A Tennessee woman filed suit in federal court Thursday, alleging that corrections officers at a prison owned and operated by Corrections Corporation of America required her to expose her genitalia to officers so they could "verify" that she was menstruating after they spotted a feminine sanitary napkin in her pocket.

The lawsuit seeks to have CCA's "strip-search policy" declared unconstitutional along with compensatory and punitive damages for the officers' "unconscionable and callous regard" for the woman's rights.

The woman, who was visiting an inmate at the prison at the time of the alleged incident, is only identified in the suit as Jane Doe. Her attorneys have also filed a motion that would allow her name to be disclosed to the court and the defendants, but kept from the public "because of the extremely humiliating and embarrassing nature" of the alleged incident. CCA, which has its headquarters in Nashville, is the nation's largest for-profit prison company. The company currently runs six facilities in Tennessee and finalized contracts for one more last year.

CCA, Avril "Butch" Chapman — the warden of South Central Correctional Facility — and six other CCA employees are named in the suit (although their full names are not included as, according to the suit, the plaintiff does not know their complete names and would likely add them during discovery).

The Scene has asked CCA for comment.

Here is the incident, as alleged in the lawsuit:

On the morning of April 20, 2014 Jane Doe arrived at South Central Correctional Facility in Clifton to visit an inmate "as she had done many times before." After clearing the first security screening, she came to a second checkpoint where one of the corrections officers noticed a feminine sanitary napkin protruding from her pocket. After telling the officers that she was menstruating she voluntarily removed the sanitary napkin and showed it to the officers, who told her they would have to give her a "CCA-approved sanitary napkin."

At that point, according to the suit, one of the officers identified only as Defendant Garska, "said words to the effect of, 'But I'll have to make sure you are...'" When Jane Doe asked how the officers planned to make sure she was menstruating, the officer allegedly responded "we'll have to see."

The suit claims that the officers then took the woman to a vacant restroom, where they conducted a pat-down search and found no contraband on her. When she asked the officers what CCA policy they were acting under, the suit claims, the officers didn't respond. But an SCCF visitor policy cited in the suit says "should you refuse to consent to the search of your personal vehicle or attempt to evade/flee without being searched, your visitation privileges may be permanently suspended from any CCA/TDOC facility."

According to the suit, the woman offered several options that might prove to the officers that she was menstruating without her undergoing a "full-fledged search of her genitals" — the suit claims she offered to urinate in a toilet without flushing, so they could "see the toilet bowl containing her urine and uterine blood" or change her sanitary pad "and show the officers the pad containing her menstrual blood in the trash."

But the suit claims the officers "refused" her "requests for accommodation." Then, according to the suit, this happened:

30. Defendants Garska and Herndon used their radios to call for a female correctional

officer. 31. Later, a female correctional officer, Defendant Qualls, arrived and asked Plaintiff,

“What’s going on?” 32. Plaintiff responded that she was on her period. 33. Defendant Qualls said, “Oh great,” in a sarcastic tone of voice, and immediately walked into a women’s restroom at SCCF. 34. Plaintiff entered the restroom, still asking what she was supposed to do. 35. Defendant Garska said, “Show me.” 36. Defendant Garska stood directly in front of Plaintiff, and Defendant Qualls stood near the door of the restroom. Defendants Herndon and John Roe stood outside the door. 37. Plaintiff asked Defendant Garska words to the effect of, “What do you want me to

do?” 38. Defendant Garska replied, “What do you think? Show me!” 39. Plaintiff pulled her pants and underwear down, exposing her genitalia. Defendant Garska visually inspected Plaintiff’s exposed genitalia and looked upon her vaginal area. Defendant Garska positioned herself so that her eyes were approximately level with Plaintiff’s hips and unclothed pelvic area. 40. After Defendant Garska was satisfied that Plaintiff was menstruating, Ms. Doe was permitted to raise her pants and exit the prison’s visitation-area restroom. 41. Defendants then permitted Plaintiff to proceed with her visitation.

After her visit, the suit claims that the woman called the facility to inquire further about the policy. The suit says she asked CCA's chief of security "for any reason, should a female visitor be asked to remove her pants and underwear for a search," even one to "prove she's on her menstrual cycle" and that the response was "Yes."

The suit accuses CCA and the top officials at the prison of inadequately training and supervising the corrections officers, and argues, among other things, that the woman's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated.

Update 1/23 9:15 a.m.:

You can read the whole complaint here.

And a press release from the woman's attorney's at Ozment Law here.

“The public should be able to visit their loved ones in prison without having to endure an invasive and humiliating search in violation of their constitutional rights,” says Tricia Herzfeld, senior counsel at Ozment Law. “Ms. Doe was forced to show her private parts to complete strangers. This behavior is unacceptable in a civilized society.”

Over at WPLN they have a comment from CCA spokesman Jonathan Burns. He tells the station that the company is taking the allegations “extremely seriously" but he "added that the company policies on searches and contraband are set by the governments they contract with — in this case the Tennessee Department of Correction."