Tough Love: Drug Sentencing Laws and their Impact on Women

By Barb Dougan

Some women get flowers and chocolates from their partners. Others get 10 years in a prison cell.

For three decades, Massachusetts has used mandatory minimum sentencing laws as its weapon of choice in the disastrous “war on drugs.” These laws were enacted without any evidence that they would work and, in fact, they don’t. They have failed to reduce drug sales or drug dependency or to protect public safety. Instead, one-size-fits-all penalties result in disproportionately harsh sentences for low-level offenders, egregious racial disparities, packed prisons and unsustainable correctional costs. Drug offenders often serve longer sentences than those who commit violent crimes. If that were not bad enough, Massachusetts’ drug sentencing laws have a particularly harsh effect on women.

Small role, big trouble.
With mandatory minimums, the sentence is typically based on the type and quantity of the drug in question, not the person’s role in the offense, prior criminal record or need for treatment. Thus, those at the bottom of the drug trade are subject to the same harsh punishments intended for major traffickers and kingpins. And the drug trade is no different from so many other commercial ventures — women fill the low level positions. But they can pay the same big price, with sentences up to 10 and 15 years.

Drug offenses by women are often linked to the men in their lives. Those who knowingly participate may, for example, drive their partner to a transaction. Others act as couriers, a potentially lethal practice when a woman uses her body to transport drugs. In February, a 21-year old woman was arrested at Logan airport with a deadly 50 pellets of cocaine inside her. In 2008, another young woman died at a New Hampshire motel after a similar smuggling attempt. Many low level “mules” are also addicts who feel they have little choice but to assist their suppliers. For others, their culpability is based on who they live with or the fact that drugs were stored in their homes, without their knowledge or consent.

But wait. It gets worse.
Remarkably, such low-level offenders may end up serving longer sentences than their partners or suppliers. Depending on the prosecutor, drug offenders may be offered reduced charges in exchange for their “cooperation,” i.e., by providing information or by forfeiting drug money and drug-related assets. Many women can’t “cooperate.” They aren’t privy to information about a drug operation and they don’t get the drug money. So they take the full brunt of mandatory sentencing laws.

By 2009, nearly one-third of the female prisoners in Massachusetts were serving drug-related sentences. Over half of them were serving mandatory minimum sentences, compared to only 12 percent in 2003. It is no surprise that drug sentencing laws contribute to longer sentences for female offenders. This, in turn, creates problems for the next generation. The majority of the state’s incarcerated women have children under 18. Children are five times more likely to end up in foster care when the mother is in prison, compared to the father. Children with either parent in prison are much more likely to become involved with the criminal justice system.

Moving toward change.
A 2005 review panel on female offenders unanimously endorsed parole eligibility for drug offenders serving mandatory minimum sentences. This is a critical reform for those who are already incarcerated, allowing for a more successful re-entry to the community. A good first step was made in 2010, when a new law was enacted that made drug offenders serving less-serious county sentences eligible for parole in certain situations. But what’s really needed is the outright repeal of mandatory sentencing laws in the first place. In any system of justice, punishment must fit the crime. Several sentencing reform bills have been filed for the new legislative session, including a ground-breaking bill by Gov. Patrick that would repeal several mandatory minimums. Surely the women – and men – of Massachusetts deserve that much.

Barb Dougan, a NLG Massachusetts Chapter board member, is the Massachusetts project director for Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM).