CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 42Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisGender, Health, and Social InequalityFeminist Theory and Gender Studies

Exploring the promise of intersectionality for promoting justice-involved women’s health research and policy.

Open access
Gueta, Keren·2020·Health & Justice
DOI 10.1186/s40352-020-00120-8PMC PMC7382787
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The perspective of intersectionality has gained widespread scholarly interest and been employed across many different disciplines, including criminology. This perspective focuses on interlocking systems of oppression and the need to work toward structural changes to promote social justice and equity. The present article aimed to explore the potential of intersectionality for advancing health research and policy regarding justice-involved women, in different phases of the judicial process, based on the extant literature. First, employing an intersectional approach to analyze the issue of health during the pre-incarceration period may facilitate identification of the structural and representational factors underlying the barriers that women face in obtaining health services, which elevates the risk to their health. Furthermore, adopting an intersectionality perspective to explore women’s health during incarceration may shed light on vulnerable, invisible subpopulations of women such as incarcerated older women and their health problems, and help identify the structural barriers to carceral health services and the role of stigma in inflicting and normalizing harmful practices within prison walls. In addition, an intersectionality lens highlights the risk of unintended use of scholarly knowledge regarding the health of justice-involved women. Last, an intersectionality perspective is particularly relevant for research of the reentry of justice-involved women. In particular, it can be used to examine gender-sensitive reentry services that ignore other axes of marginalization, such as class and race, generating a powerful dynamic that results in partial service, denial of access to therapeutic resources, and possible exposure to health-damaging environments. Through an exploration of the extant literature on justice-involved women, I endeavored to demonstrate that an intersectional framework offers powerful tools to both challenge and strengthen gender frameworks within criminology. This will make it possible to move beyond consideration of gender alone, to understand how systems of oppression based on race, age and other social locations intersect and combine to construct health disadvantages among justice-involved women. This highlights the needs for a new research agenda and policy that integrate the intersectional framework with health theories to provide a more developed understanding of health among justice-involved women.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s40352-020-00120-8

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds may face heightened dependency and limited access to support systems, increasing vulnerability to sustained abuse.

    “Individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds may face heightened dependency and limited access to support systems, increasing vulnerability to sustained abuse (Gueta, 2020).”

    From From use to abuse: psychological, neurobiological, and spiritual pathways in relational harm and recovery (2026) · cites this paper as Gueta, 2020

    In “Women’s pre-incarceration health: barriers to healthcare services” (page unavailable), Gueta describes limited access to social and health services for low-income women. “Women health issue during reentry” (page unavailable) says lack of affordable housing can force women back into environments where they risk violence. The paper does not establish heightened dependency or sustained abuse, and its discussion concerns justice-involved women rather than individuals generally. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gueta, K.
Affiliations
Bar-Ilan University (IL)
Corresponding author
Gueta, Keren
ORCID
Gueta, Keren
Venue
Health & Justice
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-07-25
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
19-19
ISSN
2194-7899 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s40352-020-00120-8
PMC
PMC7382787
OpenAlex
W3044976327
Cited by
42
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4
FWCI
6.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Health & Justice (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Feminist Theory and Gender Studies
Keywords
intersectionality, justice-involved women, women's health, incarceration, reentry services, social justice, health policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review