…two of every five aboriginal women offenders have a maximum security classification.⁵⁵

According to CSC’s own review of the issue:

…decisions based on the presence or absence of factors such as employment, education or family and community support – all areas where aboriginal offenders are often disadvantaged – discriminatory results follow from ostensibly neutral processes.⁵⁶

The Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action recently summarized one aspect of the discriminatory impact of CSC’s classification system in its submission to the United Nations:

…Those with mental health illnesses or disabilities find themselves with higher security classifications because their illness or disability is seen as a risk. Equating mental illness or disability with risk and assigning a higher security classification is discriminatory.⁵⁷

Hannah-Moffat and Shaw observed in their comprehensive study regarding CSC’s classification system:

…current risk-based classification systems and that used by CSC, in particular, are limited in terms of gender and diversity by:

• their failure to recognize the difference of gender and race;

• their inability to view problems holistically/contextually;

• their restriction of information to objective facts;

• their underlying subjectivity;

• the dominance of one perspective on criminal behaviours; and

• the theoretical and methodological limitations of studies that seek to make claims about the validity and reliability of these tools for women.⁵⁸