Why Women Need Tech Spaces After Prison
The digital divide is no longer just about access to devices or internet—it is about access to opportunity. For formerly incarcerated women, this divide is particularly wide. As technology rapidly advances, women reentering society often lack the digital literacy required to compete in the workforce, navigate essential online systems, and secure stable employment (Pew Research Center, 2021). Tech spaces designed specifically for formerly incarcerated women are not a luxury—they are a necessity.
The Hidden Costs of Digital Exclusion
Digital skills have become essential for social and economic reintegration. From applying for jobs and accessing healthcare, to managing finances and education, digital competence is foundational for success in modern life (van Dijk, 2020). Yet, incarcerated individuals, especially women, are cut off from technology for extended periods, leaving them unprepared for the digital-first society they return to (Latessa & Lovins, 2019).
This lack of digital literacy directly affects reentry outcomes. Research shows that individuals who lack basic tech skills face higher rates of unemployment and economic instability—both key risk factors for recidivism (Duwe & Clark, 2017). For women, who already face additional challenges such as child reunification and gender-based trauma post-release, this digital exclusion further compounds barriers to successful reintegration (Bender et al., 2016).
Why Tech Spaces Must Be Gender-Responsive
Women often experience incarceration differently from men, with unique trauma histories, mental health needs, and caregiving responsibilities (Covington, 2008). Standard workforce training programs often fail to address these gender-specific barriers. Tech training programs for formerly incarcerated women must be trauma-informed, supportive, and designed to meet their realities (Bloom et al., 2003).
Gender-responsive tech hubs can do more than just teach technical skills; they can create environments of empowerment where women rebuild confidence and see themselves as innovators and leaders. Such spaces can serve as incubators for entrepreneurial ventures, app development, or digital advocacy platforms led by women with lived experience (Doleac & Mukherjee, 2018).
Innovation as Liberation
Empowering women with tech skills is not just about employment; it is about liberation and self-determination. When women gain access to digital tools and education, they are better positioned to support their families, contribute to community development, and avoid cycles of poverty and incarceration (Pager, 2003).
Imagine a reentry program where women learn to build websites, code applications, or launch e-commerce businesses—skills that are portable, scalable, and in high demand. Studies show that technology training and digital equity initiatives can significantly improve job prospects and income stability for marginalized groups (Eubanks, 2018).
A Call to Action
To bridge the gap, policymakers, funders, and tech leaders must:
Fund tech hubs tailored for formerly incarcerated women.
Develop trauma-informed digital literacy and coding curricula (Sweeney et al., 2020).
Partner with grassroots reentry organizations that understand the lived realities of these women.
Create pathways to paid internships and apprenticeships in tech industries.
Include system-impacted women in tech equity policy discussions to ensure solutions are informed by lived experience.
Technology can be a powerful equalizer—if everyone has equitable access. For women leaving prison, tech spaces are more than training programs; they are pathways to dignity, economic independence, and lasting change.
References
Bender, K., DePrince, A., & Belknap, J. (2016). Risk and protective factors of incarcerated women for post-release employment. Prison Journal, 96(2), 183-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885515623985
Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2003). Gender-responsive strategies: Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders. National Institute of Corrections.
Covington, S. (2008). Women and addiction: A trauma-informed approach. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 40(s5), 377–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2008.10400665
Doleac, J., & Mukherjee, A. (2018). The labor market effects of criminal records: Evidence from an online job board. American Economic Review, 108(6), 170-174.
Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2017). The rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders: The current landscape and future directions for correctional programming. Corrections, 2(4), 283-306. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2017.1367750
Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press.
Latessa, E., & Lovins, B. (2019). Correctional interventions: Evidence-based strategies. Routledge.
Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108(5), 937–975. https://doi.org/10.1086/374403
Pew Research Center. (2021). Internet/Broadband Fact Sheet. https://www.pewresearch.org
Sweeney, C., Delaloye, N., & Henry, M. (2020). Digital equity for returning citizens: Technology access and skills after incarceration. Urban Institute.
van Dijk, J. (2020). The digital divide. Polity Press.
