WGC 1006.indd

Changing Probation Experiences for Female Offenders Based on Women’s Needs and Risk Assessment Project Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Lessons From the NIC/UC Gender-Responsive Classification Project . . . . . 85 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 meta-analytical research of Canadian scholars such as Don Andrews, James Bonta, and Paul Gendreau. (See Andrews and Bonta, 2007.) 2. The paradigm stressing the importance of women’s unique “pathways to crime,” which recognized the work of feminist criminologists such as Kathleen Daly, Meda ChesneyLind, Joanne Belnap, and Merry Morash as well as several who developed the gender-responsive model put forward by the National Institute of Corrections. (Bloom, Owen, and Covington, 2003.) The link between these two paradigms is largely through the needs principle, one of the key directives of the principles of effective interventions, and recognizes that the treatment of needs predictive of future offending is essential to the task of changing offenders. However, the genderresponsive/pathways model maintains that women’s unique needs are not adequately tapped by the current generation of risk/needs assessments. (See Salisbury and Van Voorhis, 2009.) In response, the WRNAs identify such needs as: