This guest blog is written by Andrew Lika, a recent law graduate at St John’s College, University of Cambridge, UK. Andrew is an advocate for victims and survivors of domestic abuse. He enjoys writing about social justice issues and is applying for postgraduate study in Criminology. You can contact Andrew at: andrewlika00@gmail.com.
The criminal justice system in England has long struggled to acknowledge and address the unique needs of women. Despite countless recommendations for improving the system’s response to women, progress has been slow. The government’s words have too often fallen short of its actions. The Female Offender Strategy (“FOS”) has not managed to buck this trend (Ministry of Justice, 2018). Five years since the Strategy’s publication, aspirational “commitments” have seldom been transformed into real change. Three key priorities formed the core of the FOS: (1) earlier intervention, (2) an emphasis on community-based solutions, and (3) making custody as effective and decent as possible for women who have to be there. The government’s framework for implementation insisted upon interventions that were “locally-led”, “partnership-focused”, and “evidence-based”.
Early intervention and diversion (priority one)
In priority one, the government aimed to identify and address women’s vulnerabilities to intervene before they commit crimes and enter the cycle of offending (Women in Prison, 2017). For example, in cases of domestic abuse, early help can have a positive impact on a mother and her child(ren) (McCarry et al., 2021), potentially supporting her to avoid coming into contact with the criminal justice system (Gilbert & O’Dowd, 2019).
Aim: £3.5m grant competition over two years. The grant competition was aimed at developing provisions for women who had suffered domestic abuse, maintaining and developing community services for women, and supporting local areas to develop and embed Whole System Approaches for female offenders (Ministry of Justice, 2018). According to the National Audit Office (2022), the initial estimate for funding to support 35 local areas was £3.4-3.5m. The government allocated just £1m to the cause, less than a third of what was initially proposed. The government spent £0. Given the MOJ’s emphasis on “locally-led” interventions, spending nothing on supporting local areas is an apparent failure of this aim. The programme was finalised after the spending review for April 2016-May 2020, limiting potential funding. In the government’s defence, two external factors impacted the government’s success. The MOJ focused spending on high-profile programmes such as reunifying probation services. The coronavirus pandemic also affected spending priorities.
However, privatising probation services through its Transforming Rehabilitation was a problem of the government’s making (McNeil, 2013). Finalising the programme after the spending review was a logistical failure. The pandemic may have been unforeseen, but funding decisions for the FOS were made long before the coronavirus reached our shores. Falling so far short of this, already disappointing, aiming to spend £3.5m can only be labelled a disaster. It is a blow to survivors of domestic abuse who require these services (Gilbert & O’Dowd, 2019; Williams & Earle, 2017).
Furthermore, there is no guarantee that funding would have reached organisations that support BAME women. These organisations are usually smaller, meaning they cannot devote enough resources to apply for grants. A recent positive step made by the government is funding Clinks to support these charities in making bids, though the effectiveness of this measure is yet to be measured.
Aim: Supporting the rollout of NHS-commissioned Liaison and Diversion (L&D) services. L&D services place clinical staff at police stations and courts across England and Wales to provide assessments and referrals to treatment and support. The MOJ has supported the rollout of L&D services, which have been successfully implemented in every police station across England and Wales (Prison Reform Trust, 2021). Furthermore, each service across England now has a dedicated women’s lead (Ministry of Justice, 2023). However, the FOS explicitly stated that “consideration will also be given to addressing the barriers that particular groups, such as sex workers and foreign national women, face in accessing services” (paragraph 45). The government’s FOS Impact Assessment claimed that a ‘Sex Workers Workshop’ took place in 2021 (Ministry of Justice, 2023). There is no further information on what this workshop entailed or its outcomes. There is no information about the government addressing barriers foreign national women face. So, while we celebrate the complete rollout of L&D services, we must hold the government to the standard it should set itself. Again, as in the case of Romany women, there are few signs of success in the government’s aims of addressing the unique needs of minority women.
Community solutions (priority two)
Seventy-seven per cent of women sentenced to custody in 2017 were given sentences under 12 months in length, compared to 62% of men. A key aim for the government was to reduce reoffending rates for women, which are historically higher than men’s (Prison Reform Trust, 2021; Hedderman & Jolliffe, 2015)). Amongst female offenders, short-term custodial sentences of less than 12 months have been associated with a statistically significant increase in proven reoffending compared to community orders or suspended sentence orders (Ministry of Justice, 2019). Community solutions in the FOS were also aimed at improving outcomes for women upon their release from prison. In 2021-22, 53% of women left prison without settled accommodation. Unsettled accommodation and homelessness are key risk factors in women’s reoffending (Prison Reform Trust and Women in Prison, 2018; Shelter, 2015).
Aim: Pilot five residential women’s centres (RWCs). Existing women’s centres at the time of the Corston Report, including Anawim and Scotland’s 218 centres, had successfully been used as referral centres for women who offend or are at risk of offending, as well as their use as court and police diversions. Creating lines of communication between courts, police, and women’s centres is vital in establishing a multi-agency approach to women’s justice, which has been proven to reduce reoffending (Holloway et al., 2017). Demand for women’s centres has long exceeded supply, leading to women missing out on vital services (Women in Prison, 2012). The FOS proposed the creation of more RWCs to address this gap between supply and demand. Unfortunately, none of the women’s centres envisioned by the FOS had been built by 2022 (National Audit Office (2022). This was purportedly due to insufficient space and resources (ibid). In 2021-22, the MOJ announced spending £3.5m on these centres. In 2022, they reduced this figure to just £0.5m. The government’s failure to follow through on a critical intervention, crucial for their vision of Whole System Approaches to women in the CJS, constitutes a devastating failure.
Aim: Increase community sentences and decrease custodial sentences. The government reports that the proportion of community sentences has increased from 5% to 6% since the FOS (Ministry of Justice, 2022). Though a slight increase, this is a positive sign. It is plausible that this increase is directly linked to the rise in PSRs. Nevertheless, the total number of Out of Court Disposals has dropped in the same timeframe and has nearly halved between 2012 and 2022 (Prison Reform Trust, 2023). 58% of prison sentences given to women were less than six months (Prison Reform Trust, 2023). In Nottinghamshire, this figure was an astonishing 73% (ibid). In Greater Manchester, an area with an integrated Whole System Approach, this figure was 54% in 2022, 14 percentage points lower than just eight years prior. This is clear evidence of the positive effect WSAs would have on local justice. Thus, despite the increased proportion of community sentences being delivered, short prison sentences are still far too high. The government still must do more to improve the judiciary’s confidence in using community sentences for less serious offences.
Better custody (priority three)
Amongst many of women’s unique needs (see blog post for more detailed discussion: Managing Female Offenders in England and Wales), mental health is a particular concern for women in prison. In 2021, 350 female prisoners per 1,000 prisoners self-harmed, compared with 135 per 1,000 for males. The Ministry of Justice has reported that the number of instances of self-harm per self-harming person was also higher for women (Ministry of Justice, 2022). Additionally, 46% of female prisoners have attempted suicide at some point, compared with 21% of male prisoners (Light et al., 2013).
Aim: Reduce the female prison population. The female prison population has decreased by 16% from 2018-2021 (Ministry of Justice, 2022). This reduction may indicate fewer custodial sentences for women, but the National Audit Office (2022) reported a lack of direct evidence supporting this claim. The MOJ’s 2021 report links the decrease in the female prison population to the COVID-19 pandemic. Shoplifting, one of the most commonly committed crimes by women, became less prevalent due to the closure of most shops. The addition of 500 new prison places to the women’s estate at a reported cost of £200 million seems to contradict the government’s aim to reduce the female prison population and focus on community solutions (National Audit Office, 2022). This raises questions about whether the government had considered that more community orders would decrease the number of women in custody, thereby decreasing the demand for prison places. The Prisons Strategy White Paper (2021) states that some women still need custody, and the government maintains that more prison places would lead to women prisoners being treated with more dignity.
Aim: Developing a trauma-informed approach to working with women. Since the FOS, staff in women’s prisons have received training to work effectively with women who have experienced trauma. The impact of trauma and abuse is increasingly being taken into account in the women’s estate, with support offered at Bronzefield, Eastwood Park, New Hall, and Foston Hall (HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 2023). This is a clear sign of success. The design of new buildings housing the proposed 500 additional women’s prison places would also be “trauma-informed” (The Rt Hon Victoria Atkins MP, House of Commons, 2021). This would include, for example, removing bars from windows (Q323, ibid). While it is welcome that more consideration is given to improving prison conditions by addressing trauma, it remains unclear why existing prisons could not be renovated at a cheaper cost.
Aim: Review the operation of Mother and Baby Units (MBUs). Encouraging and supporting family ties can increase women’s chances of desisting upon release (Rodermond et al., 2015). The influence of family ties on desistance is stronger for women than for men (ibid). Lord Farmer’s 2019 review found that, on average, women were imprisoned 63 miles from their families, negatively affecting women’s ties with family and friends (Lord Farmer, 2019). The government has reviewed the operation of MBUs and published a new policy framework. It has successfully introduced Pregnancy and MBU Liaison officers in all women’s prisons. The Prisons Survey found that MBUs at Bronzefield, Eastwood Park and New Hall supported women and their children very well. This shows that the government listened to and responded to Lord Farmer’s review and is a sign of success in addressing concerns around mothers in custody and the effects this has on children.
Aim: Increase racial diversity across HMPPS, with a 14% target for BAME employees across the Service. The 2017 Lammy Review called for more BAME representation in HMPPS. A 2022 HMIP review focused on the experiences of adult male black prisoners and black staff in prisons (HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, 2022). The results showed that diversity in prisons is crucial, as black male prisoners reported feeling less isolated and more likely to seek support in facilities with more black staff (ibid). As of March 31, 2023, 83.4% of staff declared their ethnicity in surveys, with 12.6% identifying as BAME (Ministry of Justice, 2021). Although this falls short of the government’s 14% target, it represents clear progress from the 10.5% figure in January 2017. However, the government must now prioritise closing this data gap to accurately assess diversity progress in the HMPPS workforce.
Conclusion
In response to the criticisms the government faced of its FOS and recommendations by the National Audit Office’s Report (2022), the government published the Female Offender Strategy Delivery Plan 2022-25. To address the progress of their FOS commitments, the government produced a matrix with a traffic light system to signal if a commitment has been completed or is still in progress, broadly replicating the Prison Reform Trust’s 2021 Matrix. The Delivery Plan’s Impact Assessment effectively sets out specific, measurable targets. One target, aimed at addressing early intervention and diversion (priority one), states that a grant competition of up to £15.5m will provide funding to support vital community services for women. Such targets present a step in the right direction.
The FOS Delivery Plan has shown some promising early signs but has replicated some of the same errors that caused the FOS to fail (see blog post: Managing Female Offenders in England and Wales). While it is still too early to judge the overall success of the MOJ’s Female Offender Strategy, it is clear that progress has been limited so far. Despite over 15 years since Baroness Corston’s review, there is still a lack of visible progress in meeting the unique requirements of women in our criminal justice system. This highlights the need for a more comprehensive approach that takes into account the specific needs of female offenders, such as trauma-informed care, mental health support, and alternatives to custody. It is clear that more work needs to be done to ensure that women in the criminal justice system receive the support they need to overcome the unique challenges they face.
This guest blog is the intellectual property of © Andrew Lika.
The blog site is © Natasha Mulvihill and Criminology Tales, 2023.
Criminology Tales 
You must be logged in to post a comment.