technical Appendix). A comparison with the total female offender population in these jurisdictions shows that the DUCO sample is similar to the profile of female offenders overall (see Table A.2). This chapter provides descriptive data on the sociodemographic characteristics of the women, as well as their criminal histories and drug use.

Demographic characteristics

Women interviewed for this study included 342 non-Indigenous and 128 Indigenous women. Overall:

• four in 10 offenders were under 30 years of age, which makes them younger than the general adult female population where 28 per cent are under 30 (ABS 2002);
• a disproportionate number of offenders were single - 43 per cent compared to 28 per cent in the general population - and a smaller number were married (10%), living in a de facto relationship (23%), separated or divorced (20%) or widowed (4%);
• education levels among female prisoners were lower than among Australian women in general: one-quarter had only a primary school education as compared to 11 per cent of women in the population;
• the mean age of school leaving among female prisoners was 15.6 years;
• this was a relatively impoverished group of women with 30 per cent living in public housing and five per cent on the street prior to entering prison; and
• a majority had children.

Indigenous women comprised 27 per cent of offenders, a proportion that far exceeds their representation in the Australian population (2%). In addition:

• Indigenous offenders were younger on average than non-Indigenous offenders, had lower levels of education and a lower mean age of school leaving; and
• Indigenous women were far more likely to have been living in public housing or on the street prior to their arrest - 62 per cent and seven per cent compared to 18 per cent and four per cent, respectively, of non-Indigenous women (see Table 2).

Table 2 : Demographic characteristics of offenders

	Indigenous		Non-Indigenous		Total
	n	%	n	%	n	%
Age
Under 20 years	6	5	7	2	13	3
20-24	30	23	56	16	86	18
25-29	29	23	70	20	99	21
30-34	19	15	58	17	77	16
35-39	23	18	59	17	82	17
40 and older	21	16	92	27	113	24
Total	128	100	342	100	470	100
Mean age	31.0		33.9		33.1
Education
Primary school	43	34	66	19	109	23
Year 10	32	25	75	22	107	23
Apprenticeship	3	2	9	3	12	3
Year 12	5	4	26	8	31	7
TAFE/technical college	42	33	122	36	164	35
University	3	2	42	12	45	10
Total	128	100	340	100	468	100
Age left school (mean)	15.2		15.7		15.6
Housing prior to prison
Rented/owned house/apt	34	27	233	70	267	58
Public housing	79	62	58	18	137	30
Someone else's home	*	2	12	4	14	3
Street	9	7	13	4	22	5
Other	*	3	15	4	19	4
Total	113	100	331	100	459	100
Have children	99	77	237	69	336	71
* fewer than five cases Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file]

History of offending

Unless they are involved in very serious crimes, such as homicide, or property or drug offences involving very large sums of money, offenders rarely receive a prison term on the first and many subsequent convictions. This is the case especially for women because they are less likely than men to be involved in violent crime and so will more often receive community sentences. But even for the same types of offences, women are less likely than men to be sentenced to prison (ABS 2004a). By the time a woman receives a prison sentence, she can therefore be expected to have an extensive criminal history.

The ability to measure history of offending is a major advantage of the DUCO study, but lengthy criminal histories can complicate the classification of offenders for analytical purposes. In this report, offenders will be classified according to:

• the main offence for which they are serving their current sentence of incarceration (self-reported by the women) organised according to ABS scoring rules; and
• past offences in which they became regularly involved.

Figure 4 shows the main offences for which these women were serving their current sentence: one-third were imprisoned for violent offences, one-third for property offences, and 14 per cent for drug offences.

Offenders were asked about their criminal careers, including acts for which they were detected and charged by police and acts the police did not find out about. This provides a more accurate and complete picture of offending than relying simply on the primary offence for which they were convicted for their current incarceration since a majority of offences do not come to the attention of police. In fact, 70 per cent of women who committed burglaries, 44 per cent of those involved in fraud or forgery, and over 90 per cent of those involved in drug buying and selling said the police never or rarely found out about these crimes.

However, a substantial percentage of these offenders had been convicted of a crime and incarcerated previously. For example:

• 43 per cent had been in adult prison previously and 11 per cent were in prison at least five times before;
• women whose current offence was break and enter or theft had the most numerous previous incarcerations - over 30 per cent reported five or more;
• property offenders were the group most likely to have numerous offences associated with their current conviction; over half of the women whose main offence was break and enter, theft or fraud were currently imprisoned for five or more property offences; and
• women whose principal offence was a violent crime tended to have only one or two violent offences associated with their current conviction; like property offenders, women serving time for violent offences were more likely to have committed numerous property crimes both in the past and associated with their current conviction.

Details about the criminal careers of these women are shown in Table 3 which displays the number and percentage of women who reported ever committing a range of violent, property and drug offences and sex work, as well as those who became regular offenders. 'Escalation' was calculated as the percentage of those who had ever engaged in each crime type who then went on to become regular offenders. Sex work, although not always considered a criminal offence, was included within the range of lifetime offences because of the strong association between this type of activity and drug abuse, and the risk of these women to violent victimisation (Cusick, Martin & May 2003; Hunt 1990). The most common type of analysis presented in this report will be 'regular' offenders, either grouped by the larger classifications of property, violent or drug crimes or sex work, or in more detail by individual offence types.

As shown in Table 3, the most common categories of offences committed by these women in the past were property and drug offences, reported by 73 per cent and 69 per cent of women, respectively. The most common offences were buying illegal drugs, stealing without break-in, assault, trading in stolen goods, fraud and selling drugs. Escalation was very high with half to two-thirds of property offenders escalating to regular offending. The exception was vandalism, which rarely became a regular activity. Among all these crimes, the highest rate of escalation was reported for buying illegal drugs (91%). In other words, nine out of 10 women who began buying drugs continued on to become regular drug consumers. While the percentage who ever sold drugs was smaller (40%), 72 per cent of these became regular drug dealers. Sex work also had a high rate of escalation (74%) although just 18 per cent ever engaged in this activity. Half of all offenders ever committed a violent act, the majority of these a physical assault. However, the escalation rate for violent female offenders was comparatively low at 25 per cent or less. The small number of women reporting regular violent offending limits the analysis of violent female offenders in this study.

Table 3 : History of offending

	Ever		Regular		Escalation1
	n	%	n	%	%
Property offences	343	73	228	49	66
Break and enter	159	34	84	18	53
Stealing without break-in	243	52	152	32	63
Traded in stolen goods	195	41	128	27	66
Vandalised property	79	17	7	1	9
Fraud, forgery	194	41	91	19	47
Violent offences	260	55	48	10	18
Physical assault	230	49	37	8	16
Robbery without a weapon	56	12	14	3	25
Armed robbery	63	13	8	2	13
Drug offences	324	69	293	62	90
Bought illegal drugs	317	67	287	61	91
Sold illegal drugs	190	40	137	29	72
Sex work	84	18	62	13	74
Total	470	100	347	74	74
1 Escalation is the percentage of those who ever committed the crime who became regular offenders Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file]

Table 4 shows a comparison between incarcerated males in the male DUCO study and this sample of incarcerated females. Males reported a higher prevalence of violent offences and a higher rate of escalation: 33 per cent of males who ever committed a violent offence went on to be regular violent offenders compared to 18 per cent of females. With respect to property crimes, males and females had comparable levels of regular offending and similar escalation rates. Women had slightly higher rates of escalation to regular drug offending.

Table 4 : History of offending among female and male inmates (percentages)

	Females			Males
	Ever	Regular	Escalation1	Ever	Regular	Escalation
Property offences	73	49	66	79*	50	63
Violent offences	55	10	18	70*	23*	33*
Drug offences	69	62	90	70	60	86*
Total	100	74	74	91	71	78*
* difference between female and male offenders are statistically significant, chi square, p < .05 1 Escalation is derived by dividing regular offenders by those who have ever committed the crime Offence categories have been adjusted to be comparable between the female and male samples. Regular property offending includes fraud and violent offending excludes regular homicide and sexual offenders since these were not asked for the female sample. Results concerning male offenders will therefore differ from Makkai & Payne 2003a and will not add to 100 per cent Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file], n=470; DUCO male survey, 2001 [computer file], n=2,135

The extensive criminal histories of these women and the diversity of their involvement in crime is shown in Table 5. Just 27 per cent of regular offenders were involved in only one crime type while three-quarters reported regularly committing multiple crime types. Half of all regular offenders regularly committed three or more offences included in this study. Burglars and women who traded in stolen goods reported regular involvement in an average of five different types of crimes, drug purchasers in an average of three, and the remaining offenders were regular participants in an average of four different types of offences. Regular fraud offenders, violent offenders and drug purchasers were the offenders most likely to specialise with about one-fifth reporting regular offending of that crime type only. Violent offenders are grouped in this table due to low numbers of women who reported regularly engaging in either robbery or assault. The 21 per cent who reported regular involvement in violent crime only were all women who regularly committed physical assault (n=10). There were no regular robbers (armed or unarmed) who were not regularly involved in other crimes.

The largest overlaps in offending were with respect to property and drug offences:

• the majority of those who had committed break and enter, stealing without break-in, trading in stolen goods or fraud were involved in at least one other type of property crime;
• at least 90 per cent of regular sex workers and all types of property offenders (with the exception of fraud) were regularly involved in buying drugs;
• 60 per cent of women who regularly traded in stolen goods were also regular drug traffickers;
• small percentages of regular property or drug offenders or sex workers were also regular violent offenders;
• however, more than half of violent offenders were involved in stealing and 71 per cent in buying drugs; and
• property offenders, with the exception of fraud, were more actively involved in the drug market in the form of buying and selling drugs as compared to violent offenders.

The extensive involvement of these women in multiple crime types illustrates the difficulty of classifying offenders according to offending background. The complexity of their offending patterns and the limits imposed by a relatively small sample means that very few offenders could be classified according to a single crime type. In an attempt to create discrete offence types for analysis, the principal focus of this report will be on the following categories of offenders:

1. regular property offenders (excluding women who had any regular involvement in violent offending or sex work);
2. regular violent offenders (whether or not they were also involved in any other offence types);
3. regular sex workers (whether or not they were also involved in any other offence types); and
4. regular drug offenders (whether or not they were also involved in any other offence types).

Due to the importance of studying women's violent offending and involvement in sex work, and the relatively low numbers of women in this sample who were regularly involved in these activities, these groups have been separated as much as possible from property offenders. The category of property offenders is therefore pure property offenders who were not involved in violent offending or sex work, although most were also drug offenders. Women with a history of violent offending tended to be involved in a range of property offences and drug buying, while few were sex workers. Women with a history of sex work also reported involvement in a range of property and drug crimes with little involvement in violent offending.

Table 5: Multiple offending by offence type (percentages)

Regular offenders	Break and enter	Steal without break-in	Traded in stolen goods	Fraud	Bought drugs	Sold drugs	Sex work	Violent offences
Property offenders
Break and enter	-	39	48	25	26	28	29	29
Steal without break-in	70	-	72	56	47	48	53	58
Traded in stolen goods	74	61	-	47	43	56	45	38
Fraud	27	34	34	-	23	23	27	15
Violent offenders	17	18	14	8	12	12	13	-
Drug offenders
Bought drugs	88	88	97	73	-	96	97	71
Sold drugs	45	43	60	34	46	-	42	33
Sex work	21	22	22	19	21	19	-	17
Mean number of offence types	5	4	5	4	3	4	4	4
Regular offending this crime type only	7	3	0	20	17	4	-	21
(n)	(n=84)	(n=152)	(n=128)	(n=91)	(n=287)	(n=137)	(n=62)	(n=48)
Excludes vandalism due to low counts. Offenders can be counted in more than one column Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file]

Prevalence of illegal drug use

Drug use among these incarcerated women was high: 80 per cent had ever experimented with illegal drugs, and 66 per cent of women had used illegal drugs in the six months prior to the time of their arrest (Table 6). Almost the same proportion (62%) were regular users at the time of their arrest. This study focuses on illegal drug use and excludes those who only used such drugs as amphetamines, benzodiazepines and morphine legally. Reference to methadone is explicitly 'street methadone'. In practice, only 22 of the 470 women (5%) self-reported only legal drug use (see Box 5 in Chapter 6). Thirty-nine per cent of offenders were regular users of more than one illegal drug at the time of their arrest.

The rate of escalation from ever using drugs to current regular drug use was 78 per cent (Table 6). In other words, almost eight in every 10 offenders who ever experimented with an illegal drug were regular users at the time of their arrest. These figures are similar to the results of the DUCO male study in which 69 per cent had used at least one of the four main illegal drugs in the six months prior to arrest, 62 per cent were regular users, and the escalation rate was 76 per cent (Makkai & Payne 2003a: 29). If analysis of the DUCO female data is restricted to the four drug types examined in the male study (cannabis, heroin, cocaine and amphetamines), the results do not change. This is due to the fact that almost all the women who use other drugs were also using at least one of these four. The results also do not change if the analysis is restricted to looking only at female inmates in the four states where interviewing took place for the male study (Queensland, West Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory).

Similar to other research, cannabis is the drug most likely to have been ever used or regularly used in the six months prior to arrest: 78 per cent and 40 per cent of offenders, respectively. Regular illegal amphetamine use was almost as high as cannabis use, followed by heroin and benzodiazepines. The percentage of women who had ever used cocaine was 42 per cent, but the regular use of this drug was comparatively low: just six per cent were regular cocaine users at the time of their arrest. Rates of escalation for drugs other than cannabis were highest for amphetamines, heroin and benzodiazepines.

The definition of 'regular' drug use was left up to the interpretation of offenders, similar to the categorisation of 'regular' offending. The frequency of 'regular' drug use varies according to the type of drug. To be a regular heroin user, for example, typically means using daily or several times a day, which is a reflection of the nature of heroin dependency. Regular cocaine use involves weekly or monthly use or less. Cannabis, amphetamine and benzodiazepine users also tended to be heavy users with at least half of these women using at least once a day. This heavy drug use implies an ongoing need for the financial resources to pay for drugs along with a diminishing capacity for legitimate employment and therefore a need to turn to crime to sustain a drug habit.

Table 6 : Prevalence of illegal drug use (percentages)

	Cannabis	Amphetamines1	Heroin	Cocaine	Benzodiazepines1	Other2	Any	More than one
Ever used	78	61	46	42	31	54	80	65
Used in six months prior to arrest	49	42	29	14	20	27	66	47
Current regular user3	40	37	27	6	15	16	62	39
Escalation4	51	61	59	14	48	30	78	60
Frequency of use for current regular users
Less than monthly	11	11	5	28	10
One to several times a month	8	12	5	31	19
One to several times a week	18	21	11	21	21
Once a day	18	17	14	14	18
Several times a day	45	39	66	7	32
Total	100	100	100	100	100
(n)	(189)	(176)	(125)	(29)	(72)
1 Excludes legal use of these drugs 2 Includes hallucinogens, ecstasy, street methadone and morphine. 3 Those who used drugs during the six months prior to arrest, and who said they had been regular users 4 Escalation is the percentage of those who ever used the drug who became current regular users Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file]

The DUMA study shows that women detained by the police are more likely than men in similar situations to test positive for drug use (Milner, Mouzos & Makkai 2004). Similarly, a comparison of the DUCO male and female samples shows that drug use among the incarcerated population is higher for females than for males for some drug types. The prevalence of regular amphetamine use and rates of escalation for both amphetamines and heroin were higher for women than for men (Table 7) (Makkai & Payne 2003a: 29). The percentage of male inmates reporting current regular use of amphetamines was 31 per cent compared to 37 per cent of women. Rates of escalation to regular use of amphetamines was 53 per cent for males as compared to 61 per cent for female users. Escalation to regular use of heroin was also significantly higher for women. Men had higher rates of cannabis use than did women, as well as higher rates of escalation. With respect to cocaine, a higher percentage of women had ever tried the drug but men were more likely to escalate to regular use so that similar small percentages of both women and men were regular users of cocaine at the time of their arrest.

Table 7 : Prevalence of illegal drug use among female and male inmates (percentages)

	Cannabis		Amphetamines		Heroin		Cocaine
	Females	Males	Females	Males	Females	Males	Females	Males
Ever used	78	81	61	58	46	45	42	32*
Current user	49	62*	42	42	29	27	14	16
Current regular user	40	53*	37	31*	27	21	6	7
Escalation	51	65*	61	53*	59	47*	14	22*
* differences between females and males are statistically significant, chi square, p < .05 Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file], n=470; DUCO Male Survey, 2001 [computer file], n=2,135

Rates of drug use among incarcerated women were also considerably higher than among women in the general population. According to the 2001 National Drug Strategy Household Survey, 13 per cent of all women aged 18 years and older had used illegal drugs in the previous 12 months. The percentage of incarcerated women in this study reporting any illegal drug use in the previous six-month period was 69 per cent. Types of drugs used by women in the general population are also somewhat different to those reported by women in prison. Cannabis was the most common drug used by women in both groups and amphetamines were second most common, but the third most commonly used drug by incarcerated women was heroin or benzodiazepines as compared to ecstasy for women generally.

It is evident from the very high percentage of drug users in each category in Table 6 that these incarcerated women did not tend to specialise in one type of drug. Sixty-five per cent had experimented with more than one drug type and 39 per cent were regular users of more than one type of illegal drug in the six months prior to arrest. Table 8 shows the combinations of multiple use of five main drug types among these women in the six months prior to their incarceration:

• between 60 per cent and 80 per cent of regular users of other drugs were also cannabis users;
• six in 10 benzodiazepine users also used heroin and three-quarters used amphetamines;
• over half of heroin users also used amphetamines;
• few cocaine users were regular users of that drug only: eight in 10 also used amphetamines and six in 10 used heroin; and
• amphetamine and heroin users were most likely to specialise in one drug with nearly one in five reporting regular use of that drug only.

Table 8 : Regular use of multiple drug types (percentages)

	Cannabis	Heroin	Cocaine	Amphetamines	Benzodiazepines
Cannabis	-	61	79	63	72
Heroin	40	-	59	40	61
Cocaine	12	14	-	14	12
Amphetamines	59	56	83	-	74
Benzodiazepines	28	35	31	30	-
Mean number of drug types	3	3	5	3	4
Mean number of drug types, excluding cannabis	2	3	4	2	3
Regular use of this drug only	10	17	--	19	7
(n)	(189)	(125)	(29)	(176)	(72)
Means and totals include all drug types, including hallucinogens, ecstasy, street methadone and morphine Includes only illegal drug use -- fewer than five cases Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file]

Women reporting the highest mean number of drug types were regular users of cocaine and benzodiazepines, reporting five and four different types of drugs, respectively. Those least likely to be using multiple drug types are regular users of cannabis, heroin and amphetamines, all of whom reported using an average of three different types of drugs. Focusing only on drugs other than cannabis, amphetamine users are least likely to be multiple drug users, reporting two types. There is a substantial cross-over with these drugs such that amphetamine is the drug other than cannabis most likely to be used regularly by heroin users and vice versa. Among women who regularly used multiple drugs other than cannabis, amphetamines were commonly used by 83 per cent, heroin by 70 per cent, benzodiazepines by 51 per cent and cocaine by 22 per cent.

Looking at users by preferred drug of choice, women who preferred heroin were regular users of other drugs, such as illegal amphetamines (45%), cannabis (51%) and benzodiazepines (33%) (Table 9). However, a different pattern emerges for women with a preference for amphetamines: just 18 per cent were also regular heroin users, a similar proportion were regular users of benzodiazepines and over half were regular cannabis users. Those who preferred other drugs (including cocaine, ecstasy, morphine or inhalants) were also regular users of amphetamines, cannabis and benzodiazepines. Not unexpectedly, there is a strong correlation between preferred drug of choice and regular use of that drug.

Table 9 : Preferred drug of choice by type of regular drug use (percentages)

Type of regular use	Heroin	Amphetamines	Cannabis	Other
Heroin	95	18	-	30
Amphetamines1	45	95	28	53
Cannabis	51	57	86	40
Cocaine	9	12	-	23
Benzodiazepines1	33	20	10	37
(n)	(100)	(96)	(81)	(30)
- fewer than five cases 1 Excludes women who only used these drugs legally Source: Australian Institute of Criminology, DUCO female survey, 2003 [computer file]

Treatment for drug problems

Just over half of these women offenders (53%) had received treatment for their drug or alcohol use at some point in their lives. The most common types of treatment were outpatient counselling, detoxification, rehabilitation programs, methadone maintenance, and support groups (Figure 5). Due to the substantial levels of multiple drug use among these women, it is not possible to determine for which drugs each of these treatments were received.

Three-quarters (74%) of regular drug users and 78 per cent of women with a drug dependency had received some form of drug treatment (drug dependency will be discussed in detail in Chapter 4). One-quarter of women who had received treatment had received one type, one-quarter had received two types, and half had received three or more of the types of treatment listed. The fact that the vast majority of women who had been treated for drug abuse were dependent on drugs at the time of their arrest (80%) is indicative of the chronic relapsing nature of drug dependency. It also leaves open to question the impact treatment has had on the lives of these women and their ability to control their drug abuse.

Four in 10 women who had ever received treatment were in drug or alcohol treatment at the time of the interview. This amounts to one-fifth of all women in the prison sample. Heroin was the most common drug they were being treated for (64 per cent) followed by amphetamines (16%). The most common current treatment was methadone maintenance, buprenorphine, support groups and other counselling. Two-thirds of the women currently in treatment had received treatment in the past. Fourteen per cent of all offenders, and 20 per cent of those with drug dependencies, had been turned away from treatment in the six months prior to their arrest due to lack of available space.

Summary

The women interviewed for this study have been involved in significant levels of prior offending and drug use. For most women, their criminal histories involved multiple types of offending, primarily multiple property crimes, buying and selling drugs. A small percentage were regular sex workers, but those who were engaged in sex work were also involved in property crimes and almost all were regular drug purchasers. A majority of drug-dependent women had received treatment for drug abuse at some time in the past, and most had undergone more than one type of treatment.

These results support other research that has found higher rates of drug use among women offenders than among male offenders. Compared to incarcerated men in the DUCO male study, use of drugs other than cannabis was higher among incarcerated women. Higher percentages of women were regular users of amphetamines in particular, and women had higher rates of escalation from experimentation to regular use for both amphetamines and heroin. This suggests somewhat different profiles in the drug use of incarcerated women as compared to men, and suggests that drugs may play a different role in the criminal offending and incarceration of women.