Women offenders: after the Corston Report - United Kingdom ...

Ev 82Justice Committee: Evidence14. The general view amongst sentencers and lawyers was that the probation service had no discretion aboutinstigating breach proceedings and that orders were enforced rigorously. Those who failed to comply withcommunity penalties were likely to be sentenced to custody, albeit often for short periods. Such action wasvery much regarded by sentencers as a “last resort” and had a huge impact on the lives of the women concerned,and that of their families. The short duration of the majority of such sentences meant that there was little timefor resettlement planning in the custodial phase. Despite some interesting initiatives in two of the prisons wevisited, most of the women we spoke to felt that too little was being done to assist them on their release.15. The importance of effective engagement with the women offenders whilst subject to any form ofcommunity supervision was therefore crucial and more attention needed to be given, in our opinion, topromoting compliance. The vast majority of the offender managers we interviewed had positive relationshipswith the women they supervised. However, we were somewhat disappointed by the lack of empathy shown bysome for the women they supervised and their low level of knowledge about how to work differently with thisgroup of offenders. Some offender managers lacked understanding about the range of resources available tothem or otherwise failed to engage women positively in the supervision process. Too often they allowed processand performance measures to dominate their thinking and, despite the work that had been undertaken at astrategic level, often within their own region, lacked the awareness and underpinning knowledge to work withwomen effectively.Conclusion16. A considerable amount of work had been undertaken at a strategic level to ensure that the specific needsof women were taken into account within the criminal justice system and it was evident that sentencers wereworking hard to establish the right balance, when taking decisions in court, between the gravity of the offence,the needs of the woman and the risk of harm she posed to others. Nevertheless, many women, often those whoposed only a low risk of harm to others, continued to find themselves in custody, frequently for breaching theircommunity order or licence.17. It would therefore appear to be a case of a “work in progress”. We found that the non-custodial optionsbeing put forward and taken up in respect of women offenders were credible to the courts but not always tothe women themselves, as shown by their lack of engagement and failure to comply with the basic requirementsof their supervision including attending appointments and undertaking work designed to reduce their likelihoodof reoffending. Some offender managers clearly still lacked the skills and knowledge to work with womenoffenders effectively. The work undertaken at a strategic level now needs to be consolidated in order to embedthe changes required into practice. The maintenance of this agenda would be challenging at any time and willbe particularly so during a period of budget constraints, significant organisational change and conflictingpriorities, but is crucial if the investment already made is to be fully realised.September 2012Written evidence from Voices from Prison, facilitated by Women in Prison 131. The Suitability of the Women’s Custodial Estate: Availability of Appropriate Provision1.1 Women with children— “I am a mother of five boys and one girl and at my youngest’s 9th birthday party I was arrested andtaken to my local police station for non-payment of Council Tax fine. I arrived at the police stationand the gentleman in charge of custody phoned the local council who said that my debt was beingpaid but on the wrong bill—and that apparently there was nothing they could do because the Courthad already made an order that I do 46 days in prison. I was taken straight to Bronzefield with noclue what was happening.”— “This has specifically affected me as I have recently been transferred from HMP Peterborough (27/6/12) to HMP New Hall. Peterborough is my allocated prison and my nine year old twins come ashort distance from Stevenage, North Hertfordshire, to visit me every family visiting day. I last sawthem on 2 April and was due to see them again on 23 July but now I am stuck in Yorkshire and itis too far for them to travel. I have been told I was moved because of the Olympics and there willbe no possibility of a transfer back until their conclusion. This may well result in me not seeing mychildren for seven weeks and has caused both them and myself great distress. They also tried totransfer me to New Hall on 2 April due to ‘overspill’ but they didn’t make me go as I was due tosee my children that day. There is clearly no forethought whatsoever in the process by which people13Women in Prison have been providing support services to women affected by the Criminal Justice System for more than 28years. In the year 2011—2012, 4,689 women accessed our support in prison and in the community. The extracts below are takenfrom letters received and 1–2-1 contact with the women we work with. It is not intended to cover the entire remit of this inquirybut to give voice and some expression to those women who do experience prison, as opposed to legislative and statisticalinformation covered by other submissions.