Gender-specific prison programming in the United States

Last updated

Gender-specific prison programming in the United States are programs created to prepare incarcerated women for successful reentry, and minimize recidivism. Prison programming and how it is structured has changed significantly over the decades to fit the needs of women in gender-specific programming. [1] Focus on gender-specific programming increased during the 1970s and 1980s, an era marked by a substantial increase in the female prison population. Traditional programming in female correctional facilities have been deemed ineffective since most were structured to fit men's needs. [2] For example, women's pathways to prison typically involve drugs, while men are typically involved in violent crimes. [3] Additionally, women are more likely to have experiences of sexual and/or physical abuse relative to men. [4]

Contents

History of programming in women's prisons

Before 1980

Programming for imprisoned women was centered on domesticity, although efforts were made to include industrial training programs and academic programs. For example, the Indiana Women's Prison tried to incorporate chair caning, paper-boxing making, glove stitching, and laundry, which, with the exception of the latter, were deemed "financially disappointing." [5] Academic classes were difficult to maintain due to staff and funding shortages, and differences in education levels among the women. [5] At another institution in Framingham, Massachusetts, administrators implemented an indenture system, a conditional early release program that allowed women to serve as domestic servants in nearby homes located on the country side, which proved to be rather successful with a less than nine percent recidivism rate for those who participated in the program. Domesticity was also promoted by prisoner officials. For example, in 1896, former superintendent Sarah Keely described the work offered to women as being appropriate, since it reflected work in a familial setting. [5] The lucrative nature and accessibility of acquiring domestic skills contributed to their lack of participation in higher skills training. [5] Despite efforts to equip female inmates with remunerative skills, programming throughout the early and mid-1900s continued to consist of limited educational and vocational opportunities. Job training programming mostly entailed training in as cleaning, sewing, [2] cosmetology, food service, laundry, and clerical work, [6] programs that did not lead women to meaningful and financially secure job opportunities upon release. [7] It has been noted that use of such programs persisted since most women entered prison with little to no education or work experience. [8] [9]

Prior to the 1980s, there was a lack of programming focused on drug treatment for incarcerated women, and even less research regarding the outcomes of treatment programs in general. [10] Research regarding the relationship between women and substance abuse had begun only a few years earlier during the 1970s, and focused primarily on alcohol treatment services, rather than drug treatment services. [8] [11] Furthermore, since the female prison population was relatively small, male substance abuse treatment had set the standard. Two of the earliest research studies investigated the outcomes of Cornerstone program (Oregon, 1976), and the Stay'n Out program (New York, 1974), with the latter conducted at an all-female facility. While these programs were found to be successful, it was noted that other male-oriented programming such as urine testing and drug education courses were generally ineffective for female offenders. [12] Only during the 1980s and 1990s did research regarding gender-specific programming for women become more prevalent.

1980s to late 1990s

During the 1980s and the early 1990s, researchers began investigating how substance abuse affected women and men differently, [8] [11] and how women functioned in traditional treatment programs. [6] Researchers found that the characteristics of female substance abuse differed from male substance abuse in several ways including pathways to drug use, psychosocial factors, and psychological impacts of drug use. [11] One study conducted in California prisons found that nearly 80% of women reported some form of physical and/or sexual abuse followed by post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). [13] [14] Furthermore, it was observed that in traditional drug and alcohol programs such as Alcohol Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA), women had lower participation rates in all aspects including entry, retention, and completion compared to those of their male counterparts. [6] The emphasis on gender-specific programming was further substantiated by the fact that a greater proportion of women than men were serving sentences for drug-related offenses during this period of time. [13] In highlighting the relationship between women's drug use to other issues such as poverty, abuse, race and gender inequalities, studies acknowledged the ineffectiveness of isolated, treatment options. [3] [6] As a result of this research, several designs for an effective gender-specific program were identified. Some of most common characteristics included female-only environments, promotion of female empowerment, skill building, mutual exchange, and relational orientation. [6] [11] [13]

One major effort designed to achieve gender-specific substance abuse treatment include the implementation and monitoring of therapeutic communities (TCs), which are characterized by the National Institute for Drug Abuse as "drug-free residential settings that use a hierarchical model with treatment stages that reflect increased levels of personal and social responsibility". TCs have been a national model for drug abuse treatment historically found in male facilities, but have appeared in female facilities. While male-oriented TCs tend to use authoritarian and aggressive approaches, female-oriented TCs take a more relaxed, and less confrontational approach. [6] In both cases, TCs have been successful in reducing recidivism. For example, the Stay'n Out program was shown to reduce recidivism rates for both women and men. Furthermore, women who stayed in the program for 9 to 12 months were more likely to successfully complete their parole compared to their male counterparts. [10] For women suffering from severe and long-term abuse, a more intense TC, residential TC, was implemented. Women in these residential programs lived together, and away from the general prison population. Despite this being most needed form of treatment for women, in 1994, most prisons lacked this type residential programming, with less than nine percent of women receiving such treatment while incarcerated. [6]

In addition to TC programs being successful, they tend to be less expensive than the cost of incarceration. [6] In 1993, the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, an initiative developed under the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), began funding mid-term and long-term residential TC programs for incarcerated women. These programs tend to last anywhere from fifty days to six months. In addition, they began funding one residential program, and two intensive intervention programs which lasted at least six months, and on average two weeks, respectively. One TC program was roughly $790,000 for 250 women, or approximately $3,200 per inmate, while the cost of incarceration ranged from $20,000 and $30,000, supporting the idea that incarceration is more expensive than treatment. In the case of CSAT-sponsored programs, the average cost of incarceration was roughly $51, while the cost of treatment was $9.22 per woman. [6]

In the early 1990s, post-secondary educational programs were solely academic in nature, and in women's prisons, were either nonexistent, or underutilized, with less than 10 percent of female prison population enrolled in educational programming. [15] In 1994, this number further decreased due to inmates' ineligibility for the Pell grant and other financial aid. [16] Funding for educational programming included federal grants, private donors, as well as state financial aid, as seen in North Carolina and California. [16]

Substance abuse programming

Traditionally, the most common treatment for substance abuse stems from a medical model, which views addiction disease. This model sees disease of addiction as being rooted solely in the individual. Relatively recent research suggests that addiction can be best understood holistically, as evident in the more recent programming that focus on other aspects of the individual. Currently, most female correctional facilities contain a range of evidence-based programming for substance abuse that have been shown to both reduce recidivism, and promote positive social behavior. Most of the substance abuse programs are largely funded by organizations such as CSAT. In addition to residential TCs, prison-based substance abuse programming may include detoxification units, inpatient drug treatment, outpatient treatment or counseling, self-help group/peer counseling, education/awareness, or maintenance program. [1] Volunteering professionals across several disciplines often run these programs, since effective gender-responsive programming should address substance abuse holistically. [3] [13] While there has been an increase in the number of substance abuse treatment options, research regarding their effectiveness has reduced since the late 1990s. The outcome evaluations that come during the early 2000s focus primarily on programming elements that contribute to high levels of effectiveness. For example, a 2001 study of treatment investigated the effectiveness of receiving treatment (versus not receiving treatment), group type (mixed versus female only), and the type of women's treatment (enhanced vs standard). [17]

Professional development/employment

Vocational training

Vocational training covers a wide range of occupations including trade skills such as auto mechanics, and electrical work or other occupational skills such as culinary arts, warehousing, and other hands-on work experience. [15] Nonetheless, there tends to be far less vocational training programs in women's facilities compared to male facilities, even though women are more likely to take advantage of such programs. [1] Vocational training programs currently provided in female correctional facilities are much like those seen throughout the 1980s and 1990s. [18] They are gender-stereotyped and lower-skill opportunities such as sewing, clerical work, food services, and cosmetology. [9] [13] The use of these types of vocational programs has been described as ironic since some state legislatures prohibit ex-offenders from entering such fields. In 2003, at least six states had barred ex-offenders from public employment, prohibiting them opportunities in approximately 350 higher-skilled occupations, thus restricting women to low-paying jobs upon reentry. [15]

By far, vocational training and work assignments have ranked highest among women's priorities. Due to limitations and high demands of these programs, enrollment is quite difficult. [15] In some cases, the waitlists tend to be longer than the number of students. In one survey conducted in 1995, vocational was identified as a top priority, but only 14 to 28 percent of women were actually enrolled. Furthermore, the educational eligibility requirements for vocational training tend to result in underutilization of programs since some require higher levels of education. [9] [15] For example, a business program at a New Hampshire women's facility in the 1990s was inaccessible since most women lacked the educational requirements. [15] Additionally, access to stable employment is often compounded by the fact that newly released women have limited access to adequate transportation and resources, which reduces the likelihood of long-term employment. [15] The existence of vocational program is not enough to recidivism; the quality of the program, and the need for that occupation must also be taken into account. More specifically, the program must train women in widely available fields experiencing shortages, and must in an area that will provide a living wage. For example, a temporary plumbing maintenance program was implemented throughout correctional facilities in New York State during the early 2000s, a time where plumbers were of relatively high demand. [19]

One of the strongest indicators of stable employment is education. Studies of women in state correctional facilities reveal a positive relationship between educational level and probability of employment. [15] Furthermore, higher education has been shown to increase self-esteem. The high regard for post-secondary is not reflected in prison programming. Over 90 percent of state prisons provide educational programs that focus on GED preparation and adult basic education, but only a few prisons offer programming in post-secondary education. [6] Furthermore, participation in educational programs is relatively lower than participation in vocational training, and work assignments. The challenge to complete coursework appears specifically when competing with participation in paid work assignments. In a comparative study of women's participation in programming, less than half, 34 percent of women participated in educational programming, while 70 percent of women had work assignments. [1]

Postsecondary education

College education is becoming increasingly important for advancement in the labor market. Consequently, more focus is being placed on higher education in correctional facilities. [16] Some prisons have developed relationships with local community colleges to form postsecondary correctional education (PSCE) programs. Such programs allow individuals to take credited (or non-credited) college level courses. Through funding, these programs are offered at discounted rates, or at no cost to the inmate. The programs vary in length, eligibility requirements, eligibility, course type, and program structure. [16] [20]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incarceration in the United States</span> Form of punishment in United States law

Incarceration in the United States is one of the primary means of punishment for crime in the United States. In 2021, over five million people were under supervision by the criminal justice system, with nearly two million people incarcerated in state or federal prisons and local jails. The United States has the largest known prison population in the world. It has 5% of the world’s population while having 20% of the world’s incarcerated persons. China, with more than four times more inhabitants, has fewer persons in prison. Prison populations grew dramatically beginning in the 1970s, but began a decline around 2009, dropping 25% by year-end 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Recidivism</span> Person repeating an undesirable behavior following punishment

Recidivism is the act of a person repeating an undesirable behavior after they have experienced negative consequences of that behavior, or have been trained to extinguish it. Recidivism is also used to refer to the percentage of former prisoners who are rearrested for a similar offense.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Halfway house</span> Institution that allows people to re-integrate into society

A halfway house is an institute for people with criminal backgrounds or substance use problems to learn the necessary skills to re-integrate into society and better support and care for themselves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prison education</span> Educational activities inside prisons

Prison education is any educational activity that occurs inside prison. Courses can include basic literacy programmes, secondary school equivalency programmes, vocational education, and tertiary education. Other activities such as rehabilitation programs, physical education, and arts and crafts programmes may also be considered a form of prison education. Programmes are typically provided, managed, and funded by the prison system, though inmates may be required to pay for distance education programmes. The history of and current practices in prison education vary greatly among countries.

Special Alternative Incarceration Facility (SAI) was an alternative prison in Chelsea, Michigan. It was formerly a minimum security boot camp (correctional) known as Camp Cassidy Lake for male and female probationers. The facility was a part of the Michigan Department of Corrections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">California Division of Juvenile Justice</span> Law enforcement agency in California, USA

The California Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), previously known as the California Youth Authority (CYA), was a division of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation that provided education, training, and treatment services for California's most serious youth offenders, until its closure in 2023. These youths were committed by the juvenile and criminal courts to DJJ's eleven correctional facilities, four conservation camps and two residential drug treatment programs. The DJJ provided services to juvenile offenders, ranging in age from twelve to 25, in facilities and on parole, and worked closely with law enforcement, the courts, district attorneys, public defenders, probation offices and other public and private agencies involved with the problems of youth. The DJJ underwent reorganization as required by a court agreement and the California State Legislature after widespread criticisms of conditions at its youth prisons. The agency's headquarters were in Sacramento, California.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison, Corcoran</span> Male-only state prison in California, US

California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison, Corcoran (SATF) is a male-only state prison located in the city of Corcoran, in Kings County, California, specifically designed to house inmates who have substance use disorder. It is sometimes referred to as California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility, and Corcoran II.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">California Rehabilitation Center</span> State prison in Norco, California, US

California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) is a state prison located in Norco, Riverside County, California. The prison is sometimes referenced as "Norco" or "Norco Prison".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Second Chance Act (2007)</span>

The Second Chance Act of 2007, titled "To reauthorize the grant program for reentry of offenders into the community in the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, to improve reentry planning and implementation, and for other purposes," was submitted to the House by Representative Danny Davis (D-IL) to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to reauthorize, rewrite, and expand provisions for adult and juvenile offender state and local reentry demonstration projects to provide expanded services to offenders and their families for reentry into society. H.R. 1593 was signed into law April 9, 2008.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incarceration of women</span> Imprisonment of women

Approximately 741,000 women are incarcerated in correctional facilities, a 17% increase since 2010 and the female prison population has been increasing across all continents. The list of countries by incarceration rate includes a main table with a column for the historical and current percentage of prisoners who are female.

Hawaii's Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) is an intensive supervision program that aims to reduce crime and drug use while saving taxpayers' dollars spent on jail and prison costs. HOPE deals with offenders who have been identified as likely to violate the conditions of their probation or community supervision.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incarceration of women in the United States</span> Topic page on incarceration of women

The incarceration of women in the United States refers to the imprisonment of women in both prisons and jails in the United States. There are approximately 219,000 incarcerated women in the US according to a November 2018 report by the Prison Policy Initiative, and the rate of incarceration of women in the United States is at a historic and global high, with 133 women in correctional facilities per every 100,000 female citizens. The United States is home to just 4% of the world's female population, yet the US is responsible for 33% of the entire world's incarcerated female population. The steep rise in the population of incarcerated women in the US is linked to the complex history of the war on drugs and the US's prison–industrial complex, which lead to mass incarceration among many demographics, but had particularly dramatic impacts on women and especially women of color. However, women made up only 10.4% of the US prison and jail population, as of 2015.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incarceration prevention in the United States</span> Methods to reduce prison populations in America

Incarceration prevention refers to a variety of methods aimed at reducing prison populations and costs while fostering enhanced social structures. Due to the nature of incarceration in the United States today caused by issues leading to increased incarceration rates, there are methods aimed at preventing the incarceration of at-risk populations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Relationships for incarcerated individuals</span> Familial and romantic relations of individuals in prisons or jails

Relationships of incarcerated individuals are the familial and romantic relations of individuals in prisons or jails. Although the population of incarcerated men and women is considered quite high in many countries, there is relatively little research on the effects of incarceration on the inmates' social worlds. However, it has been demonstrated that inmate relationships play a seminal role in their well-being both during and after incarceration, making such research important in improving their overall health, and lowering rates of recidivism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gender responsive approach for girls in the juvenile justice system</span>

Gender responsive approach for girls in the juvenile justice system represents an emerging trend in communities and courts throughout the United States, Australia and Latin America, as an increasing number of girls are entering the juvenile justice system. A gender responsive approach within the juvenile justice system emphasizes considering the unique circumstances and needs of females when designing juvenile justice system structures, policies, and procedures.

Gender-responsive prisons are prisons constructed to provide gender-specific care to incarcerated women. Contemporary sex-based prison programs were presented as a solution to the rapidly increasing number of women in the prison industrial complex and the overcrowding of California's prisons. These programs vary in intent and implementation and are based on the idea that female offenders differ from their male counterparts in their personal histories and pathways to crime. Multi-dimensional programs oriented toward female behaviors are considered by many to be effective in curbing recidivism.

Women in American prisons encounter numerous difficulties that often involve mental health problems, drug and alcohol issues, and trauma. These challenges not only make navigating the criminal justice system more difficult for women but also highlights broader societal issues such as, gender-based violence, economic inequalities, and lack of mental health support. People in prison are more likely than the general United States population to have received a mental disorder diagnosis, and women in prison have higher rates of mental illness and mental health treatment than do men in prison. Furthermore, women in prisons are three times more likely than the general population to report poor physical and mental health. Women are the fastest growing demographic of the United States prison population. As of 2019, there are about 222,500 women incarcerated in state and federal prisons in the United States. Women comprise roughly 8% of all inmates in the United States. This surge is largely attributed to the rising use of imprisonment for drug-related offenses rather than violent crimes. A considerable portion of incarcerated women are serving time for drug-related offenses, with the proportion increasing significantly between 1986 and 1991. Even among those in maximum security facilities, a majority are not imprisoned for violent felonies. The data also reveal that in states like New York, a substantial proportion of incarcerated women are serving time for drug-related offenses, with a smaller percentage incarcerated for violent crimes or property offenses.

Prisoner reentry is the process by which prisoners who have been released return to the community. Many types of programs have been implemented with the goal of reducing recidivism and have been found to be effective for this purpose. Consideration for the conditions of the communities formerly incarcerated individuals are re-entering, which are often disadvantaged, is a fundamental part of successful re-entry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Decarceration in the United States</span> Overview article

Decarceration in the United States involves government policies and community campaigns aimed at reducing the number of people held in custody or custodial supervision. Decarceration, the opposite of incarceration, also entails reducing the rate of imprisonment at the federal, state and municipal level. As of 2019, the US was home to 5% of the global population but 25% of its prisoners. Until the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. possessed the world's highest incarceration rate: 655 inmates for every 100,000 people, enough inmates to equal the populations of Philadelphia or Houston. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinvigorated the discussion surrounding decarceration as the spread of the virus poses a threat to the health of those incarcerated in prisons and detention centers where the ability to properly socially distance is limited. As a result of the push for decarceration in the wake of the pandemic, as of 2022, the incarceration rate in the United States declined to 505 per 100,000, resulting in the United States no longer having the highest incarceration rate in the world, but still remaining in the top five.

There are about 220,000 women currently incarcerated in America. Over 30% of these women are convicted prostitutes. Much of the research on the sex industry in prisons focuses on the experiences of women because the number of jailed female sex workers greatly outnumbers men. Prominent issues that the criminal justice system and women who are incarcerated on prostitution charges currently face include the sexually transmitted infections and diseases epidemic, the sex-work-prison cycle, and the prison-to-sex-trafficking pipeline. Intervention and diversion programs, both within prisons and in traditional and specialty courts aim to address these issues, decrease recidivism, and provide these women with resources to assist them in exiting the sex trade. There are a variety of community-based organizations which seek to help resolve these concerns.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Crittenden, C. A.; Koons-Witt, B. A. (28 August 2015). "Gender and Programming: A Comparison of Program Availability and Participation in U.S. Prisons". International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 61 (6): 611–644. doi:10.1177/0306624X15601432. PMID   26320030.
  2. 1 2 Belknap, Joanne (1 January 2010). ""Offending Women": A Double Entendre". The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 100 (3): 1061–1098. JSTOR   25766115.
  3. 1 2 3 Bloom, Barbara (September 1999). "Gender-Responsive Programming for Women Offenders: Guiding Principles and Practices" (PDF). Forum on Corrections Research. 11 (3): 22–27.
  4. ↑ Morash, Merry; Bynum, Timothy; Koons, Barbara (August 1998). Women Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising Approaches (PDF). Washington D.C.: National Institute of Justice.
  5. 1 2 3 4 Freedman, Estelle (2009). "Their Sisters' Keepers: Women's Prison Reform in America 1830-1930" (PDF). The University of Michigan Press. University of Michigan. Retrieved 2016-05-24.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Kassebaum, Patricia (2004). Substance abuse treatment for women offenders (PDF). Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment.
  7. ↑ Prendergast, Michael L.; Wellisch, Jean; Falkin, Gregory P. (1995-06-01). "Assessment of and Services for Substance-Abusing Women Offenders in Community and Correctional Settings". The Prison Journal. 75 (2): 240–256. doi:10.1177/0032855595075002007. ISSN   0032-8855.
  8. 1 2 3 Green, Carla (2006). "Gender and Use of Substance Abuse Treatment Services" (PDF). Health Services Research. 29 (1): 55–62.
  9. 1 2 3 Zaitzow, Barbara (2006). "Empowerment not Entrapment: Providing Opportunities for Incarcerated Women to Move Beyond 'Doing Time'" (PDF). Justice Policy Journal. 3 (1).
  10. 1 2 Lipton, D. S.; Falkin, G. P.; Wexler, H. K. (1992-01-01). "Correctional drug abuse treatment in the United States: an overview". NIDA Research Monograph. 118: 8–30. ISSN   1046-9516. PMID   1620228.
  11. 1 2 3 4 Nelson-Zlupko, Lani; Kauffman, Eda; Dore, Martha Morrison (1995-01-01). "Gender Differences in Drug Addiction and Treatment: Implications for Social Work Intervention with Substance-Abusing Women". Social Work. 40 (1): 45–54. doi:10.1093/sw/40.1.45. ISSN   0037-8046. PMID   7863372.
  12. ↑ Vigdal, Gerald; Stadler, Donald (1992). "Comprehensive System Development in Corrections for Drug-Abusing Offenders: The Wisconsin Department of Corrections" (PDF). NIDA Research Monograph. 118: 126–141.
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 Stephanie S. Covington PhD, LCSW (1998-02-12). "Women in Prison". Women & Therapy. 21 (1): 141–155. doi:10.1300/J015v21n01_03. ISSN   0270-3149.
  14. ↑ Zlotnick, Caron (2002). "Treatment of Incarcerated Women with Substance Use Disorder and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Providence, Rhode Island, 1999-2001". ICPSR Data Holdings. doi:10.3886/icpsr03416.v1.
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Flower, Shawn (2010). Employment and female offenders: An update of the empirical research (PDF). U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections.
  16. 1 2 3 4 Contardo, Jeanne; Tolbert, Michelle (2008). 1 Prison Postsecondary Education: Bridging Learning from Incarceration to the Community (PDF). New York: Reentry Roundtable on Education, John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
  17. ↑ Prendergast, Michael; Hall, Elizabeth A.; Wellisch, Jean (2003). "Outcome Evaluation of the Forever Free Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program at the California Institution for Women, 1997-2000". ICPSR Data Holdings. doi:10.3886/icpsr03442.v1.
  18. ↑ Richmond, Kerry M. (2014-07-04). "The Impact of Federal Prison Industries Employment on the Recidivism Outcomes of Female Inmates". Justice Quarterly. 31 (4): 719–745. doi:10.1080/07418825.2012.668924. ISSN   0741-8825.
  19. ↑ Young, Diane S.; Mattucci, Robert F. (2006-01-01). "Enhancing the Vocational Skills of Incarcerated Women Through a Plumbing Maintenance Program". Journal of Correctional Education. 57 (2): 126–140. JSTOR   23282704.
  20. ↑ "Pathways from Prison to Postsecondary Education Project" (PDF). Center Sentencing and Corrections. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-06-29. Retrieved 2016-05-24.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.