Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Individuals'
Perceptions of the Criminal Justice System
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study
Introduction
Fair and equitable treatment of individuals regardless of gender identity/sexual
orientation is necessary in order to fulfill fundamental/civil rights of people within the
criminal justice system. However, historically, the relationship between the transgender
and gender nonconforming (TGNC) population and the criminal justice system has been
rooted in violence, intimidation, and mistrust due to TGNC individuals’ sexual
orientation and gender identity (Buist & Stone, 2014; Miles-Johnson, 2015; Nadal,
Quintanilla, Goswick, & Sriken, 2015; Noga-Styron, Reasons, & Peacock, 2012; Stotzer,
2014). When TGNC individuals are interacting with the criminal justice system as
victims or offenders, the system is not prepared to appropriately handle them or respond
to their unique needs and circumstances (Buist & Stone, 2014; Miles-Johnson, 2016b).
Overall, their experiences with the criminal justice system have resulted in a reluctance to
report crimes and their own victimization as well as reluctance to seek assistance (Nadal
et al., 2015).
Many studies have explored the perceptions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,
and queer (LGBTQ) individuals regarding law enforcement officers (Briones-Robinson,
Powers, & Socia, 2016; Galvan & Bazargan, 2012; Miles-Johnson, 2013a; Nadal et al.,
2015; Woods, Galvan, Bazargan, Herman, & Chen, 2013). However, there remains a gap
in understanding the experiences and factors that influence the perceptions of TGNC
individuals when they seek assistance from the various sectors of the criminal justice
system without grouping them with the lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) population as an
afterthought (Nadal et al., 2015; Stotzer, 2014). Little is known about how TGNC
individuals perceive their experiences when interacting with the criminal justice system
(e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court system). This study focused on
describing their lived experiences and perceptions by examining their interactions with
the various sectors of the criminal justice system when interacting with personnel in law
enforcement, the prison system, and the court system. Gaining insight into these
perceptions and experiences may provide a better understanding of how to adequately and
appropriately respond to the unique needs and circumstances of the TGNC population.
The terms transgender and gender nonconforming are used synonymously and
abbreviated as TGNC throughout this document.
Background of the Problem
Throughout history, people who have failed to adhere to their societies’ standards
have been perceived as exhibiting deviant behavior. Individuals in the LGBTQ
community have been considered sexual deviants because they have been in love with or
have displayed acts of affection toward individuals of the same sex (Buist & Stone,
2014). Societal norms have led others to fear people in the LGBTQ community and to
react to their sexual “deviance” with contempt, hatred, and disgust (Noga-Styron et al.,
2012). Distorted images of homosexuals have resulted in members of the LGBTQ
community being judged by others and discriminated against (Miles-Johnson, 2013a;
Noga-Styron et al., 2012). Historically, criminal justice systems criminalized behavior
coded as sexually deviant through the enforcement of antisodomy laws that targeted
individuals because of their gender identity and sexual orientation (Buist & Stone, 2014;
Noga-Styron et al., 2012). Violations of earlier antisodomy laws were punishable by
death (Noga-Styron et al., 2012). Although the punishments for violating antisodomy
laws were greatly reduced, they continued to impact TGNC individuals well into the 20th
century (Noga-Styron et al., 2012).
TGNC individuals have continued to face many forms of discrimination and
harassment, as well as the fear that they may be victimized by the criminal justice system
because of their sexual orientation and gender identity (Buist & Stone, 2014; National
Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs [NCAVP], 2013, 2014). Buist and Stone (2014)
argued that the criminal justice system is not designed to appropriately respond to the
unique needs of TGNC individuals as victims or offenders. Stotzer (2014) pointed out
that law enforcement has unfairly associated and profiled transgender individuals as
being sex workers, which has resulted in them being stopped, unjustly detained, and
subsequently arrested. The 2015 U.S Transgender Survey (USTS; James et al., 2016),
which focused on the experiences of transgender individuals, reflected the responses of
27,715 transgender participants from the United States, its territories, and U.S. military
bases overseas. The survey reported that 22% of respondents indicated that they had been
arrested primarily because they were transgendered.
Research has shown that transgender individuals are more likely than other
nonheterosexual individuals to experience violent acts, threats, and intimidation from the
police, including hostile treatment, verbal abuse, slurs, and the use of biased language
(Langenderfer-Magruder, Whitfield, Walls, Kattari, &Ramos, 2016; NCAVP, 2014).
Buist and Stone (2014) reported that the 2011 National Transgender Discrimination
Survey surveyed 6,450 TGNC individuals who indicated the following: (a) 20% of them
had been denied equal treatment by the police; (b) 29% had been harassed or disrespected
by the police; and (c) 6% had been physically assaulted by police officers. Transgender
individuals who identify as females were 5.2 times more likely than LGBT youth, LGBT
young adults, people of color, gay men, and bisexual survivors to experience an incident
of police violence when they interacted with a police officer after reporting an intimate
partner violence (IPV) incident (NCAVP, 2014, p. 10). The NCAVP (2013) indicated that
nearly 12% of transgender individuals reported encountering violence by law
enforcement officers during IPV incidents (p. 32). Galvan and Bazargan (2012) found
that 64% of Latina transgender females reported being treated unfairly when they were
arrested.
When seeking assistance from the police, TGNC individuals tend to underreport
their victimization or crimes against them due to lack of trust, lack of respect, and
negative perceptions that police may have of them (Miles-Johnson, 2013a; Redfern,
2014a; Stotzer, 2014; Woods et al., 2013). Redfern (2014b) surveyed 62 law enforcement
officers about their attitudes toward transgender individuals and reported that 19% of the
officers believed that identifying as transgender was an indication of mental illness; 32%
believed that the assigned sex at birth determined how transgender individuals should be
treated; and 18% believed that transgender individuals should not be allowed to live
according to their gender identification. Woods et al. (2013) found that 57% of Latina
transgender females reported that their interactions with law enforcement officers resulted
in the officers being “aggressive, insensitive, rude, or disrespectful” (p. 387).
While in custody, TGNC nonconforming individuals continue to experience
victimization and abuse by inmates as well as prison staff. Galvan and Bazargan (2012)
found that among Latina transgender female inmates, 30% reported that they had been
verbally assaulted by other inmates, 11% reported that they had been physically
assaulted, and 10% reported that they had been sexually assaulted (p. 5). Stotzer (2014)
indicated that prison staff further exacerbate reports of victimization and abuse made by
TGNC individuals by failing to provide adequate protection for them. Galvan and
Bazargan found that 70% of respondents reported that prison staff responded negatively
to reported incidents. Their negative actions included laughing at the reported incident,
taking no action, and being part of the victimization and abuse that the inmate was
complaining about (p. 5). The 2015 USTS found that 20% of respondents reported that
they had been physically and/or sexually assaulted by prison staff when they were
incarcerated, while 22% reported being physically and/or sexually assaulted by other
inmates (James et al., 2016).
Research has indicated that there is a lack of training for criminal justice
personnel regarding how to appropriately interact with the transgender community.
Redfern (2014b) found in a survey that law enforcement officers believed that they were
adequately trained about the sensitivities regarding the transgender community. However,
Redfern (2014b) reported that 71% of the officers could not recall ever receiving any
training that would have provided them guidance in interacting with or understanding
members of the transgender community. Miles-Johnson (2016b) suggested that providing
law enforcement officers with sensitivity training on interacting with diverse minority
communities would give them necessary tools to engage with such communities
professionally.
Although past researchers have quantitatively explored the experiences of TGNC
individuals in the criminal justice system, a qualitative approach is necessary to provide
insight into their lived experiences of interacting with the criminal justice system. This
study provides a detailed understanding of the experiences of TGNC individuals and
insight into how sexual orientation and gender identity may influence their experiences
and perceptions of the criminal justice system.
Problem Statement
TGNC individuals have faced discrimination, harassment, and abuse by law
enforcement personnel, prison personnel, and court personnel and have been the target of
biased state laws and discriminatory practices by lawmakers (Nadal, Davidoff, Davis, &
Wong, 2014; Noga-Styron et al., 2012). In addition, they have experienced adverse
consequences in the criminal justice system because of their sexual preferences and
gender identities (Miles-Johnson, 2016b). Research has indicated that the personal
beliefs, prejudices, and cultural norms of society play a role within the criminal justice
system, and that these stem from a normative masculine viewpoint (Buist & Stone, 2014;
Miles-Johnson, 2016b). There has been a lack of studies focusing on the perceptions and
experiences of TGNC individuals within the various sectors of the criminal justice system
(e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court system) from a firsthand
perspective.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand how TGNC individuals
experience, perceive, and interact with the criminal justice system and the criminal justice
system’s responses when they are seeking assistance and reporting incidents of crime.
Stotzer (2014) suggested that there is a need for understanding and finding alternative
avenues that will assist TGNC individuals in accessing and using the criminal justice
system as well as in improving interactions between them and the various sectors of the
criminal justice system. This study provides first steps toward obtaining a general
understanding of the challenges and barriers that members of this population face when
interacting with the criminal justice system. The participants in this study were TGNC
individuals in the metropolitan area of Austin, Texas.
Research Questions
1. How do transgender and gender nonconforming individuals feel about the
criminal justice system in general and the specific sectors of the criminal
justice system (e.g., law enforcement, prison system, and the court system)?
2. What factors influence transgender and gender nonconforming individuals’
perceptions of the criminal justice system?
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework for this study was Tyler’s (1990, 2004) procedural
justice theory, which is grounded on the perceptions, judgments, and opinions of
individuals and the process of fairness regarding the various sectors of the criminal
justice system. The basic premise of procedural justice theory, when applied to this study,
is that when transgender and gender nonconforming individuals are treated fairly and
with respect by the various sectors of the criminal justice system, their value and
selfworth are reinforced while their attachment to society is confirmed. Additionally,
procedural justice theory provided an understanding of how the behavior of the actors in
the criminal justice system may shape the cooperation or resistance of TGNC individuals
during their interactions. This theory has been used in research conducted on individuals
in the LGBTQ community and their perceptions of their interactions with the police and
the criminal justice system (Miles-Johnson, 2013a; Nadal et al., 2015). Using this theory
in this study was important for comparing the perceptions of TGNC individuals with
other members of mainstream society and the LGB population.
Nature of the Study
I chose a qualitative phenomenological research approach because it allowed me
to gain firsthand knowledge of the perceptions and experiences of TGNC individuals with
the criminal justice system. Edmund Husserl (1967, 1999), the father of phenomenology,
described phenomenology as a method to “go back to the things themselves” by focusing
on what is experienced in an individual’s consciousness. To achieve this, Husserl
suggested that a phenomenological attitude (known as the epoché process) be adopted in
order to hold any assumptions and presuppositions in abeyance in order to get to the pure
essence of the individual’s experience (Finlay, 2014; Moustakas, 1994). Overall, the
primary goal of phenomenological research is to “determine what an experience means
for the persons who have had the experience” and “provide a comprehensive description
of it” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 13).
Creswell (2007) argued that qualitative research is most appropriate when there is
a problem or an issue that needs to be explored to obtain a detailed understanding instead
of relying on information obtained from the literature and other research studies that have
been conducted. By using a phenomenological qualitative research design to analyze the
lived experience of TGNC individuals and their interactions with the various sectors of
the criminal justice system, I sought to engage in rich and deep exploration of their
experiences and any perceived factors that might influence those perceptions. Stotzer
(2014) supported this aim by noting the need for more in-depth studies that examine the
treatment and interactions between transgender individuals and the various sectors of the
criminal justice system. Moreover, Briones-Robinson et al. (2016) argued for the
importance of understanding the barriers and challenges that individuals in the LGBT
community experience with law enforcement when reporting incidents of victimization.
Definition of Terms
Cisgender: A term used to describe a person whose gender identity aligns with
that typically associated with the sex assigned to them at birth (Human Rights Campaign,
2019).
FTM: A term referring to an individual who has transitioned from a female to a
male, meaning that the individual was assigned female gender at birth and now lives as a
male. The term transgender man is synonymous with FTM (National Center for
Transgender Equality, 2014).
Gender identity: A term used to refer to an individual’s internal sense of being
male, female, or something else (National Center for Transgender Equality, 2014).
Gender nonconforming: A term used to refer to individuals “who do not behave in
a way that conforms to the traditional expectations of their gender, or whose gender
expression does not fit neatly in a category” (Human Rights Campaign, 2019).
Gender transition: A term that describes the process by which some people strive
to more closely align their internal knowledge of gender with its outward appearance.
Some people socially transition, whereby they might begin dressing, using names and
pronouns, and/or being socially recognized as a member of another gender. Others
undergo physical transitions in which they modify their bodies through medical
interventions (Human Rights Campaign, 2019).
LGBTQ: An acronym for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (Human
Rights Campaign, 2019).
Law enforcement: A term referring to police officers, correctional officers,
probation officers, and parole officers.
MTF: A term referring to an individual who has transitioned from a male to a
female, meaning that the individual was assigned male at birth but now lives as female.
The term transgender female is synonymous with MTF (National Center for Transgender
Equality, 2014).
Sexual orientation: A term used to describe an individual’s attraction to another
person of the same sex and/or a different sex, usually defined as lesbian, gay, bisexual,
heterosexual, or asexual (National Center for Transgender Equality, 2014).
Transgender: An umbrella term used to refer to individuals who do not identify
with their assigned sex at birth. They tend to express their gender identity differently
from cultural expectations. They may also identify as being straight, gay, lesbian,
bisexual, and so forth (Human Rights Campaign, 2019).
Transition: A term referring to when an individual begins to live life as the gender
with which they identity rather than the gender that they were assigned at birth. This often
includes changing their name and the way that they dress, as well as using pronouns that
are socially recognizable as the new gender. This may also include taking hormones,
having surgery, or changing identity documents (e.g. driver’s license, Social Security
record) to reflect their gender identity (Human Rights Campaign, 2019; National Center
for Transgender Equality, 2014).
Assumptions
I assumed that all participants would be truthful and honest concerning their
gender identity as TGNC individuals. I assumed that the participants in this study would
be truthful and honest about their experiences and perceptions of interacting with the
criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court system)
and that they would openly and honestly answer all questions presented to them during
the interview. I assumed that their participation would be voluntary.
Scope and Delimitations
This study included TGNC individuals from metropolitan Austin, Texas who had
experienced interaction with the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, prison
system, and the court system). Their lived experiences helped to provide an
understanding of how they experienced, perceived, and interacted with the various sectors
of the criminal justice system and the criminal justice system’s responses when they were
seeking assistance. This study was delimited in that it did not include individuals who
self-identified solely as lesbian, gay, or bisexual because they did not have the same
challenges or barriers that TGNC individuals have when interacting with the criminal
justice system.
Limitations
A potential limitation for this study was that it involved only TGNC individuals
from the metropolitan area of Austin, Texas. Another limitation for this study was the
small number of participants, who might not reflect the specific perceptions and
experiences of other TGNC individuals in the metropolitan area of Austin, Texas. The
findings may not be generalizable to other TGNC in other parts of Texas or in other
states, or to other populations in the LGBTQ community.
Significance of the Study
This study fills a gap in understanding perceptions of and experiences with the
criminal justice system by TGNC individuals. This study provides an accurate picture of
participants’ perceptions regarding the criminal justice system. Moreover, it provides
insight into how experiences affected participants’ perceptions of the criminal justice
system. There is a lack of empirical research in the field of criminology and criminal
justice regarding the TGNC population because the members of this population have been
grouped together with the LGB community as an afterthought (Nadal et al., 2015;
Stotzer, 2014). Research has indicated that the criminal justice system is not prepared to
appropriately handle the TGNC community (Buist & Stone, 2014; Noga-Styron et al.,
2012; Whitman, 2016). This situation has created a need for understanding TGNC
individuals’ experiences and perceptions in order to provide a coherent and
comprehensive understanding of how sexual orientation and gender identity influence
interactions between them and the criminal justice system. This understanding came
directly from the perspective of TGNC individuals who provided firsthand accounts of
their lived experiences in detail. Moreover, the results of this study pertaining to this
specific population not only add to the criminal justice and public safety research
knowledge base, but also add to the ambit of queer criminology (Buist & Stone, 2014).
Summary
In this chapter, I introduced the research problem and discussed the background of
the study, research questions, and methodology. I also addressed and discussed the
theoretical framework and explained the nature of the study. Important terms were
defined, and the scope, delimitations, and limitations were outlined.
In Chapter 2, I provide an exhaustive review of the literature in which I explain
the theoretical framework of procedural justice and police legitimacy, TGNC individuals’
contact with the criminal justice system (law enforcement, prison system, and court
system), and police training and education.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Introduction
Members of the TGNC population have historically been marginalized and
stigmatized by the criminal justice system. In addition, they have experienced
mistreatment, discrimination, violence, and harassment because of their gender identity
and sexual orientation. The purpose of this study was to understand how TGNC
individuals experience, perceive, and interact with various sectors of the criminal justice
system (e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court system).
This chapter provides an overview of the relevant literature concerning TGNC
individuals’ perceptions of and experiences with the criminal justice system. The review
of the literature focuses on the theoretical framework of procedural justice and police
legitimacy, contact with the criminal justice system, and police training and education.
Literature Review Strategy
The literature review for this study used qualitative and quantitative peerreviewed
literature regarding the LGBTQ community and members’ experiences and interactions
with and perceptions of the criminal justice system. I used various databases located in
the Walden University Library, including SocINDEX, LGBT Life, Nexis Uni
(formerly LexisNexis Academic), Bureau of Justice Statistics, CQ Researcher, Criminal
Justice Database, Taylor & Francis, and Sage Journal. In addition, I used Google Scholar
to search for articles and websites. Some of the key words I used were transgender,
gender nonconforming, perspectives, experiences, criminal justice system, police
training, police education, law enforcement, courts, prison system, corrections,
discrimination, procedural justice theory, and police legitimacy.
Theoretical Framework of Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy
Procedural Justice
Procedural justice is defined as “the quality of treatment and the quality of
decision making that police display” (Antrobus, Bradford, Murphy, & Sargeant, 2015, p.
153). It has four key components: (a) a voice—“whether people have the opportunity to
‘voice’ their concerns before an authority makes a decision”; (b) neutrality—“whether
decisions made by authorities are based on facts, not biases or personal opinions”; (c)
respect—whether authorities treat citizens with “dignity and respect”; and (d)
trustworthiness—“whether the motives of authorities are seen to be ‘fair’ (that is, do they
act in the best interest of citizens and do they display concern for their well-being)”
(Murphy, Sargeant, & Cherney, 2015, p. 721; Mazerolle, Bennett, Davis, Sargeant, &
Manning, 2013).
When people encounter law enforcement, they want a chance to explain
themselves and their situations by telling their side of the story (Murphy, Mazerolle, &
Bennett, 2014). When they feel that they have a voice, they feel more satisfied because
they feel as though they have presented all the facts to authorities before the authorities
make a decision (Murphy et al., 2014). Additionally, they are more inclined to act in a
positive manner when they feel that the decisions made by a law enforcement officer are
based on facts and not on the officer’s personal opinions or biases (Murphy et al., 2014).
Everyone believes and feels that they have the right to be treated in a respectful manner
and are more inclined to react negatively when they are not treated according to their
expectations (Murphy et al., 2014). Finally, when law enforcement officers display
benevolence and care toward citizens in addition to being sincere in pursuing the best
interests of the community that they serve, the members of the community will be more
prone to act in a positive manner toward law enforcement officers and agencies (Murphy
et al., 2014). Research has indicated that there is a link between procedural justice and
police legitimacy regarding citizens’ encounters with law enforcement and their
perceptions of law enforcement and agencies (Bates, Antrobus, Bennett, & Martin, 2015).
To obtain an understanding of what motivates individuals to cooperate with law
enforcement, Murphy et al. (2015) conducted a quantitative study for which they
surveyed 10,148 Australian residents primarily with an ethnic minority background —
Indian, Vietnamese, and Arabic-speaking individuals. The findings indicated that (a) an
individual’s intention to cooperate with authorities is directly linked to procedural justice,
(b) an individual’s intention to cooperate with authorities is based upon the performance
of the police; and (c) an individual’s identity plays a role in the intention to cooperate
with authorities. While the findings of this study do not specifically pertain to TGNC
individuals, the authors suggested that there is a need to further investigate the
relationship between an individual’s identity and procedural justice. Furthermore, the
study’s implications for law enforcement officers and agencies are of paramount
importance in strengthening the relationship between them and the community that they
serve and protect. The authors suggested that law enforcement agencies need to
communicate with members of their community by informing them about the strategies
that they are using to tackle crime in their community. They also suggested that officers
should practice procedural justice when interacting with members of the community,
especially members of ethnic minority groups.
Police Legitimacy
Police legitimacy has been defined as “the belief that the police are entitled to call
upon the public to follow the law and help combat crime and that members of the public
have an obligation to engage in cooperative behaviors” (Tyler, 2004, pp. 86-87; Wolfe,
Nix, Kaminski, & Rojek, 2016). It has been implicated in “a number of desired outcomes,
including willingness to cooperate with the police, provide information, assist in solving
crime, empower the police, and obey the law more generally” (Jonathan-Zamir,
Mastrofski, & Moyal, 2015, p. 847). Essentially, it is of paramount importance for
ensuring that law enforcement officers and agencies have the ability to work effectively
in maintaining public order and making decisions that are in the best interest of the
community that they are protecting and serving (Bates et al., 2015; Wolfe et al., 2016).
When it is perceived that law enforcement officers are treating individuals fairly, law
enforcement officers are more likely to be seen as legitimate in the eyes of the
community (Bates et al., 2015). Trust in law enforcement’s character and motivations is
considered to be a component of police legitimacy (Wolfe et al., 2016). Overall, the
police are expected to (a) have integrity; (b) treat and apply the law to everyone they
encounter in an equal and consistent manner; (c) uphold the morals of the community; (d)
display ethical behavior when interacting with members of the community; and (e) hold
themselves accountable (Hickman, Piquero, Powell, & Greene, 2016). When the police
do these things, members of the community will perceive and support law enforcement as
a legitimate authority in their community (Hickman et al., 2016).
In examining how individuals’ sexual identity impacts their perceptions of police
legitimacy and trust in the police, Miles-Johnson (2013a) conducted a face-to-face survey
with 365 participants. The author suggested that beliefs about the police are shaped by an
individual’s perceptions of police trust, procedural justice, quality of treatment received
by the police, and levels of respect received from the police. The findings indicated that
individuals’ gender and age can shape their perceptions of procedural justice, the quality
of treatment received from the police, the trust and legitimacy of the police, and the
respect received from the police. The findings also indicated that the ethnicity of an
individual can influence perceptions of the quality of treatment received by the police,
trust and legitimacy of the police, and respect received from the police. The findings
further indicated that individuals’ sexual identity does impact their perceptions of police
legitimacy and trust in the police. LGBT and intersex individuals reported more negative
perceptions about police than heterosexual individuals relating to police trust and
legitimacy, procedural justice, quality of treatment received from the police, and respect
from the police.
In a systematic literature research that used a variety of academic databases, Peck
(2015) examined the perceptions and attitudes of various racial and ethnic groups toward
the police. The findings indicated that compared to Whites, Blacks, non-Whites, and
members of minority groups were more likely to have negative perceptions and attitudes
toward the police, especially under certain circumstances. The findings also indicated that
Hispanics, compared to Blacks, were more likely to view the police positively; however,
their attitudes toward the police were more negative than those of Whites. This study has
the potential to expand the understandings of researchers and policy makers regarding
differences in attitudes regarding law enforcement based on race, ethnicity, gender
identity, and sexual orientation.
Literature Review Related to Contact With the Criminal Justice System
The criminal justice system is designed to keep citizens safe in addition to
enforcing the rights of all citizens as indicated in the Constitution. The motto for law
enforcement indicates that officers must “serve and protect” all citizens and their
communities. The court system provides an avenue where criminal, civil, and family
matters are handled and resolved. The prison system provides the community with a
sense of security by housing individuals who have been convicted of crimes and are
considered a danger to society. Each of these units is important to society, and the units
work together to establish a system that all citizens can count on. However, research has
indicated that TGNC individuals are mistreated and treated differently when interacting
with the various sectors of the criminal justice system (Buist & Stone, 2014; Galvan &
Bazargan, 2012; Knauer, 2012; Langenderfer-Magruder et al., 2016; Miles-Johnson,
2015; Noga-Styron et al., 2012; Stotzer, 2014; Woods et al., 2013). The sections that
follow provide information regarding TGNC individuals’ interaction with law
enforcement, the court system, and the prison system.
Law Enforcement and Transgendered and Gender Nonconforming Communities
Evidence has suggested that TGNC individuals are subjected to mistreatment and
abuse when interacting with law enforcement because of their gender identity and sexual
orientation. In examining the experiences of 27,715 TGNC individuals, the 2015 U.S.
Transgender Survey (USTS) indicated that they reported being mistreated, harassed, and
misidentified as sex workers because of their gender identity and sexual orientation
(James et al., 2016). The mistreatment and harassment that they received and experienced
when interacting with law enforcement resulted in them being reluctant to seek any
assistance from law enforcement. They reported that seeking assistance from law
enforcement made them feel uncomfortable because they faced the potential of being
victimized a second time by being rejected, being disrespected, and having their cases
poorly handled (James et al., 2016; Stotzer, 2014).
There is evidence to support the negative experiences that TGNC individuals have
with law enforcement when reporting crimes. In a quantitative research examining
interactions between law enforcement and Latina transgender women, Galvan and
Bazargan (2012) and Woods et al. (2013) found negative consequences of Latina
transgender women’s interactions with law enforcement. Both studies found that 56% of
participants reported a crime to the police and were verbally harassed by the police during
that process. They also found that 20% of participants reported having a positive
experience during their interaction with law enforcement when reporting a crime. These
results suggest that TGNC individuals are highly likely to be verbally harassed during the
process of reporting a crime to the police. Consequently, Woods et al. indicated that 44%
of their participants had not reported a crime to the police. Participants provided many
reasons as to why they did not report crimes; for instance, 11% indicated that there was a
language barrier, 18% indicated that they feared or had mistrust toward the police, and
36% indicated that they believed that the police would not listen to, be helpful toward, or
even believe them (Woods et al., 2013, p. 385). Furthermore, Woods et al. reported that
24% of their participants indicated that their past experiences of being treated negatively
by the police had influenced their decision not to report crimes to the police. These results
demonstrated that TGNC individuals may be reluctant in reporting crimes to law
enforcement for many reasons, including a fear of being treated negatively.
Regarding TGNC individuals being mistreated by law enforcement, Galvan and
Bazargan (2012) found that out of 220 individuals, only 151 individuals (69%) reported
that they were not only harassed verbally, but also assaulted physically and sexually by
law enforcement (p. 6). They also indicated that 41 individuals (27%) reported having
filed a report regarding this matter, while eight individuals who did not file a report
regarding their assault by law enforcement individuals reported filing a report for a
completely different reason. Out of these 49 individuals, 31% reported that their reports
had been poorly handled or very poorly handled (35%). However, 18% indicated that
their reports were handled well or in an excellent manner (2%). They also found that 16%
of their participants had been physically assaulted by police officers, with 8% having
been assaulted by sheriffs and 7% having been assaulted by undercover law enforcement
personnel (Galvan & Bazargan, 2012, p. 6). Additionally, Galvan and Bazargan found
that 15% reported being sexually assaulted by police officers, with 4% reporting being
sexually assaulted by sheriffs and 11% reporting being sexually assaulted by undercover
law enforcement personnel (p. 6). This research suggests that TGNC individuals are at
risk of being physically and sexually assaulted when interacting with law enforcement
personnel in their daily lives.
Evidence has also suggested that transgender individuals are targeted in their own
communities by law enforcement personnel, as they experience high rates of arrest and
incarceration, unjustified stops and arrests, as well as abuse and violence from law
enforcement and criminal justice personnel (Stotzer, 2014). In examining the interactions
of transgender individuals within the last year with law enforcement personnel, Woods et
al. (2013) reported that 58% of their participants had been stopped by law enforcement
for nothing. Of those who had been stopped, 33% reported being stopped between three
and five times. Furthermore, 67% of the participants reported being stopped while
performing normal activities, such as walking in their neighborhoods, waiting at the bus
stop, or coming/going to the club or the grocery store (Woods et al., 2013, p. 387). Given
that Galvan and Bazargan’s (2012) and Woods et al.’s (2013) samples primarily included
Latina transgender women who resided in Los Angeles, CA, their results may not be
generalizable to locations outside California.
Miles-Johnson (2013b) examined the variations of lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) individuals’ crime reporting to the police in Australia
and found that there was a difference between an individual’s sexual identity and
willingness to report crimes to the police. The findings indicated that LGBTI participants
were less likely to report crimes to the police than heterosexual participants. The findings
also indicated that female participants were more likely to report crimes to the police than
male participants. Overall, the findings indicated that LGBTI participants found it more
difficult to report crimes to the police because of their strong perception of and belief in
police homophobia. In this study, the findings demonstrated that individuals’ sexual
identity and perceptions of their treatment received from the police can determine their
willingness to report a crime to the police.
In another study that examined the interactions of TGNC individuals and their
reports of crimes to the police, Briones-Robinson et al. (2016) found that there were no
differences between the sexual orientation of victims and victims of other types of crimes
when it came to reporting crimes to the police. Briones-Robinson et al.’s findings
indicated that LGBT victims who reported crimes to the police after the implementation
of the Matthew Shepard Act continued to perceive the police as biased (as they were
perceived before the Matthew Shepard Act). While Miles-Johnson (2013b) used a faceto-
face survey at a Gay Day celebration, Briones-Robinson et al. used data from the
National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) from 2003 to 2014—before and after the
Matthew Shepard Act. Briones-Robinson et al.’s study suggested that there is a lack of
knowledge regarding the types of interactions that occur between transgender individuals
and the police as well as about transgender individuals’ willingness to report crimes to the
police. Due to the missing information in the NCVS, the authors recommended that
qualitative interviews be conducted with LGBT victims who had reported crimes to the
police, which might uncover their perceived mistreatment by the police and their access
in adequately interacting with the police. Further research is needed on the crimereporting
variations and behavior of TGNC individuals due to their sexual identity differences and
their willingness to report crimes to the police.
To understand the perceptions that transgender individuals have regarding the
police and policing, Miles-Johnson (2015) conducted an in-depth qualitative analysis that
built upon previous existing research that examined the perceptions of the police by the
transgender community. The findings indicated that the police were perceived negatively
which was based upon a previous experience that resulted in their receiving negative
treatment from the police and the policing practices that were applied toward them during
that interaction. The participants expressed having feelings of anxiety and fear when
interacting with the police because of their assumption that they would be treated
unfairly. The participants reported that police officers were disrespectful, unprofessional,
and harassing to them because of the officer’s lack of awareness about their (transgender)
community. Later, Miles-Johnson (2016a) conducted a quantitative research study that
utilized the theoretical frameworks of Social Identity Theory (Tajfel) and the Group
Value Model (Lind & Tyler). The findings indicated that the gender identities of
transgender individuals significantly shape their negative perceptions of how they are
treated by the police and influences their perceptions about the police and policing.
Overall, Miles-Johnson (2015) posited that his findings are indicative to transgender
individuals’ perceptions of their intergroup differences which are fostered by their
perceived contact and experiences that they have had with the police – either actual or
hypothetical (p. 185). Similarly, Miles-Johnson (2016a) posited that his research data
demonstrated that because of the treatment that they received from the police,
transgender individuals considered themselves to be a part of the out-group. These
intergroup differences influence the attitude and perceptions that transgender individuals
have when interacting with the police. The findings from both studies suggested that the
intergroup differences that transgender individuals perceive regarding the police and the
treatment they receive can influence (positively or negatively) how they view the police.
The Court System and Transgendered and Gender Nonconforming Communities
Research have documented the court systems’ discrimination and victimization
toward transgender and gender nonconforming individuals (Goodmark, 2013;
NogaStyron et al., 2012). Evidence has suggested that this type of discrimination and
victimization often results in them being skeptical about the court system’s ability to
respond appropriately to them because of their gender identity and sexual orientation
(Goodmark, 2013). Their skepticism questions the court’s ability and willingness to
provide any type of protection to transgender individuals who have experienced any kind
of abuse or victimization (Goodmark, 2013).
In highlighting the unique experiences of transgender individuals and their
interaction with the criminal justice system, Buist and Stone (2014) argued that there is a
need for queer criminology which could be utilized to assist in the exploration of their
experiences that they face while interacting with the criminal justice system. Buist and
Stone also argued that there is an apparent need for more research to be conducted that
have examined the experiences of transgender individuals as they interact with the court
system as victims or offenders. Furthermore, Buist and Stone posited that the criminal
justice system is ill prepared when interacting with transgender individuals in any
capacity. For example, for transgender individuals to change their gender marker on any
legal documents they must first be diagnosed with a gender identity disorder which is a
mental condition that essentially implies that something is wrong with their gender
identity and sexual orientation (Buist & Stone, 2014, p. 40). This further negatively
stigmatizes them because of their wish to live their lives as another gender (Buist &
Stone, 2014).
In a qualitative research study, Nadal et al. (2015) examined the perceptions of
lesbian, gay, bisexual and queer (LGBQ) individuals’ perceptions of the various aspects
of the criminal justice system (police, courts, legal processes, etc.) and how those
perceptions affect their mental health and behaviors. The authors found that the
participants positively acknowledged the importance of law enforcement and a need for
the criminal justice system. The gay participants in the study reported that there is a need
to appear more masculine while lesbian, bisexual and queer participants reported needing
to appear more feminine. The findings indicated that an individuals’ sexual orientation
and race impacted the way that they were treated by the various sectors of the criminal
justice system. For example, the white participants admitted to having a more positive
experience with the criminal justice system because of their race and social class while
the minority participants reported that they were mistreated because of their race and
social class. The participants described that their lack of trust toward the criminal justice
system comes from the historical and current discriminatory practices that have been
employed toward the LGBQ community. One limitation of this study was that the
transgender population was not included. The rationale for this was primarily because
they did not want to aggregate the experiences, unique challenges and potential barriers
that they face in their everyday lives by placing them under the LGBTQ umbrella. This
research suggested that there is an inherent need to examine the perceptions of the
LGBTQ community in order to understand their differences of their interactions with the
criminal justice system.
An overview of the experiences that the LGBT community has encountered in the
criminal justice system, suggested that there is a culture of homophobia that has been
rooted since the early colonies (Noga-Styron et al., 2012). For example, Noga-Styron et
al. (2012) seemed to suggest that society beliefs about LGBT individuals are based on
cultural experiences and not on personal experiences. The authors cited that homophobia
was born in early colonies as a response to sodomy and other crimes that could be
committed by those individuals that they deemed to be sexual deviants. Because of this,
individuals who identified as LGBT were seen through a distorted lens that further
alienated them from receiving the “equal justice and protection under the law” that they
deserved (Noga-Styron et al., 2012, p. 375).
Historically, evidence has indicated that transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals have faced inequitable treatment by judges, prosecutors, and court personnel.
Noga-Styron et al. (2012) suggested that judges, prosecutors, and court personnel often
exhibit “blatant and obvious homophobia” when presenting cases and making decisions
when the defendant is transgender (p. 385). They argued that discretion ultimately opens
the door for their prejudices to be acted upon. Noga-Styron et al. further argued that this
type of mistreatment has led to the LGBT community receiving harsher penalties and
punishments for crimes than heterosexual defendants.
The Prison System and Transgendered and Gender Nonconforming Communities
As inmates, research has argued that the prison system is not designed to
adequately accommodate transgender and gender nonconforming individuals. While there
is no clear delineation of how they are housed and placed in a correctional institution,
historically inmates have been primarily sorted based on the sex that they were assigned
to at birth (Whitman, 2016). It has been reported that transgender and gender
nonconforming individuals are assaulted physically and sexually by staff and other
inmates upon entering the prison system and while incarcerated. For example, the 2015
USTS indicated that 20% of their respondents reported being assaulted, physically and/or
sexually, by the prison staff while 22% reported being assaulted, physically and/or
sexually, by other inmates (James et al., 2016, p. 191).
In examining the incarceration experiences of transgender individuals, Reisner,
Bailey, and Sevelius (2014) conducted a quantitative survey utilized data from the
National Transgender Discrimination Survey (NTDS) that was collected from September
2008 through March 2009. They found that transgender women of color experienced
being victimized and mistreated at a higher rate than White non-Hispanic transgender
women while incarcerated. In a qualitative research study that also examined the
experiences of incarcerated transgender individuals, Rosenberg and Oswin (2015) found
that all their participants (23 individuals) reported being laughed at or called names while
being housed in administrative segregation, also known as ad-seg, the hole or solitary
confinement (p. 1276).
While in general population and ad-seg, the participants reported that they were
“raped and/or sexually assaulted, sold for sex, subjected to humiliating strip searches in
front of other inmates, verbally and sexually harassed, had personal property destroyed,
received unfair or unprovoked disciplinary charges, and refused placement in adequate
housing” (Rosenberg & Oswin, 2015, p. 1276). Their findings further indicated that all of
their participants reported that they were sexually harassed and 16 of them reported that
they were forced into a sexual situation due to their gender (Rosenberg & Oswin, 2015).
Additionally, Rosenberg and Oswin (2015) also found that transgender and gender
nonconforming individuals faced extreme gender regulation while incarcerated. Their
findings indicated that 22 participants were forced to cut their nails; 21 participants were
prohibited from wearing women’s underwear and makeup; and 19 participants were
forced to cut their hair (p. 1276). The participants reported being instructed to act normal
and were not allowed to sit down while urinating or even allowed to shave by prison staff
or face disciplinary actions (Rosenberg & Oswin, 2015).
Evidence has suggested that while transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals have faced and endured harassment and assaults while incarcerated, their
reports have been largely ignored. For example, Galvan and Bazargan (2012) found that
30% of their participants reported being verbally harassed by prison guards in addition to
10% reported being physically assaulted and 6% being sexually assaulted by prison
guards while incarcerated (p. 6). When making reports to the prison staff about the
assaults committed to them by other inmates, 33% reported that prison staff responded
negatively whereas 37% reported that the prison staff did nothing about the reported
incident (Galvan & Bazargan, 2012, p. 5). The participants reported that the prison staff
would make things worse instead of taking an alternative approach such as moving them
to another cell or even moving them away from the inmate their reported assailant
(Galvan & Bazargan, 2012).
Along with transgender and gender nonconforming individuals experiencing
physical and sexual assaults while incarcerated, they have also experienced medical
neglect. The 2015 USTS reported that 37% of their respondents were prevented from
taking any hormone supplements while they were incarcerated even though they
reportedly were taking them before their incarceration (James et al., 2016). Resiner et al.
(2014) also reported that 24.5% of their participants were denied healthcare while they
were incarcerated. The denial of medical treatment and hormones were not just common
to transgender and gender nonconforming individuals who were housed in general
population but were equally extended to those who were housed in ad-seg. Rosenberg and
Oswin (2015) reported that 14 of their participants indicated that they were denied
medical treatment and hormones while they were placed in ad-seg. However, while
incarcerated in general population, eight of their participants started or continued to take
hormone supplements while seven participants were not allowed to and only three of
them reported being able to use them intermittently (Rosenberg & Oswin, 2015, p. 1277).
The criminal justice system is likely to encounter transgender and gender
nonconforming individuals. However, discrimination, stigmatization, harassment and
violence towards transgender and gender nonconforming individuals based on gender
identity and sexual orientation have been documented in research. Due to the unique
challenges that are faced by them, there is evidence to suggest that training and education
are vital to improving the relationship between the criminal justice system and the
transgender and gender nonconforming community. This next section will highlight the
studies regarding the training and education of the law enforcement community.
Literature Review Related to Police Training and Education
Evidence has suggested that there is a disconnect between the transgender and
gender nonconforming community and the law enforcement community. To improve the
relationship between the two communities, many studies have recommended that law
enforcement be educated and trained about responding appropriately to the transgender
community (Briones-Robinson et al., 2016; Galvan & Bazargan, 2012; Miles-Johnson,
2015; Noga-Styron et al., 2012; Woods et al., 2013). For example, Sereni-Massinger and
Wood (2016) examined the importance of officer training and education in building
community relationships in multicultural communities. The authors recommended that
annual training of police officers should be mandatory and should reflect the demands of
the community that they serve. Overall, the authors posited that police officers should be
trained to effectively communicate with members in a diverse society to develop a
rapport with the community that they serve as well as establishing and building a
relationship with those communities.
Redfern (2014a) provided practical suggestions on how law enforcement
personnel can improve their interactions with transgender individuals. It was suggested
that law enforcement be open-minded when engaging with transgender individuals since
their gender is fluid and nontraditional. Overall, Redfern recommended that sensitivity
training be provided to law enforcement agencies to educate them on how to
communicate effectively with the transgender community and to increase their awareness
and appreciation of gender diversity. It was also suggested that providing law
enforcement with education and training would likely avoid costly litigations for their
policing agencies as well as helping them in decreasing and/or avoiding any personal
biases and assumptions regarding transgender community.
To provide an understanding of how law enforcement perceived their interactions
with transgender and gender nonconforming individuals, Redfern (2014b) conducted a
brief survey via various social media websites and via Survey Monkey which consisted of
22 questions. The findings demonstrated that there is an inherent need for sensitivity
training for all law enforcement personnel to improve their interaction with and
understanding of transgender individuals. Seventy-one percent of the respondents
reported never attending sensitivity training geared toward understanding transgender
individuals in a law enforcement setting (p. 4). Furthermore, 36% of the respondents
reported being unaware that their department had any policies or procedures on
interacting with the transgender community whereas 37% reported that their department
did not have any policies or procedures in writing (p. 4). The findings also highlighted
that while 45% of the respondents had previously interacted with a transgender
individual, 29% reported attending a sensitivity training that focused on the transgender
community (p. 5). What was concerning about this study was that 19% of the respondents
reported that they believed that being transgender was a mental illness and 18% of the
respondents believed that transgender individuals should not be allowed to live their lives
according to the gender identity that they identified with (Redfern, 2014b, p. 6-7).
Overall, the findings suggested that while law enforcement personnel may be
openminded about the transgender community, there are law enforcement personnel who
appeared to be less accommodating and tolerant of transgender individuals. Furthermore,
Redfern recommended that law enforcement agencies participate in educational programs
that address the sensitivities, stereotypes, and expectation of interacting with individuals
in the transgender communities.
Israel, Harkness, Delucio, Ledbetter, and Avellar (2014) conducted an evaluation
of 5-hour training session designed for law enforcement officers to effectively interact
with the LGBTQ communities. The training was completed by 120 law enforcement
officers however, 81 law enforcement officers completed the questionnaire. The findings
indicated that the confidence level of law enforcement officers increased significantly
when utilizing LGBTQ affirming tactics. These tactics, which are intentional behaviors
and/or approaches utilized by law enforcement personnel when engaging with individuals
in the LGBTQ community, may prepare law enforcement officers in effectively working
with the LGBTQ community. The findings demonstrated that there was an increase in
law enforcement’s knowledge regarding issues related to the LGBTQ community.
However, these findings are not entirely convincing since this was based on the
participants’ self-reported perceived knowledge. Further research on measuring the
impact of training on the participants’ actual knowledge is required to draw a more
definitive conclusion. Overall, the findings indicated that completion of the training
session increased law enforcement personnel’s knowledge relating to LGBTQ issues and
their confidence in utilizing LGBT affirming tactics.
To build upon previous work, Israel et al. (2016) conducted a qualitative content
analysis and a multiple case study approach that identified LGBTQ affirming tactics that
were utilized by law enforcement officers when interacting with LGBTQ individuals.
The authors utilized the same data set that was utilized in Israel et al. (2014) research
study; however, these participants were involved in role plays and group discussions.
The findings demonstrated that law enforcement officers utilized a variety of LGBTQ
affirming tactics when interacting with LGBTQ individuals. Israel et al. (2016) posited
that when law enforcement officers utilize these tactics consistently, LGBTQ individuals
are more likely to have a positive experience when interacting with law enforcement
officers. Overall, these findings demonstrated the utilization of scenario-based trainings
to enhance the officer’s abilities to utilize the training received in their daily job
functions.
Evidence has shown that police officers are resistant to training. Miles-Johnson
(2016b) examined an Australian police organization’s training program that was
implemented to educate the police about transgender individuals. This qualitative study
utilized field notes collected during observing the participants attending the police
training and utilized the Social Identity Theory (SIT) as a theoretical framework to
determine the intergroup dynamics perceived by the officers. The findings indicated that
the police officers reinforced and maintain their in-group membership and in-group
identity by utilizing such words as “our people”, “we”, and “us” when talking about the
law enforcement community whereas they utilized such words as “they”, “them”, “those
people”, and “that community” when referring to transgender individuals and their
community (Miles-Johnson, 2016b, p. 114). This finding is critical when understanding
the intergroup differences that law enforcement officers perceived between them and the
transgender community. For example, Miles-Johnson indicated that the officers not only
reinforced their intergroup differences through their shared identification but also through
their classification of transgender individuals (p. 116). This demonstrated that the
participants’ perceptions of transgender individuals are influenced in a negative way and
their perceptions of transgender individuals are influenced by the police culture, training
procedures and stereotypes of gender. The study recommended that policing agencies
should have annual training courses related to the transgender community and other
diverse minority groups.
To further understand police officers’ hesitation and resistance to training, Israel
et al. (2017) examined the law enforcement responses to LGBTQ workplace diversity
training which produced mixed findings. For example, the findings indicated that law
enforcement officers were resistant and receptive to training. Law enforcement officers
denied that they needed any training or that they had any biases and they challenged the
information that they were given and proved to be detached from the training. Law
enforcement officers indicated a reluctance in intervening on behalf of LGBTQ
individuals and pursing a crime as a hate crime. On the other hand, law enforcement
officers showed receptiveness to participating and engaging in training. They also
exhibited empathy for the LGBTQ community and appreciated the training.
While there is evidence to suggest that the criminal justice system is not
adequately accommodating to the transgender and gender nonconforming population
(Noga-Styron et al., 2012; Reisner et al., 2014; Rosenberg & Oswin, 2015; Stotzer,
2014), there is also evidence that suggest training and educating is vital to building and
restoring the relationship between the criminal justice system and the transgender and
gender nonconforming community (Israel et al., 2014; Israel et al., 2016; Redfern, 2014a,
2014b; Miles-Johnson, 2016b; Sereni-Massinger & Wood, 2016).
Summary & Conclusions
It is known that transgender and gender nonconforming individuals face
challenges in their daily lives when interacting with the criminal justice system which
include, but not limited to, harassment, violence, stigmatization, and discrimination. It is
also known that the criminal justice system is not accommodating to these individuals.
What is not known, however, is their perceptions and experiences when seeking
assistance from the various sectors of the criminal justice system. Research has indicated
that future research is needed regarding sexual identity and its influence on the
perceptions of procedural justice and police legitimacy by individuals in the LGBTI
community (Murphy et al., 2015). Procedural justice may provide insight into how these
perceive their interactions and experiences with the criminal justice system. This study is
replicating the work conducted by Nadal et al. (2015) by utilizing transgender and gender
nonconforming individuals in examining their perceptions of the various sectors of the
criminal justice system (law enforcement, the court system, and the prison system).
In this chapter, I provided an exhaustive overview of the relevant literature
concerning transgender and gender nonconforming perceptions of and experiences with
the criminal justice system. The literature focused on the theoretical framework of
procedural justice and police legitimacy, transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals contact with the criminal justice system, and police training and education. In
Chapter 3, I will discuss the research design, sampling process, instruments and
procedures used.
Chapter 3: Research Method
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to understand how TGNC individuals experience,
perceive, and interact with the criminal justice system (law enforcement, prison system,
and court system) and its responses when they seek assistance and report incidents of
crime. The previous chapters detailed the experiences of TGNC individuals within the
criminal justice system and provided an analysis of the literature concerning procedural
justice and police legitimacy and TGNC individuals’ contact with the criminal justice
system as well as police training and education. This chapter introduces the research
methodology that was used.
Research Design and Rationale
The research questions that guided this study and influenced the data collection
process and analysis are listed below:
1. How do transgender and gender nonconforming individuals feel about the
criminal justice system in general and the specific sectors of the criminal
justice system (e.g., law enforcement, prison system, and court system)?
2. What factors influence transgender and gender nonconforming individuals’
perceptions of the criminal justice system?
A qualitative methodology was used to examine the perceptions and experiences
of TGNC individuals with the various sectors of the criminal justice system (e.g., law
enforcement, the prison system, and the court system). Creswell (2007) argued that
qualitative research is most appropriate when there is a problem or an issue that needs to
be explored to obtain a detailed understanding in lieu of relying on information obtained
from the literature and from other research studies that have been conducted.
Additionally, qualitative research is used when there is a need to study a group of
individuals or a population whose voices have been silenced (Creswell, 2007).
Furthermore, qualitative research is most appropriate when quantitative research
approaches “do not fit the problem” (Creswell, 2007, p. 40).
Nadal et al. (2014) suggested that other qualitative analysis (i.e., secondary
analysis of a pervious data set) be used to examine the experiences of transgender
individuals. Stotzer (2014) stated that a limited amount of empirical research had been
conducted on interactions between law enforcement officers in the criminal justice
system and individuals in the LGBT community. In addition, Stotzer (2014) noted the
need for more in-depth studies examining interactions between transgender individuals
and the various sectors of the criminal justice system. The arguments made by Creswell
(2007), Nadal et al. (2014), and Stotzer (2014) supported the use of qualitative research to
examine the experiences and perceptions of TGNC individuals and their interactions with
the various sectors of the criminal justice system. Using qualitative research, I sought to
conduct an in-depth exploration of the problem as expressed in the participants’ own
words.
In this study, I attempted to gain firsthand knowledge of the lived experiences of
TGNC individuals and their perceptions of the criminal justice system when seeking
assistance, reporting a crime, or interacting with the system as a victim or an offender. I
chose to use a phenomenological qualitative approach. Phenomenology is about focusing
on what is or was experienced in an individual’s consciousness in order to get to the pure
essence of that individual’s experience (Finlay, 2014; Husserl, 1967, 1999; Moustakas,
1994). This research design aligned with the research questions and made it possible to
capture the meaning-making perceptions, experiences, and perceived challenges of
TGNC individuals who had experienced interactions with the criminal justice system.
Because there had been a lack of research studies focusing on these individuals, using a
phenomenological research design to analyze their lived experiences of and their
interactions with the criminal justice system had the potential to provide a rich and deep
exploration into their experiences and any perceived challenges or barriers that might
have existed during their interaction.
Role of the Researcher
As the researcher, I served as the data collection instrument in this study (Finlay,
2013; Peredaryenko & Krauss, 2013; Xu & Storr, 2012). The aim of the researcher is to
be open minded in relation to the phenomena being studied while applying bracketing
(epoché) to any prior knowledge or preconceptions with the goal of focusing on the
essence of the participants’ experience and not the researcher’s (Finlay, 2013). In
addition, the researcher’s role is to be an active listener who is fully present but does not
interject his or her own ethos, instead following the lead of participants, who are
considered experiential experts on the phenomena being studied (Smith, Flowers, &
Larkin, 2009). In taking such an approach, I sought to uncover and provide a detailed
analysis of the subjective views of TGNC individuals on their interactions with the
criminal justice system when seeking assistance or reporting crimes.
I was careful not to allow any of my experiences, prior knowledge or
preconceptions, or emotions interfere with this study. I was mindful of the need to be an
active listener to my participants and was careful not interject my own ethos into the
phenomena being studied. My role as the researcher was to ask participants to explain, in
their own words, their experiences when interacting with each entity of the criminal
justice system.
Methodology
Participants
The participants in this research study were 10 English-speaking individuals who
self-identified as TGNC individuals over the age of 18 years who had an interaction or an
experience with any of the sectors of the criminal justice system (law enforcement,
prison, courts). The participants constituted a homogenous sample that was purposively
selected using the snowball technique, which was appropriate because the participants
shared similar social and demographic characteristics (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña,
2014). Research suggested that the typical sample size for phenomenological studies
ranges from four to 10 participants (Daniel, 2012; Mertens, 2010; Smith et al., 2009).
However, Englander (2012) indicated that the primary focus of a qualitative research
study is not determining “how many” individuals have experienced the phenomena being
studied but uncovering the experience and the meaning of the phenomena being studied
in great detail.
Because I did not have immediate access to this population, given that I do not
identify as a TGNC individual, I decided to use a gatekeeper who would have access to
the TGNC community. Creswell (2007) recommended that a gatekeeper be required
when research is being conducted with individuals who have been marginalized by
society. I decided to recruit my participants through the LGBT Liaison Officer of the
Austin Police Department in Austin, TX. After sending him an email request, I learned
that he had retired and that no one had yet taken his place at the police department (see
Appendix A). I then began recruitment of my participants for this study by posting flyers
throughout the downtown central area of Austin, TX and on the campus of a nearby
university with permission (see Appendix B). The flyers included my email address and
telephone number. Participants were also recruited via word of mouth by other
individuals who had seen a posted flyer, a potential participant, or a participant who had
already been interviewed.
I screened potential participants for this study by asking them several questions:
1. How old are you currently?
2. Do you self-identify as a transgender individual or a gender nonconforming
individual?
3. Have you had an experience or an interaction with an entity of the criminal
justice system?
4. Which sector of the criminal justice system?
5. Are you willing to participate in an interview that will be audio recorded?
Participants were invited to take part in the study if they (a) were 18 years old or older;
(b) self-identified as a TGNC individual; (c) had an experience or an interaction with law
enforcement, the prison system, and/or the court system; and (d) were willing to
participate in an interview that would be audio recorded.
Instrumentation
I created a participant eligibility form and a demographics sheet (see Appendices
D & E). The eligibility form was used to help determine if the participants met the criteria
to participate in this study. The demographics sheet was used to collect participants’
background information, such as gender, age, and ethnicity.
A semistructured interview guide created by Nadal et al. (2015) was used for this
study with Dr. Nadal’s permission (see Appendices F & G). The interview guide focused
on information regarding TGNC individuals’ experiences with, and their perceptions of,
the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, court system, and prison system). The
interview guide was used to facilitate discussion in the one-on-one interview and
encourage the participants to answer the questions in an open-ended format. Follow-up
questions (e.g., “Tell me more about that,” “How do you feel about that?”) were used to
clarify or further investigate the participants’ responses when necessary.
Recruitment, Participation, & Data Collection
Before collecting data for this study, I obtained approval from the Institutional
Review Board (IRB) at Walden University—approval # 03-08-18-0651504. Participants
were recruited through flyers and word of mouth. I ensured that all participant contact
was kept anonymous and confidential.
Participants were invited to participate in an individual one-on-one interview that
would be conducted in a private meeting room in a local library or via telephone. To
protect confidentiality and to provide total anonymity, all participants requested that their
individual interview be conducted via telephone. Each participant was read the consent
form, which explained the purpose of the study, the study procedures, risks and benefits
of participating, the right to privacy and confidentiality, and participants’ right to
withdraw completely at any point during the interview.
Participants were informed that if they experienced any discomfort during or after
the conclusion of the interview, a referral list of counseling services would be provided to
them. None of the participants expressed experiencing any discomfort. Each participant
was provided the contact information for the research participant advocate at Walden
University. As an incentive for their participation, all participants were given a $10 gift
card. Each individual interview was audio recorded and lasted approximately one and a
half hours in length.
At the beginning of each individual interview, I started by establishing rapport
with the participant by asking questions that were listed on the eligibility form and the
demographics sheet (see Appendices D & E). Each participant was provided an assigned
number code that was used on the eligibility from, on the demographics sheet, and at the
beginning of each audio recorded interview.
Data were collected from each participant by using a semistructured interview
guide with 14 questions and probes that was created and used by Nadal et al. (2015; see
Appendix G). Questions 1 through 3 related to the participants’ feeling, belief of
effectiveness, and feelings about safety regarding each entity of the criminal justice
system. Questions 4 through 6 related to the participants’ personal experiences, whether
negative or positive, with each entity of the criminal justice system. Question 7 related to
how the participant might have been affected by knowing someone employed with the
criminal justice system. Questions 8 and 9 related to the participants’ likelihood of
seeking assistance from the criminal justice system to report a crime that had been
committed against them. Questions 10 and 11 related to the participants’ belief
concerning how the criminal justice system deals with transgender individuals as victims
or offenders. Question 12 related to the participants’ experiences with the criminal justice
system compared to individuals who do not identify as LGBTQ. Question 13 related to
the participants’ feelings about the criminal justice system’s accommodations for LGBTQ
individuals. Question 14 asked the participants if there was anything that they would like
to say about this topic that was not covered in the previous interview questions.
Audio recordings and files (both written and computer generated) were locked in a
file cabinet in my home office to which only I have access. Any self-identifying
information of the participants was taken out when the data were transcribed. After
transcribing the audio recordings for each individual interview, I began the process of
analyzing that information. All participants were asked if they would like to review their
respective transcripts once the transcripts had been produced; they all declined.
Data Analysis Plan
To analyze the collected data, a modified version of the Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen
method of analysis was used (Creswell, 2007; Moustakas, 1994). There are six steps in
this method:
1. Begin with a full description of the researchers’ personal experience
concerning the phenomenon being studied.
2. Develop a list of significant statements;
3. Group the significant statements into meaning units or themes.
4. Write a textural description.
5. Write a structural description.
6. Write a composite description of the phenomenon being studied, incorporating
both the textural and structural descriptions. (Creswell, 2007; Moustakas,
1994)
Prior to scheduling and beginning each individual interview, I completed the
bracketing process by writing down my experiences with the phenomenon before hearing
the lived experiences of each participant. Bracketing (epoché) is the process of setting
aside any prior knowledge or preconceptions to focus on the essence of the participant’s
experience, with the researcher being as nonbiased as possible (Finlay, 2013). After
bracketing my personal experiences and biases, I transcribed each participant interview
using Express Scribe Transcription Software and Microsoft Word. Each transcribed
transcript was read in its entirety with the purpose of gaining sense of the information that
was provided and identifying significant statements.
Before starting the next step, I placed and organized each transcribed interview in
NVivo 12 Plus. I then began developing a list of significant statements from each
transcript manually, a procedure Moustakas (1994) referred to as horizontalization. These
significant statements related to the participants’ descriptions of their experiences. The
third step involved clustering the significant statements into “meaning units” or themes.
All relevant statements were recorded with their supporting quotes and page numbers.
Each nonrepetitive, nonoverlapping statement was listed. These meaning units were
clustered into themes that were color coded on the transcripts and placed in a table format
for easier viewing. Once the themes had been identified, the fourth step of writing a
textural description began. The textural descriptions came from the common themes
across the transcripts and described what the participants experienced. These descriptions
included verbatim quotes from the participants relating to their experiences and
perceptions about the criminal justice system. The fifth step included structural
descriptions that were created, which provided a detailed explanation of how the
participants experienced the phenomenon (i.e., the setting and context). The final step in
completing the analysis concluded with me writing a composite description of the
participants’ experience. This composite description provided a better understanding of
their experiences and perceptions of the criminal justice system.
Issues of Trustworthiness
To establish the trustworthiness of this research study’s process and data
collection, I used four criteria: (a) credibility, (b) transferability, (c) dependability, and (d)
confirmability. According to Moustakas (1994), “scientific investigation is valid when
knowledge sought is arrived at through descriptions that make possible as understanding
of the meanings and essences of experience” (p. 84). I ensured credibility through
member checking by restating, paraphrasing, or summarizing all ambiguous information
that lacked clarity during the interview process (Harper & Cole, 2012). This allowed me
to determine the accuracy of the information provided by the participant during the data
collection process, which made it possible to elicit a deeper understanding of their
experiences and perceptions of the criminal justice system in their own words as they
experienced it. Saturation was achieved.
Transferability refers to the researchers’ ability to describe in detail the
participants that are being studied (Creswell, 2007). Transferability was enhanced in this
study, by providing a rich, thick description that will “enable readers to transfer
information to other settings and to determine whether the findings can be transferred
‘because of shared characteristics’” (Creswell, 2007, p. 209). The structural and textual
descriptions of the participants’ experiences and perceptions with the criminal justice
system provided a thick description.
Dependability refers to providing a clear, detailed, and sequential descriptions of
how the data was collected so that others can replicate the research process while
confirmability refers to the confirmation or authenticity of the study’s findings (Ravitch
& Carl, 2016). Throughout this study, I adhered to Walden University’s quality standards
and guidelines. The standard of confirmability was fulfilled by the phenomenological
research’s fundamental element of bracketing which is inherently reflexive and an
essential component.
Ethical Procedures
The importance of any research study is the protection of human participants. The
participants in this research study completed and was provided a consent form and their
confidentiality was protected. Since the discussion of the participants’ experience or
interaction with the various sectors of the criminal may cause the participant some
discomfort, a sense of heightened anxiety, or emotional pain during the interviewing
process, a list of counseling services was made available and provided to each participant.
Throughout the study, the participants were informed that their participation is strictly
voluntary and that they have the option of withdrawing from the interview at any given
time without any consequences.
To protect the confidentiality of each participant, I replaced all direct and indirect
identifying information pertaining to the participant with an assigned number code
throughout the transcripts and prior to data validation to minimize any links between the
participants and their data so that it cannot be re-identified (Drake, 2013). All the
collected data, audio recordings, files, and transcripts will be stored on a password
protected drive which will be kept in a locked cabinet that only I have access to.
Summary
In Chapter 3, I discussed the methodology for this study. The purpose of the
qualitative phenomenological research study was to understand how transgender and
gender nonconforming individuals experience, perceive, and interact with the criminal
justice system (law enforcement, prison system, and the court system) and its responses
when seeking assistance and reporting incidents of crime as a victim or an offender. The
participants in this study were 10 English speaking, individuals who self-identify as
transgender or gender nonconforming individuals over the age of 18 years old who have
had an interaction or an experience with any of the sectors in the criminal justice system
(law enforcement, prison system, courts).
Data was collected through a semi-structured interview guide that was created by
Nadal at al. (2015) that consisted of 14 questions and probes. Each interview lasted
approximately 1 ½ hours and was conducted with a purposively selected snowball
sample. To analyze the collected data, a modified version of the Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen
method of analysis was utilized. I also discussed the issues of trustworthiness and the
ethical considerations for the participants.
In Chapter 4, I will discuss the findings and explanation of that data.
Chapter 4: Results
Introduction
The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe and understand the
perceptions and experiences of TGNC individuals as they interacted with various sectors
of the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court
system). The problem that this study explored was how sexual orientation and sexual
identity may influence TGNC individuals’ experiences and perceptions of the criminal
justice system. A qualitative phenomenology research methodology was employed to
capture the essence of this phenomenon. The research questions that guided this study
were the following:
1. How do transgender and gender nonconforming individuals feel about the
criminal justice system in general and the specific sectors of the criminal
justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court
system)?
2. What factors influence transgender and gender nonconforming individuals’
perceptions of the criminal justice system?
In Chapter 2, I provided an overview of the literature concerning TGNC
individuals’ perceptions of and experiences with the criminal justice system. I also
provided a review of the theoretical framework of procedural justice and police
legitimacy. In Chapter 3, I reviewed the research methodology, the ethical protection of
the participants, the research questions, the number of participants, the recruitment
methods, and the sampling strategy that were used in this study. In Chapter 4, I provide a
description of the research setting, participant demographics, and the data collection and
data analysis process that was used in this study. I also address credibility and provide a
description and explanation of the major themes that were obtained from the participants’
lived experiences with the criminal justice system.
Setting
To collect data from TGNC individuals who had interacted with the criminal
justice system, I posted fliers in the downtown central area of Austin, Texas (see
Appendix B). I also used snowball sampling to recruit TGNC individuals via telephone
interviews. I conducted telephone interviews from April 2018 to the end of August 2018.
The information on the fliers included a telephone number and an email address that
potential participants could use to reach me. During the telephone interviews, I was never
aware of participants’ physical location, which allowed participants to feel comfortable
and assured their privacy to freely partake in the study. I did not physically meet with any
of the participants in my study and only connected with them one time during the
telephone interview.
Demographics
The study sample consisted of 10 transgender individuals—seven participants
were MTF (male to female), and three were FTM (female to male). Seven of the
participants self-identified as being White/Caucasian and of non-Hispanic ethnicity. One
participant self-identified as being White/Caucasian and of Hispanic ethnicity. Two
participants self-identified as of Latino/Hispanic ethnicity. The age, ethnicity, and gender
for the 10 participants are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Participants’ Demographic Data
Participant Age in years Ethnicity Gender
001 55 White/Caucasian Transgender (MTF)
002 28 White/Caucasian
Latin/Hispanic Transgender (MTF)
003 26 White/Caucasian Transgender (FTM)
004 43 White/Caucasian Transgender (MTF)
005 30 Latin/Hispanic Transgender (MTF)
006 30 Latin/Hispanic Transgender (MTF)
007 46 White/Caucasian Transgender (MTF)
008 32 White/Caucasian Transgender (FTM)
009 48 White/Caucasian Transgender (FTM)
010 57 White/Caucasian Transgender, Lesbian (MTF)
The members of the study sample shared common characteristics, such as (a)
selfidentifying as a TGNC individual, (b) having had an interaction or an experience with
an entity of the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, or the
court system), (c) being of adult age (i.e., 18 years of age or older), and (d) speaking
English. Nine adults self-identified as transgender individuals, and one individual
selfidentified as a transgender/lesbian individual. Seven participants had transitioned
from male to female, and three participants had transitioned from female to male. The
mean age of the participants was 39.5 years, with the youngest being 26 years of age and
the oldest being 57 years of age. All participants spoke English and had an interaction or
an experience with an entity of the criminal justice system. To ensure confidentiality and
to minimize any concerns about the participants’ identity, an identifier number was
assigned to each participant at the beginning of the interview.
Data Collection
I began data collection after receiving approval from Walden University’s IRB.
After fliers were posted in and around downtown central Austin, Texas, 12 potential
participants contacted me to set up an interview time. I conducted telephone interviews
with 10 participants using a semistructured interview guide that was created by Nadal et
al. (2015), which consisted of 14 open-ended questions (see Appendix G). The interviews
were conducted over a period of 4 months (April 2018 to August 2018). This study
reached saturation, and therefore no further participants were recruited. The interviews
lasted between 16 minutes and 1 ½ hours and were audiotaped with the consent of the
participants. A number was assigned to each participant before the interview began.
Before the start of each telephone interview, I provided a brief introduction of the
study and encouraged each participant to ask questions throughout the interview. After
the participant indicated acceptance and understanding of the requirements, demographic
information was obtained and the interview began. During the interview process, I
listened carefully to the participant’s responses to determine when to probe for additional
information or for clarification. After completing each interview, I labeled each recording
with the identifier number that had been assigned to the participant at the beginning of the
interview. The recordings were then backed up on a password-protected hard drive. After
completing this process, I listened to each audiotaped recording in its entirety and then
began manually transcribing each interview into a Word document using Express Scribe
Transcription Software Pro. Specific names, locations, and any medical illnesses were
omitted from the transcripts to further ensure the participants’ confidentiality and
anonymity.
All the participants were eager to share their feelings, thoughts, experiences, and
interactions with the criminal justice system. Some of the participants were more detailed
than others, but all participants remained on topic throughout the interview. Each
participant was cooperative and freely answered all questions during the interview. At the
end of each interview, the participant was debriefed and thanked for participating in the
study.
Data Analysis
The data analysis process that I used for this study was Moustakas’s modified
Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen method (Moustakas, 1994). I used NVivo 12 Plus throughout this
research to store and organize the data by creating nodes and manually organizing them
into themes. To manually analyze the data using the Moustakas’s modified
StevickColaizzi-Keen method, I completed several steps. In the first step, I described my
personal experience concerning the phenomenon being studied. Prior to conducting
interviews, I worked to ensure that my experiences, thoughts, and feelings on the
phenomenon were not included in the study by keeping a journal, which allowed for me
to detail my feelings and thoughts about this phenomenon.
The second step consisted of developing a list of significant statements, which
was done by assigning equal value and weight to all statements in the transcripts. This
allowed me to develop a list of statements that were nonoverlapping and nonrepetitive in
nature and kept the focus on the central phenomenon that was being studied.
The third step was grouping the significant statements into meaning units or
themes. The significant statements were stored and organized in NVivo 12 Plus, and
nodes were created to group those statements into meaning units or codes, which were
assigned descriptive titles (e.g., “Friendly & Pleasant,” “Helpful”). Initially, 65 codes
were generated. I further analyzed the codes and began searching for and identifying
patterns or terms that were similar and collapsed them within one code. After a careful
review, there were seven codes that were generated. I then categorized these codes into
three themes that allowed more focus of the phenomenon and that better supported the
research questions that guided this study.
The fourth and fifth steps consisted of writing textural and structural descriptions
of the participants’ experiences, which included quotations taken from the participants’
transcripts. These quotations were organized and stored in NVivo 12 Plus. The
descriptions of the participants’ experiences represented their individual feelings,
perceptions, thoughts, and lived experiences in relation to their interactions with the
criminal justice system. The sixth step consisted of describing the essence of the
phenomenon by incorporating both the textural and structural descriptions, which
represented a rich and accurate composite description from all participants.
Evidence of Trustworthiness
The trustworthiness of this research study’s process and data collection was
established through four criteria: (a) credibility; (b) transferability; (c) dependability; and
(d) confirmability.
Credibility
I ensured credibility in this study through member checking by restating,
paraphrasing, or summarizing all ambiguous information that lacked clarity with each
participant during the interview process (Harper & Cole, 2012).
Transferability
I ensured transferability in this study by providing a rich, thick description of the
data by incorporating both the textural and structural descriptions of all participants’
experiences with and perceptions of the criminal justice system.
Dependability
I ensured dependability in this study by providing a clear, detailed, and sequential
descriptions of how I collected the data so that others could replicate the research process.
The interview guide that I adopted in this study was used with permission from
Nadal et al. (2015; see Appendices F & G).
Confirmability
To achieve confirmability, I kept a journal and reviewed it prior to and after each
interview to ensure that my experiences, thoughts, and feelings on the phenomenon were
not included in the study.
Results
The data analysis process generated three primary themes that represented the
lived experiences of the participants with the criminal justice system: (a) interactions with
the criminal justice system; (b) thoughts about the criminal justice system; and (c)
experiences with the criminal justice system. These themes emerged through the
participants’ significant statements and supported the two research questions that guided
this study:
1. How do transgender and gender nonconforming individuals feel about the
criminal justice system in general and the specific sectors of the criminal
justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court
system)?
2. What factors influence transgender and gender nonconforming individuals’
perceptions of the criminal justice system?
Theme 1: Interactions With the Criminal Justice System
The first theme to emerge from the data was the participants’ experiences
regarding their interactions with the criminal justice system. Three codes were generated:
(a) emotional reactions, (b) perceptions of not being safe, and (c) help-seeking behaviors.
Emotional reactions. The first code that was generated from the data was
emotional reactions. All 10 participants indicated experiencing some level of an
emotional reaction when interacting with an entity of the criminal justice system (e.g.,
law enforcement, the court system, or the prison system). Because Participants 001, 004,
005, 008, and 010 had never personally interacted with the prison system as transgender
individuals, they all agreed that the jails and prisons need some work done to them to
alleviate any difficult experiences for other TGNC individuals. Details of the participants’
emotional reactions and feelings are presented below.
Law enforcement. When asked about interactions with the police, Participant 001
wished that they would “change their attitude and learn to accept and not be so
judgmental towards anybody.” Participants 002 and 010 indicated that the police make
them feel scared. Participant 002 further explained that she could not trust the police and
that her heart begins to race whenever she is near them because of how scared she is. She
also stated that she would be worried if she ever decided to speak against them because
whatever she said could be spun around and manipulated by the police. Participant 003
explained that although he felt invisible to police officers, which was great for him, he
felt afraid and nervous about the prospecting of being pulled over because he did not
know what the cops would feel about a transgender person. Participant 007 stated that the
police “make me nervous. I mean it’s not the fact that you know I have a personal
problem with them. They have a lot of power and it’s real easy to take advantage of
people.” Participant 008 indicated that the police make them feel extremely nervous.
Participant 009 indicated that they were “scared of the police to a large degree.”
Participant 005 stated that she believed that the police are needed to keep chaos
levels down. Participant 004 stated,
I feel they can be helpful especially being White that if I go to them I’m not going
to be harassed in any way or I don’t have to, but I have concerns about some of
my friends of color that I worry about them with the police.
Participant 006 stated,
I think that some law enforcement are doing their jobs and I do also believe that
they are um some cases where there are individuals who do not always follow
proper procedures and protocols. Um, and I do think there is a slight um
differences when it comes to transgender individuals because no police
department that I’ve came across don’t know how to handle situations when it
involves people who are um transgender or gender nonconforming.
The court system. Although there were some Participants (002, 004, 006, and
008) who had not had any personal experience with interacting with the courts, the six
remaining participants provided descriptions of their feelings regarding their interactions.
Participant 001 indicated that she felt disrespected in court when she was called
by her dead name (i.e., the name that she used as a male before she transitioned to a
female) even though she had her name legally changed. She indicated that she was told
by a probation officer that “we understand that this is your new name, but we have to
refer to you as this name” because she was arrested under that name. She also stated that
she did not associate herself with that name anymore and believed that the criminal
justice system should be more accepting:
They need to learn how to accept this and be okay with this person has changed
their name and their gender marker; we need to have it changed on their records
so this way when we call them, they go by this name. They learn to accept it and
be able to understand it more and to deal with it better instead of throwing it under
the rug.
Participant 003 indicated that her experience was frightening because she was
“being subjected to the understanding of people who are primarily not like you.” She
indicated that she believes that transgender or gender nonconforming individuals are not
tried by a jury of their peers instead they are tried by individuals “who have a lot of
opinions and are in this country not accepting or is forgiving.” Participant 010 explained
that she was afraid of the court and that her experience was really tricky because “the
courts in Texas tend to be extremely conservative” so “you’re unlikely to get anything
there happening in the courts.” She explained that when she went to get her name and
gender marker changed, the justices in the county where she lives used a legal clause to
get around changing her name and gender marker, so she had to go to a neighboring
county to get the process done.
Participants 005 and 007 indicated that their interactions with the courts have been
fair and didn’t elaborate any further. Participant 009 indicated that he is indifferent about
his interaction with the court because when he went to court, he only had to stand before
the judge when called and the judge didn’t even look up at him. Since he hired an
attorney to handle things for him, his belief is that the attorney actually minimized his
interaction with the judge and other actors in the court system.
The prison system. When asked about their interactions with the prison system,
Participant 001 stated that since transitioning to a female, she has not had to personally
deal with the prison system. However, she indicated that she’s heard things from other
transgender individuals that they didn’t get treated right such as them being looked down
upon by the jailers and being refused their prescribed medications while they were in jail
or prison.
Participant 002 indicated that she wasn’t treated fairly because she was denied her
medications. She stated that she felt threatened to report the incident to prison officials
because the system would only take the side of their officers. Moreover, Participant 002
stated that she believed that the prison doctor believed that his medical advice was
superior to her own medical doctor because the prison doctor considered her medicine to
not be medically necessary even though it was prescribed to her by her medical doctor.
Participant 009 stated that he was scared while in jail and that he was also denied his
medications while he was there. He further stated that after speaking with his attorney, his
attorney was able to get his original sentence of 45 days dropped down to five days
because of his medical condition and the refusal of his medications while locked up.
Participant 003 stated that he is very nervous about interacting with the prison
system because his personal fear is that “most transgender people will have an extremely
difficult time and probably can’t be out in prison as transgender.” He also commented
that in general, the prison system is for white people and since he is a white transgender
male, he would consider the system to be pretty alright, but he knows that if he’s placed
in jail or prison, he would be placed in a women’s holding cell because of he has not had
his gender reassignment surgery.
Participant 007 indicated that the interacting with the prison system scares the hell
out of her. She stated that she doesn’t like how the prisons are and indicated that it’s like
a bastion of ignorance. She further explained that “we have 1930 mentality for our prison
systems in the new millennium and based on ignorance which scares the hell out of me.”
Participant 006 stated that she was placed in a scary situation when she was arrested and
placed in a male holding cell even though she physically presented as a female but had
not had any type of gender reassignment surgery. She believes that the prison system
needs to be redone.
Perceptions of not being safe. The second code that was generated from the data
was perceptions of not being safe. All 10 participants indicated their perception of not
being safe when interacting with an entity of the criminal justice system (e.g., law
enforcement, the court system, and the prison system). Their perceptions are detailed
below.
Law enforcement. Majority of the participants agreed that the police are unsafe
because of the way that they are treated when interacting with the police.
Participant 001 indicated that she doesn’t feel that the police are safe because of
the way that treat people. She stated that “you have some that, oh my God, that need to be
locked up or they need to be taken off the force because of the way that they treat
people.” Participant 002 stated that the police are not effective in making people of color
or trans people feel safe. She stated that “the police do a great job of protecting the people
they want to protect then the people that their interest lies in which would be primarily
like white people.”
Participant 003 stated that “I think the police as a unit as a whole is not safe at
all.” Participant 010 indicated that she thinks “the police are still safer for gay people than
they are for trans people.” Participant 008 explained that he believed that the police were
unsafe and stated that,
If I’ve been pulled over for like having a headlight out or something, I’ve just
kind of been interrogated and treated like a criminal before it’s even proven
whether I am one. Um, so, I just don’t feel like they’re on my side.
There were only two Participants, 004 and 007, who indicated that they believed
that the police are safe. Participant 007 stated that “it’s not a matter of trusting the cops to
keep me safe; it’s a matter of me knowing what my rights are and what I can and can’t
get away with.”
The court system. Majority of participants believes that the courts are biased
against transgender and gender nonconforming individuals. Participant 002 stated that the
courts are not safe because they are “completely biased and set to distant people who are
not people of color or are of the normative lifestyle.” Participant 003 stated that the courts
are as effective if you have money and if you’re white and that other individuals “would
have an extremely difficult time in America getting justice for your case.”
Participant 005 stated that the courts put transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals in a dangerous situation when they make it difficult for them to legally get
their name and gender marker change. She stated that she still has her driver license from
another state even though she resides in the state of Texas because they allowed her to
identify as female on her driver license when Texas requires a legal gender marker
change before allowing an individual to change their gender marker on their driver
license. Because she presents as female (dress and appearance), she stated that if she were
to obtain a Texas driver license, her gender marker would identify her as male and if that
information were to get into the wrong hands, it would put her life in danger referring to
her gender marker.
Participant 006 indicated that transgender and gender nonconforming individuals
are not given a fair shot and that she believes that the court system isn’t ever going to
recognize people who are transgender especially in the state of Texas. Participant 008
explained that the courts are unsafe because they are biased and depends on what judge
you have presiding over your case. Participant 010 stated that the “courts in Texas is
more unsafe for trans people” and that it largely depends upon the judge that is presiding
over your case.
Participant 007 believes that the court system is safe because she has been to court
twice and both times she was treated fairly. However, Participant 009 indicated that he
was indifferent about the court system. He stated that he has not had any issues with the
court because he’s a trans man and believes that trans men can blend in social situations
because they can grow facial hair and cover up softer features. Furthermore, he believes
that trans women are bullied and harassed a whole lot worst in the courts because “you
don’t see a whole lot of women over 6 feet.”
The prison system. The majority of participants perceptions were that the prison
system is unsafe for transgender and gender nonconforming individuals and cited a
variety of reasons. Participants 008 and 010 agreed that the prison system was unsafe
with Participant 010 stating that she believes that the prison system is much safer for
homosexuals than it is for trans people. Participant 002 stated that she believes that the
prison system is unsafe largely due to the masses that they incarcerate. Participant 003
stated that she doesn’t believe that the prison system is safe and that an individual would
have “to adapt a certain mindset to try to survive.” Without having much experience
looking at the prison system beyond being on the outside, participant 004 stated that “if
people stay calm it’s safe, but if they don’t it’s not safe.”
Participant 001 stated that she believes that the prison system is dangerous
because there are no protections in prison that legally protects a transgender or gender
nonconforming individual. She stated that “there’s people out there that don’t agree with
it and they will hurt you for being gay or whatever” and that the prison system needs to
be more aware of this in order to provide protections for transgender and gender
nonconforming individuals. Participant 007 indicated that she feels that the prison system
is unsafe and stated that,
We’re gonna be ostracized in solitary confinement which you know is really not
productive or we’re gonna be put in general pop where we’re targets. I mean the
whole prison concept is very, very terrifying in the trans community, at least, to
me it is.
Participant 006 indicated that she believes that the prison system is unsafe and
could have done more to protect her when she was processed. She explained that when
she was being processed in a local jail, the jailers wouldn’t accept her telling them that
she was transgender. Instead, the jailers relied on what the officer indicated in his
paperwork and she was subsequently placed in general population with males and not
placed in solitary confinement which she requested. Participant 009 “didn’t feel
incredibly safe” because
I did have a couple of girls that wanted to, they just got real threatening and just
tacky and the cop, none of the officers would say ‘Hey, give it a rest’. They’d just
let her do these things. I think that in any other situation they would have been
like ‘Man, knock it off’, you know, cause you just don’t want two inmates
fighting arguing cause that can turn into something bad, you know. But they
wouldn’t stop them; they’d just let it happen.
Help-seeking behaviors. The third code that was generated from the data was
help seeking behaviors based on their interactions with the criminal justice system. Half
of the participants (001, 004, 005, 006 and 007) reported that they would be more likely
to turn to the criminal justice system if a crime had been committed against them. The
other half of the participants (002, 003, 008, 009, and 010) reported that they are not
willing to turn to the criminal justice system for assistance and that they would turn to
family, friends or a non-profit organization for assistance instead. Their responses are
listed below.
Willing to seek assistance. Participant 004 and 005 indicated that she would
definitely turn to the police if a crime had been committed against them as soon as it
occurred. Participant 001 stated, “I don’t think no matter who you are that if something
happens to you, you should go to the police department to report it.”
Participant 006 indicated that there is an 70% chance that she would turn to the
criminal justice system for assistance if a crime had been committed against her. She
stated that there’s a 30% chance of her ending up with “some dick officer who doesn’t get
it and who’s just gonna be a complete a-hole to me.” She also stated that she would
probably turn to a non-profit organization for assistance if she was not likely to turn to the
criminal justice system. Participant 007 indicated that she is probably as likely as any
other person to turn to the criminal justice system for assistance because she doesn’t have
any fears. However, she stated that if she isn’t likely to turn to the criminal justice system
for assistance, depending on the situation, she has different alternatives. She stated that
she would be very careful “of what I take to people because to be honest, I don’t always
trust everybody to be as helpful as you know they claim to be.”
Not willing to seek assistance. Participant 009 stated that while they filed a report
with a police officer once before, he “probably wouldn’t have gone because it’s a very
vulnerable situation to put yourself in when I already don’t like them.” However, he did
state that if it’s an immediate safety thing, he would have no other option but to call the
police and take his chances.
Participant 002 stated that she wouldn’t call the police if a crime had been
committed against her and that she would rather take it to a local people’s court. She
explained that “the actual court system is actually a, you know, court system of selected
jurors who don’t have any criminal background who are considered mentally dead I guess
to rid the society. It’s essentially these people of lil value.” Participant 003 believes that
they wouldn’t call the police if a crime was committed against them “because I would
have to deal with my dead name and I don’t want that” and “you would have to show
your ID anytime you call the cops” and he wouldn’t want to have his ID out there.
However, he did state that if he could legally change his first and last name, then he
would probably call the police. He also stated that he would absolutely turn to a personal
lawyer or something like that if the situation was serious and needed help with it or he
would turn to friends or family so he could get himself taken care of.
Participant 008 indicated that his willingness to turn to the criminal justice system
for assistance depended on the severity of the crime that had been committed against him.
However, he did indicate that he would probably turn to a non-profit organization or a
family member if he was unlikely to seek assistance from the criminal justice system.
Participant 010 stated that she would be “very unlikely” to turn to the criminal justice
system for assistance unless she could prove that the crime occurred against her.
However, she stated that depending on what the crime was, she would more than likely
turn to her family and friends first and if it was a legal issue then she would probably seek
legal counsel.
Theme 2: Thoughts About the Criminal Justice System
The second theme to emerge from the data was the participants’ thoughts about
the criminal justice system. Four codes were generated: (a) perceptions of effectiveness,
(b) lack of accommodations, (c) lack of protections, and (d) lack of training.
Perceptions of effectiveness. The first code that was generated was perceptions
of effectiveness. All 10 participants described their perceptions of how effective they
believed that the sectors of the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the court
system, and the prison system) are.
Law enforcement. Participants were asked how effective they believed the police
to be. Participant 001 believed that the police are accepting and accommodating to
transgender and gender nonconforming individuals while Participant 004 stated that “I
think they can be effective if they’ve had the right training.” However, Participant 007
stated that “just because somebody is trained to do something does not mean that that’s
how they’re going to do it every time.” Furthermore, she stated that “they don’t know
how to treat trans people and the ones who are just willing to treat us like they would any
other human being are the ones that don’t stand out.”
Participants 005 believed that “social media definitely kind of affects a lot of
people’s judgment on that from what they see, you know, with like the police brutality
and things like that.” Meanwhile, Participant 003 stated that she lost faith in the police
and thinks that the police see themselves in the position of power instead of helping and
providing assistance in the community. Participant 010 stated that she doesn’t believe that
the police are effective for helping or taking care of trans women when interacting with
them.
Participants 002, 006, 008 and 009 believed that the police are ineffective for a
few reasons. Participant 002 believed that the police are “really effective at suppressing
minority people” and that they are more incline to protect “people who are cisgender or
heteronormative and who fit a certain criteria or people that they would consider to be
productive in society.” Participant 006 believed that the police are not effective because
of their mindset when dealing with transgender and gender nonconforming individuals.
She stated “legally, I’m still considered to be male um they don’t look at me as female.”
She further elaborated by saying,
It doesn’t matter how I identify, how I dress, or how I live my life, it’s just…it’s
never going to be on a, on an equal ground where, you know, I identity as this
way, but law enforcement is just gonna always see me as being a male cause as
soon as I show my ID, cause you have to show ID in the state of Texas – as soon
as you show ID that just gives it all away and then the mindset of the police
officers completely change.
Participant 008 believed that the police is effective in making people afraid and keeping
them in line but are ineffective when combatting crime. Participant 009 believed that the
police are “very strong majority” and are bullies with the trans community.
The court system. Participants 005, 007, and 009 believed that the court system is
effective for various reasons. Participant 009 believed that the court system is effective
because he feels that he was never looked at differently. However, he indicated that his
main point of contact is his lawyer and she didn’t see him any differently. He never had
to get up to say or do anything. Participant 007 indicated that the courts were
accommodating to her primarily because they were respectful of her trans status even
before she had gotten her legal name and gender marker changed on her driver license.
Participant 005 believed that the court system was effective when a judge took her gender
identity into factor when determining what her punishment was going to be. She stated
that “instead of putting me with the rest of the males doing community service on the
street picking up garbage in the hot sun and things like that, he had me more into like an
elderly community center.” She explained that the judge was being lenient on her when
he did not put her “in the general public with people that might have made me feel really
uncomfortable.”
Participants 001, 002, 006, 008 and 010 believed that the court system was
ineffective for many other reasons. Participant 001 believed the court system is close
minded when it comes to dealing with transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals. She explained that,
You don’t want to go in front of a certain judge because you better be dressed as
the gender you were born because if not, they’re not, you’re not gonna be, that
judge is not gonna be happy with you. If a person goes in there dressed however,
they just need to treat them a little bit better than what they treat them.
Participant 002 believed that the court system is broken when it comes to transgender and
gender nonconforming individuals. She stated that the system doesn’t place any value on
the life of transgender and gender nonconforming individuals when a serious crime has
been committed against them. Participant 006 believed that the court system is not
effective because of people’s mentality. She indicated that there needs to be new laws put
in place that would assist transgender and gender nonconforming individuals regarding
the decisions that are made by judges in the court. Participant 0008 believed that the
courts are ineffective because individuals who suffer from drug addictions and mental
health issues are just being thrown in jail instead of getting the help that they truly need.
The prison system. Participants 002, 003, 004 and 008 believed that the prison
system is ineffective because of how traumatic it leaves an individual and its inability to
rehabilitate individuals. Participant 002 stated that the prison system can be traumatizing
for all individuals because people who go in often leave with more mental trauma.
Participant 003 believed that the prison system is “officially just incarcerating people”
instead of effectively rehabilitating them. Participant 004 stated that “I don’t feel like
they’re given the tools in a lot of prison systems so that when they come out, they can be
more effective and not go back to crime”. Participant 008 stated that the prison system
fails to rehabilitate people.
Participants 005 and 006 believed that the prison system is ineffective when
processing and protecting transgender and gender nonconforming individuals. Participant
005 stated that “I identify as a female and they would constantly like refer to me as ‘him’
and ‘it’ and you know things like that, you know and so that was unprofessional.”
Participant 006 stated that when she was placed in jail, the system placed her in general
population with males instead of placing her in solitary confinement which she believes
would have been safer considering that she looks female. Participant 010 stated that
“unless she’s had her name and gender marker changed, she’s gonna be treated male no
matter how far she had been in her transition” which is the reason why detention centers
and prisons are probably the most negative and scariest thing that a trans woman can face.
Participants 007 and 009 believed that the prison system is ineffective because of
their staff refusing to provide transgender and gender nonconforming individuals their
prescribed medications. Participant 007 believed that the prison system is archaic and
results in transgender and gender nonconforming individuals becoming easy victims. She
indicated that the mentality that governs the prison systems is very scary to her and
petrifying because you’re dealing with doctors who don’t know how to treat transgender
individuals. Participant 009 stated the jail staff are assholes and bullies to everybody. He
indicated that the jail staff openly talked about the fact that he was taking testosterone
medication and refused to give it to him. He also stated that that the jail nurse refused to
provide him with his prescribe dosage of insulin with each meal and instead want to
provide him with a lesser dosage for the entire day.
Lack of accommodations. All participants agreed that the accommodations in
the criminal justice system are lacking for transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals. Participant 009 was court ordered to attend an in-patient drug rehabilitation
program. However, even though he presents as a male, he was placed with the females
which prohibited him from getting help in a timely manner. He stated that he would have
gotten cleaner a lot sooner had he been appropriately placed in the drug rehabilitation
program.
Participant 003 and 004 talked about the name and gender marker obstacles that
are faced in the criminal justice system. Participant 003 stated that the criminal justice
system doesn’t see transgender and gender nonconforming individuals as people and
make the process of legally changing your name and gender marker difficult and
expensive; it’s as if “you’re a transgender person and you’re kind of existing.” Participant
004 stated that if you’re name and gender marker aren’t legally changed, transgender
individuals get misgendered. She stated that “when they get misgendered like that or
misnamed and called their old names, it causes a lot of anxiety for them and it causes
depression for them.”
Participants 001, 002, 005, 006, 007, 008 and 010 talked about the lack of
accommodations in the prison system. Participant 007 stated that the accommodations are
sub-par and that she “don’t expect to be staying at the Ritz Carlton but I do expect a
certain level of decent accommodations.” She stated that she shouldn’t be denied
medication by prison staff that was deemed to be necessary by her own doctor.
Participant 002 stated that the accommodations are awful and uncaring because “they like
put you in with general population and they don’t care.” Participant 001 stated that she
believes that separating transgender and gender nonconforming individuals in the prison
system would protect them so that they wouldn’t be out in the general population, it
equates to segregation. However, Participants 005, 006, 008 and 010 believed that
transgender individuals should be placed in solitary confinement or placed according to
their gender identity in the appropriate general population.
Participant 005 stated that when transgender individuals are locked up, they
should be housed in a separate holding cell. For example, when she was locked up, she
was placed with men who were felons and rapists. She suggested that they have “some
kind of holding cell or maybe even jail cells selected for people who identity with our
community just because it will make us feel a little bit more safer.” Participant 006 stated
that the accommodations for the criminal justice system is poor and isn’t enough for
transgender individuals. She stated that because she identifies as a transgender female and
looks female, she should have either been placed in the female population or placed in
solitary confinement for her protection. Being placed in general population with other
males “there’s a chance I could get some pretty significant damage done to me”, she said.
Participant 008 stated that there probably are not enough accommodations for
transgender individuals. Although he presents as male, when he was locked up, he was
placed with females. He stated that it would have been awkward for him to be placed in
the male population at that time. Participant 010 stated that the accommodations for
transgender individuals are not there. She stated,
In a jail, they have to lock you up in a male or female side and they lock you up
based upon your gender marker usually. So, the accommodations for a trans
person is a jail are much worse than they are in a mental hospital.
Lack of protections. All participants agreed that there are no laws in the state of
Texas that provide any protections for transgender individuals. Participants 006 and 008
believes that there are not enough laws to protect transgender individuals. Participant 004
stated that the laws that were created against transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals “can make it difficult if you run into somebody.” She indicated that “Texas is
kind of backwards when it comes to LGBT laws” because
A lot of the ones [laws] that get passed are not laws that are meant to protect us or
keep us safe. I think they’re meant to be against us and the laws that would
protect us can’t get through because of our legislators.
Participant 001 stated that there are no laws that protect transgender and gender
nonconforming individuals in the state of Texas. While she referenced the bathroom law
in other states, she stated even here in Texas they were trying to change the law to
prevent us, transgendered people, especially children that are in school making sure that
they do to the right, to go to the bathroom as the gender that they were born”. She stated
that despite what your gender marker says, “going into the restroom dressed the way you
are, you can get hurt.” She indicated that the creation of these kind of laws are primarily
the result of individuals beings misinformed about transgender individuals and not having
any documentation or proof to back things us. She stated that “they need to educate
themselves better or learn from us.” Her belief is that the laws that are being created
against transgender individuals are discriminatory and stupid. She stated that she doesn’t
want her rights taken away and reiterated that she believes that everyone needs to
“re-educate themselves a little bit more.”
Participant 003 stated that it’s a nerve-wracking situation every day for him
knowing that he’s not seen as an individual in America. He stated that “certain laws that
ah which take away the rights um they just strip people of their humanity in a sense.” He
has a “sense of fear about them” and believes that this perpetuates a terrifying situation
because “you have people who will want to pass that transgender bathroom bill” in Texas
which are “fear based” and not right. He stated that when he thinks about the laws that are
being created, he feels that “there’s no place for me to operate safely as an out
transgender person” and “I don’t think that there’s anything in place that really protects
me.”
Participant 005 stated that the laws “should be more leaning towards equality
towards each individual” and should be a little bit more non-gender specific. She believes
that the “law should not disable a person from being able to identify however they choose
to identify themselves.” An example that she provided was that in Arkansas when you get
a driver license, they list your gender identity and sexual orientation solely based on your
appearance and not what is listed on your birth certificate like Texas does. She explained
that “Texas doesn’t honor the hate crime when it comes to somebody attacking one of our
community.”
Participant 007 stated that she believes that the passage of gay marriages “has
pushed the conservative backlash on us” because “prior to 2015, people didn’t care that I
used the restroom of the gender that I am, not the gender that I was born as.” She believes
that people are allowing their fears to make laws that legislate problems that do not exist.
She feels as though the laws that were in place to provide some kind of protection for the
transgender and gender nonconforming individuals are being revoked by our current
president thereby creating “a lot of hatred just by itself.”
Participant 002 stated that she feels attacked because “a lot of laws that don’t
mention the LGBT community are the ones that affect the LGBT community the most.”
She believes that the laws are awful, especially with this current administration
“considering the people who are passing these laws are primarily Congress people who
work at the state and federal” level. Basically, “they don’t care about us” and they only
seem to care about how they appear to other people. Participant 009 stated that “we have
gone so far backwards, and Obama fought too hard to give us rights that we have” that
are now being taken away from them by this current administration.
Moreover, Participant 010 stated that “Texas is very biased and there’s no legal
protections in Texas” when it comes to transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals. She stated
The state department um under Obama came up with the way to change the
gender marker and um so you can get a passport with your gender marker set
properly uh with the same letter from your doctor. Under the Trump
administration, um if they’re starting to revoke those passports. Yeah, they’re
changing the passports from full seven-year passports to temporary two-year
passports with revocation at the end of two years. So, they’re actually forcing
people to go back to their previous gender marker ever after they’re fully
transitioned.”
Lack of training. All participants agreed that training is necessary for the sectors
of the criminal justice system regarding how they interact and deal with transgender and
gender nonconforming individuals. Participant 004 stated that she believes that the police
can be effective “if they get the right training” while participant 006 asked “how are you
supposed to treat these people um that do not identify as any gender and then those who
do identify as a gender you don’t even recognize that at all.”
Participant 001 stated that even though the “overall majority of the police
department do understand and are trying, I think if they’re educated, the better, then it
would be better for everyone else.” Participant 002 stated that the “police are cold in
general” and are much more stricter on trans people because “if you don’t fit into a
certain box or a certain narrative that they want, then you’re essentially screwed.”
In terms of the LGBT community, Participant 003 stated that he believes that nobody
has even thought of providing basic trainings for the personnel staff in the criminal
justice system. He stated that his only goal is that the people in the criminal justice
system “will eventually receive training on how to talk to transgender people and deal
with them” and “if they can learn like the things that transgender people use like a
binder and a tuck…that’s helpful” especially when they have to be pat down by the
police who probably assumes that “they’re hiding things underneath.” He stated that
“there’s just so much that people can do that they don’t even realize to make someone
way more comfortable to like interacting with the system.” However, he stated that he
believes that it may be baseless to train them because he doesn’t “think that people look
at transgender people as though they’re like real people yet.”
Participant 007 explained that everything people know and learn is what they
have seen on TV and that’s all they know. She stated that “if they don’t know somebody
that’s like that, then they don’t know, and they have no base of knowledge to work off
on.” She went even further and stated
You can treat transgender people however you want to treat them. You can treat
them good; you can treat them bad. But at the end of the day, the people you have
are human beings, okay and all human beings deserve a certain amount of respect.
If you want to make things better for trans people and you want to make the world
a better place, the biggest thing in my mind is probably exposure.
Theme 3: Experiences With the Criminal Justice System
The third theme to emerge from the data was the participants’ experiences with
the criminal justice system. Two codes were generated: (a) positive experiences and (b)
negative experiences.
Positive experiences. The first code that was generated was the positive
experiences that the participants had with an entity of the criminal justice system (e.g.,
law enforcement, the court system, and the prison system).
Law enforcement. Being taken in by a police officer and being treated as one of
the family created a positive experience for Participant 003 that he explained changed his
overall viewpoint of all police officers. While Participant 009 admitted to being defensive
when approached by police officer, he stated that he was surprised to interact with a
police officer who was pretty respectful and had normal conversation with him about
being a transgender individual.
While in San Antonio attending a Pride parade, Participant 001 stated that the
police department was very accepting, accommodating and supportive of the LGBT
community. There were officers talking to the parade attendees, making sure that they
were safe, and that they were not being bothered by anyone being negative towards them.
She also expressed how there was another time when a police officer was accepting and
accommodating to her when she needed to use the public restroom and feared any
possible consequences. She stated,
I had to go to the bathroom I was like okay. I don't want any trouble you know I
just wanted to go in there and just do my business and get it done. I noticed a
police officer there I say excuse me I go can you tell me is there a family restroom
here cause I don't want no problems. And she was like ma'am, she goes, the
woman's bathroom is right over there. She goes, you have the right to use that
bathroom. She goes, don't worry about it she goes you're not gonna have no
trouble. She goes and I'm riding around here. She goes “we, we try to understand
people are different” and she goes “and I know you are transgender.” She goes
“and I see that you're dress as a female and that's who you are.” She goes “go
right ahead.” She goes “if anyone gives you a problem or anybody comes out and
say anything”, she goes “I'll take care of it...
While riding as a passenger in a vehicle that was stopped by police, Participant
004 explained how police asked to search her purse. During the search, the officer found
a bottle of medicine that had multiple pills inside and she wasn’t carrying the actual
prescriptions for the pills. She stated that “he said you need to carry the prescription
things with you. I won’t, I could arrest you for that, but I’m not going to because I
understand that you didn’t know.” She believed that her being “white and presenting
female” helped her out in that situation.
She also indicated that when reported a theft that occurred at her apartment to
police, one of the detectives that was assisting her was extremely helpful. She stated that
her preferred name missed getting to that person, but he was okay with it and used the
correct pronouns and everything. She stated that “he even turned around and when we
found where he pawned my stuff, he went out to get it and brought it to my house
because I don’t drive.”
The court system. When Participant 005 was sentenced to community service, she
stated that the judge was fair and accommodating to her when he ordered her to do her
community service in an elderly community center instead of putting her “with the rest of
the males doing community service on the street picking up garbage in the hot sun and
things like that.”
The prison system. When Participant 001 was in jail, she stated that everyone left
her alone and “the people that worked there were okay, they didn’t give me no hard
time.” Also, while in jail, Participant 005 stated that she believed that being locked up
with felons and rapists were a positive experience “because they do only let one cell out
at a time to where you’re not like intermingling with everybody and putting myself in
more danger.” While being booked in jail, Participant 008 stated that he was immediately
put in contact with a nurse for his medical conditions who was really helpful. He was
then brought to the infirmary to meet a doctor “and they were super accommodating.”
Negative experiences. The second code that was generated was the negative experiences
that the participants experienced with the sectors of the criminal justice system.
Law enforcement. During a recent arrest, Participant 002 explained that she was
left feeling entrapped, humiliated and embarrassed. She stated that she felt that the police
were just singling her out because she was a transgender individual and his belief that she
was a sex worker. She stated
They want to go after people who barely don't have any options. Like how can we
make money off the poor? Let's go after the people who legitimately have nothing
because it's so much easier for us to get money off of them then to go after
somebody who actually have money. Because the people who have, that doesn't
have much, they're able to get everything from us. They're able to get everything
from us. And, but you know...if they go after somebody that has money that's not
a quick ticket for them. Because they're able to fight back cause they have money,
they have power, they have privilege.
She went on to say that during that same arrest, she was charged with theft after
the officer accused her of attempting to steal his laptop. She stated that “you can’t even
trust what they put on you cause they’re going after the weakest of the weak.” She also
stated that there was another time when a detective “victim blamed” her instead of
actually helping her out. To justify his actions, she stated that “he’s like ‘I’m sorry I have
to do this, but I have to get both sides to see if you’re lying’ so I have to traumatize you
by scaring you essentially – real awful.”
While being processed and booked in jail, Participant 005 encountered two
uniformed police officers – a male and female who were being unprofessional, in her
opinion. She stated that,
They were kind of going back and forth like ‘That’s a man, you need to check
him’; ‘No, that’s clearly a woman’; ‘I’m telling you that’s a man’; ‘No, it’s a
woman, you have to do it’; ‘I’m not touching it’ – you know things like that. I just
thought that was really unprofessional.
She expressed that it made her feel horrible because she felt as though they were
treating her as an animal when she’s a human being. She stated that all of this could have
been avoided if they asked her who she preferred to check her. But in the end, it scared
her into not getting into any more trouble.
When working at his job, Participant 009 stated that he came across a disgruntled
customer who was very threatening to him, so he immediately reported the incident to the
police. He stated that after the police officer took his report, he walked off without
addressing him or saying a word to him. He stated that this situation left him feeling
vulnerable and indicated that this should never happen to anyone who reports a crime or
an incident to the police.
While reporting an incident that happened to her while in a waiting room at a
hospital, Participant 010 stated that the hospital police failed to take her report seriously.
She stated that “the hospital police officer treated me like ‘that was stupid for you to do to
begin with. How could you be so stupid to let some man do that to you’ so “basically, he
treated me like well you’re a stupid woman who you know got groped.”
The court system. During a court experience, Participant 001 explained that her
old name was utilized throughout the court proceedings even though her new name had
been legally changed. She stated that “when you say that name, I don’t associate with it.”
She also Participant 001 also described how a she witnessed a judge deliver a verdict in a
trial that she attended where the victim was a transgender individual. She stated He did
not even say his…he did not even give the verdict from the stand; he walked away from
his stand and gave the verdict of not guilty. And he said, he said that if that person
wouldn't have been dressing like that person dressed and living that life, that would have
never happened to that person and it was her own fault.
Participant 005 also stated that when she went to court, she was called by her old
name. She stated that the judge asked for her ID card to verify her identity before he
proceeded with the hearing.
The prison system. After being processed in jail, Participant 002 stated that there
were feces and urine all over the walls and “whenever they stripped me, they made all the
men sit around like ah sit around like along the wall and look at me while they took my
clothes off while they made fun of me.” She further stated that “they made me like, like
squat and cough and all these awful things in front of like these people I've never met
before who they're going to incarcerate me with, which is general population.” She
described this as an awful experience for her.
When she was arrested and subsequently processed to be booked in jail,
Participant 006 stated that she had all of her medications with her. However, when it was
time for her to take her medicine, her request was denied because they didn’t have any
medical staff available that day. However, the very next day after a shift change, a
correctional officer allowed her to take her medication.
Summary
The purpose of this qualitative research study was to describe and understand the
perceptions and experiences of TGNC individuals as they interacted with the various
sectors of the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the court system, and the
prison system). There were two research questions that guided this research: (1) how do
transgender and gender nonconforming individuals feel about the criminal justice system
in general and the specific sectors of the criminal justice system, and (2) what factors
influence transgender and gender nonconforming individuals’ perceptions of the criminal
justice system. The participants’ responses to the interview questions were analyzed and
three themes were identified: (a) interactions with the criminal justice system; (b)
thoughts about the criminal justice system; and (c) experiences with the criminal justice
system. Nine subthemes were also identified.
Regarding the first research question, I found that the participants felt that the
criminal justice system, in general, is broken and there is a great deal of work that is
needed to alleviate the negative experiences and obstacles that TGNC individuals face
when encountering and interacting with the various sectors of and the personnel staff of
the criminal justice system. For law enforcement, the participants felt scared, worried and
nervous when interacting with the police. Furthermore, the majority of participants felt
unsafe interacting with the police because of the way they were treated or the perception
of how they will be treated. The participants felt that the court system is biased against
TGNC individuals because of the sitting judges and their conservative views regarding
TGNC individuals.
Regarding the prison system, the participants felt unsafe because of the lack of
safety protections for TGNC individuals when being placed in jail during the booking
process because they are housed based on the gender and sex listed on their birth
certificates and not how they presently present when being booked. Based on these
findings, half of the participants indicated that they would be willing to seek the
assistance of the criminal justice system when a crime had been committed against them.
The other half of the participants indicated that they are not willing to seek assistance
from the criminal justice system and would either seek assistance from their family,
friends, or a non-profit organization as an alternative or handle the matter themselves.
Regarding the second research question, the factors that I found influence TGNC
individuals’ perceptions of the criminal justice system were their perceptions of how
effective they believed the sectors of the criminal justice system to be; a lack of
accommodations and protections for TGNC individuals; and the lack of training for the
criminal justice system and its personnel staff.
In Chapter 5, I will discuss the interpretation of the findings, the limitations of the
study, recommendations and the implications for social change of this research study.
Chapter 5: Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations
Introduction
The purpose of this qualitative phenomenological study was to describe and
understand the perceptions and experiences of TGNC individuals as they interacted with
various sectors of the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the prison system,
and the court system). The problem that this study explored was how sexual orientation
and gender identity may influence TGNC individuals’ experiences with and perceptions
of the criminal justice system. Given that there was a lack of empirical research in the
field of criminology and criminal justice regarding the TGNC population, an
investigation into the lived experiences of TGNC was warranted. This research study fills
that gap and contributes to the knowledge base in the fields of criminal justice and public
safety as well as queer criminology by providing an understanding of the lived
experiences of TGNC individuals and their perceptions of their interactions with the
various sectors of the criminal justice system.
I used Tyler’s (1990, 2004) procedural justice theory as the theoretical framework
for this study and Moustakas’s modified Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen method for data analysis.
A semistructured interview guide created by Nadal et al. (2015) was used for this study
with Dr. Nadal’s permission (see Appendices F & G). Two research questions guided this
study:
1. How do transgender and gender nonconforming individuals feel about the
criminal justice system in general and the specific sectors of the criminal
justice system?
2. What factors influence transgender and gender nonconforming individuals’
perceptions of the criminal justice system?
The participants’ responses to the interview questions were analyzed, and three themes
were identified: (a) interactions with the criminal justice system, (b) thoughts about the
criminal justice system, and (c) experiences with the criminal justice system. Nine
subthemes were also identified.
Interpretation of the Findings
Participants in this study described their experiences with and perceptions of
interacting with the sectors of the criminal justice system. The findings provide an
understanding of the participants’ unique experiences and perspectives, which were
positive, negative, and neutral toward the sectors of the criminal justice system.
Theme 1: Interactions With the Criminal Justice System
The findings for this theme have been organized by the sectors of the criminal
justice system—law enforcement, the court system, and the prison system.
Law enforcement. All of the participants in this study expressed a variety of
negative emotional reactions when dealing with the sectors of the criminal justice system
(e.g., scared, frightened, worried, afraid, and nervous). However, one participant
expressed that her “White privilege” allowed her to feel safe because “I’m not going to be
harassed in any way”. A majority of the participants agreed that interacting with the
police can be unsafe because of the way that they perceive that they will be treated. For
example, Participant 003 conveyed their fear of not knowing know how the police would
feel about a transgender individual. Participant 002 indicated that they were worried for
fear of police manipulating what was said during the encounter. Participant 007 stated
that the police have a lot of power and can easily take advantage of people. This finding
confirms Miles-Johnson’s (2016a) finding that the gender identities of transgender
individuals significantly shape their perceptions of how they are treated by the police and
influence their perceptions about the police.
Half of the participants in this study reported that they would be willing to turn to
the criminal justice system to report a crime if one had been committed against them,
while the other half of the participants reported that they would be unwilling to turn to the
criminal justice system to report a crime. For example, Participant 008 indicated that his
willingness to turn to the criminal justice system for assistance would depend on the
severity of the crime that had been committed against him. Participant 010 conveyed that
she would only turn to the criminal justice system if she could prove that a crime had
occurred against her because of a prior experience she had with a police officer who did
not believe her when she initially reported a crime. This finding confirms Serpe and
Nadal’s (2017) finding that transgender individuals who are more inclined to feel mistrust
toward the police or to have a less favorable perception of the police are more likely to be
less comfortable in interacting with the police. Those individuals who are less
comfortable in interacting with the police are less likely to seek assistance from the police
due to an inherent fear of being victimized by the police, whereas those individuals who
harbor a positive perception of the police are more likely to be comfortable interacting
with the police and are more likely to seek assistance from the police (Serpe & Nadal,
2017).
The court system. A majority of the participants believed that the courts are
biased against transgender individuals. Participant 005 conveyed that the courts make it
difficult for individuals to legally change their names and gender markers. Participant 010
commented that when she went to get her name and gender marker changed, the justices
in the county where she lived used a legal clause to get around changing her name and
gender marker. Participant 001 explained that even after she legally had her name and
gender marker changed, she still got called by her dead name when she appeared in court.
This finding supports previous research that has indicated that the legal system is
inadequate and not designed for transgender individuals (Buist & Stone, 2014;
Goodmark, 2013). Furthermore, it supports Buist and Stone’s (2014) assertion that the
determination of an individual’s sex and gender causes issues “for transgender people
who do not fit into the predetermined categories” (p. 44).
The prison system. Two participants commented that while they were in jail, they
were denied medications that had been prescribed to them by their primary doctor. Four
participants indicated that they felt unsafe when they went to jail because they were
placed in a holding cell that was based on their assigned gender at birth and not the
gender that they presented as. For example, Participant 009 stated that she was placed in a
males’ holding cell when she presented as a female (e.g., she had breasts). This finding
confirms the findings of previous research that has indicated that medical treatments for
transgender individuals are often denied or withheld altogether, even though denying
transgender individuals prescribed hormone medications can impair their physical and
mental health (Reisner et al., 2014; Stohr, 2015; Whitman, 2014). Furthermore, this
finding also supports the findings of previous research that has indicated that the chances
of a transgender individual being victimized increase while in custody, especially when a
transgender woman’s appearance has been feminized and she is placed in a male facility
(Scott, 2013; Stohr, 2015; Whitman, 2016).
Theme 2: Thoughts About the Criminal Justice System
The belief that the criminal justice system is ineffective for transgender
individuals was indicated by many of the participants in this study. For example,
Participant 002 commented that the police are “really effective at suppressing minority
people” and that they are more inclined to protect “people who are cisgender or
heteronormative and who fit a certain criteria or people that they would consider to be
productive in society.” Regarding the court system, Participant 001 indicated that the
system is closed minded when it comes to dealing with transgender individuals.
Regarding the prison system, Participants 005 and 006 felt that it is ineffective when
processing and protecting transgender individuals. This finding confirms previous
research that has indicated that the legal system is inadequate and not designed for
transgender individuals (Buist & Stone, 2014; Goodmark, 2013). Moreover, it supports
the assertion that individuals’ “real or perceived” gender identity and sexual orientation
determine how they are treated by police, the court system, and the prison system (Noga-
Styron et al., 2012).
The belief that the accommodations in the criminal justice system for TGNC
individuals are lacking and need to be improved, especially when it comes to the prison
system, was agreed upon by all participants in this study. For example, Participant 001
stated that separating TGNC individuals in the prison system would protect them.
However, Participants 005, 006, 008 and 010 believed that transgender individuals should
be placed in solitary confinement or placed according to their gender identity in the
appropriate general population. The findings of a lack of accommodations in the prison
system support the findings of previous researchers who argued that the safety of the
inmate should be a priority when housing transgender inmates (Reisner et al., 2014;
Stohr, 2015; Whitman, 2016). For example, the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PERA)
required all the states in the country to make decisions on where and how to house
transgender individuals on a case-by-case basis in order to create a safe environment for
them while they are in custody and are incarcerated (Schuster, 2014; Stohr, 2015).
There was agreement by all participants in this study that there are no laws that
provide any protections for transgender individuals. Many of the participants cited the
bathroom bill that the state of Texas attempted to implement as a law that was created
against TGNC individuals. Participants 001 and 005 commented that this law was based
on fear and is discriminatory toward TGNC individuals. This supports the findings of
Knauer (2012), who argued that LGBT individuals are denied protections by policies that
are biased, restrictive, and/or discriminatory in nature. Knauer suggested that polices be
crafted and designed “to reduce disparities and address inequality” for LGBT individuals
(p. 755).
The belief that training on the needs of TGNC individuals is necessary for the
sectors of the criminal justice system was agreed upon by all participants in this study.
The consensus of the participants was that criminal justice system personnel need basic
training on how to interact and deal with TGNC individuals. Participant 007 expressed
the belief that everything people know and learn about transgender individuals comes
from TV. Participant 006 wondered, “How are you supposed to treat these people um that
do not identify as any gender and then those who do identify as a gender you don’t even
recognize that at all?”
This finding supports research conducted by Miles-Johnson (2015), Redfern
(2014a, 2014b), and Sereni-Massinger and Wood (2016), who argued for the importance
of training and education. Miles-Johnson found that the negative techniques that are used
by police officers come from their lack of knowledge and/or education. The fact that
administrators and patrol officers are not effectively communicating strategies with each
other can cause problems when there are no formal policies and procedures governing
interactions with transgender individuals.
Redfern (2014a, 2014b) suggested that improved communication with transgender
individuals can be achieved through training that should be implemented in law
enforcement agencies, as well as through written policies or procedures that address
appropriate methods of interacting with transgender individuals. Implementing a
sensitivity training program as well as written policies and procedures would increase
agencies’ knowledge of transgender individuals while providing them with greater
sensitivity toward this population (Redfern, 2014a, 2014b). Providing training and having
policies and procedures would also decrease the number of lawsuits and civil rights
violations (Redfern, 2014a). Sereni-Massinger and Wood (2016) found that training and
education that focus on interpersonal communication skills and critical thinking are of
paramount importance due to the diversity in today’s society and the role of the criminal
justice system.
Theme 3: Experiences With the Criminal Justice System
The participants in this study described positive and negative experiences they had
with the sectors of the criminal justice system. Participants 001, 003, and 009 indicated
that they had a positive experience with the police wherein the police were
accommodating and respectful during an interaction. Participant 005 stated that she had a
positive experience with the court system when the judge who sentenced her to
community service accommodated her when he ordered her to do community service in
an elderly community center instead of making her pick up garbage in the hot sun.
Participants 001, 005, and 008 commented about their positive experience with the prison
system, with Participant 008 explaining how he had immediately been put in contact with
a nurse for his medical conditions after being processed in jail.
The negative experiences that Participants 002, 005, 009, and 010 described were
about their interactions with the police. For example, Participant 002 indicated that she
felt entrapped, humiliated, and embarrassed during an interaction she had with a police
officer. Participant 002 stated that the officer singled her out because she was transgender
and he believed that she was a sex worker. When filing a police report, Participant 009
stated that an officer took his report and walked away without addressing him or
explaining the next steps in the process to him. Participant 010 stated that an officer
refused to believe that an incident had occurred to her. Participants 001 and 005 reported
negative experiences with the court system; Participant 005 was repeatedly referred to by
her dead name by the presiding judge. Participants 002 and 006 detailed their negative
experiences with the prison system. Participant 002 commented that when she was placed
in a males’ facility, she was strip searched in front of men who sat along the wall and
watched her take her clothes off while making fun of her.
Overall, more than half of the participants indicated that they had a negative
experience with an entity of the criminal justice system. Their negative interactions
included police officers who were rude and unprofessional; assumptions that they were
sex workers just because they were transgender; being called the wrong name by court
personnel; and being “put on display” while being searched (Stotzer, 2014, p. 273). The
findings in this study support the previous findings that transgender individuals are more
likely than other heterosexual individuals to experience an incident of being mistreated,
disrespected, or intimidated within the criminal justice system (Buist & Stone, 2014;
Langenderfer-Magruder et al., 2016; NCAVP, 2014; Woods et al., 2013). Galvan and
Bazargan (2012) found that prison staff responded negatively to transgender individuals
and took part in victimizing them.
Limitations of the Study
While this study provides important findings about the lived experiences of
TGNC individuals and their perceptions about the criminal justice system, there were
several limitations to this study. First, although the sample size in this study may be
adequate for qualitative studies, it may lack generalizability to the entire transgender
population (Nadal et al., 2015; Nadal et al., 2014). Second, due to all of the participants
being recruited from or around a large metropolitan city in Texas, this study may not
reflect the perceptions and lived experiences of other transgender individuals in other
cities, states, or parts of the country (Nadal et al., 2015; Nadal et al., 2014).
Another limitation of this study was the demographics of the participants.
Although I attempted to recruit participants who self-identified as TGNC, most of the
participants in this study were recruited by other participants using a snowball technique.
This resulted in all of the participants in the study being transgender individuals, seven
participants being MTF (male to female) and three participants being FTM (female to
male)—and primarily White and Hispanic. Again, this study may not reflect the lived
experiences of the entire transgender population whose members share these
demographics. Despite these limitations, this study provides an in-depth account of the
lived experiences of TGNC individuals and their perceptions of the criminal justice
system.
Recommendations
There is a dearth of research on the lived experiences of TGNC individuals
specifically examining their experiences with the criminal justice system. There is a need
to understand how their experiences affect and influence their perceptions and attitudes
about the criminal justice system when seeking assistance. They deserve to be treated
equally and fairly regardless of their gender identity and sexual orientation.
Future research should continue to examine the unique experiences of TGNC
individuals and their interactions with the criminal justice system in different geographic
regions. It is important to understand the differences in how TGNC individuals in various
geographic regions perceive their experiences and interactions with the sectors of the
criminal justice system. It is equally important to understand how gender identity and
sexual orientation affect the perceptions and experiences of TGNC individuals when
interacting with the criminal justice system. Examining the unique issues, challenges, and
barriers that TGNC individuals experience could provide insight into how their gender
identity and sexual orientation shape their personal experiences with and views of the
criminal justice system.
Given that participants reported that the criminal justice system was in need of
training, future researchers in this area should attempt to explore best practices of the
criminal justice system for interacting with TGNC individuals. Incorporating sensitivity
training for each entity of the criminal justice system could promote alternative and
flexible responses by personnel to meet the unique needs of the TGNC community
(Redfern, 2014b). There is also a need to further investigate the relationship between
TGNC individuals’ gender identity and procedural justice. Examining this relationship
could provide findings that could be of paramount importance in strengthening the
relationship between law enforcement and the TGNC community that they serve and
protect. Murphy et al. (2015) supported this idea by concluding that procedural justice is
important for building trust and confidence in law enforcement within the communities
that it serves. TGNC individuals’ personal encounters with law enforcement have been
shown to directly shape their perceptions and to affect their level of trust and confidence
when interacting with law enforcement agencies (Murphy et al., 2015). Procedural justice
should be practiced in a consistent and fair manner when personnel within the criminal
justice system are interacting with all members of the community.
Implications for Social Change
One of the largest positive social change that can potentially come from this study
is bringing awareness to the unique challenges and potential barriers that TGNC
individuals experience when interacting with the criminal justice system. Given that there
is a dearth of literature that has explored the lived experiences of TGNC individuals
because they have been grouped together with the LGB community as an afterthought,
this study contributed to a gap in the literature because it provides insight and an
understanding into how those experiences affect their perceptions of the criminal justice
system (Nadal et al., 2015; Stotzer, 2014). The participants in this study were eager and
willing to share their experiences and perceptions of the criminal justice system which
revealed the need for additional qualitative research to be conducted in this area.
The results of this study will hopefully, on an individual level, contribute to
provide a better understanding of TGNC individuals’ experiences with the criminal
justice system and how those experiences have affected their perceptions of the criminal
justice system. On an organizational and community level, the results of this study will
hopefully provide an insight into the necessity and importance of training and education.
The findings in this study provided a description of the unique challenges that
transgender and gender nonconforming individuals face when interacting with the
criminal justice system. Everyone deserves to be treated in a fair and respectful manner.
They are more incline to react in a negative manner when treated in an unfair and
disrespectful manner. When law enforcement displays benevolence and care towards
citizens in addition to being sincere with the best interest of the community that they
serve, the members of the community are more prone to act positive toward law
enforcement officers and agencies (Murphy et al., 2014). In turn, the level of trust and
confidence that members of the community will have towards the criminal justice system
will begin to increase.
Conclusion
The collective obligations of the criminal justice system are to “promote
beneficence, justice, and respect and to prevent or minimize harm” toward the community
that they serve (Whitman, 2016). These obligations should not be subjective to an
individuals’ gender identity and sexual orientation. However, the relationship between the
TGNC community and the criminal justice system has been wrought with discrimination
and harassment to include mistrust, violence, and intimidation. Such experiences have
inhibited TGNC individuals and the criminal justice system from interacting with each
other in an effectively and cooperatively manner. A review of the literature revealed that
there is a dearth of scholarly research available about TGNC individuals without
grouping them as an afterthought with the LGB community. Specifically, as it relates to
their lived experiences with and perceptions of the criminal justice system. The purpose
of this qualitative phenomenological study was to describe and understand the
perceptions and experiences of TGNC individuals as they interacted with the criminal
justice system. The problem that this study explored was how sexual orientation and
gender identity may influence TGNC’s experiences and perceptions of the criminal
justice system.
While the ultimate purpose of the criminal justice system is to provide equal and
fair treatment to everyone despite their gender identity and sexual orientation, the
findings of this study confirms previous findings that the criminal justice system is not
prepared to appropriately handle individuals in the TGNC community (Buist & Stone,
2014; Noga-Styron et al., 2012; Whitman, 2016). In addition, the findings of this study
depicted an accurate picture of TGNC individuals’ experiences and perceptions of their
interactions with the criminal justice system and the barriers that they encounter during
those interactions. Having written policies and procedures on how to interact with TGNC
individuals may improve the treatment of TGNC’s by the criminal justice system.
The findings in this study confirmed that there is a need for the criminal justice
system to be treated and educated on how to professionally communicate and interact
with TGNC individuals during interactions. Therefore, in addition to written policies and
procedures, transgender-affirmative training programs and education for the criminal
justice system is needed to be developed and implemented to improve the communication
and interaction with TGNC individuals. Transgender and gender nonconforming
individuals are entitled to being treated in a fair and equal manner when interacting with
the criminal justice system regardless of their gender identity and sexual orientation.
