Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:03:27.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Solving Her Problems? Beyond the Seductive Appeal of Specialist Problem-Solving Courts for Women Offenders in England and Wales

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2019

GEMMA BIRKETT Open the ORCID record for GEMMA BIRKETT [Opens in a new window]
GEMMA BIRKETT*
Affiliation:
Senior Lecturer in Criminology, City University of London, Department of Sociology, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB email: Gemma.Birkett.1@city.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

At the nexus of the social and penal policy fields, problem-solving justice promises to punish offenders while working to address the complex issues that drive their law-breaking behaviour. Appealing to the left and right due to its dual focus on pragmatism and welfarism, the concept has floated in and out of political fashion for the past two decades. Recent years have heralded a renewed political interest in the approach, closely aligned to the Conservative government’s commitment to ‘transforming justice’. With a focus on empowerment and collaboration, the problem-solving model has much to offer women offenders in particular. Drawing on data from a large-scale study into the sentencing and punishment of women under the new probation arrangements, this article reveals a divergence of views on gender-specific courts among sentencers, probation officers and third sector workers. Moral concerns about up-tariffing sit alongside the practical barriers of government bureaucracy and hindering legislation. With data pertaining to effectiveness (rather than potential) still required, this article argues that specialist problem-solving courts for women present a risky strategy, however seductive their promise.

Keywords

problem-solving justicepenal welfarismwomen offendersnet-widening
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , January 2021 , pp. 104 - 121
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berman, G. and Fox, A. (2009), Lasting Change or Passing Fad? Problem-Solving Justice in England and Wales, London: Policy Exchange.Google Scholar
Birkett, G. (2016), ‘We have no awareness of what they actually do’: Magistrates’ knowledge of and confidence in community sentences for women in England and Wales’, Criminology and Criminal Justice 16:4 497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkett, G. (2018), ‘Sentencing Women in the Transformed Probation Landscape’ in E. Milne, K. Brennan, N. South and J. Turton (Eds.) Women and the Criminal Justice System: Failing Victims and Offenders?, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Birkett, G. (2019), ‘Transforming women’s rehabilitation? An early assessment of gender-specific provision in three Community Rehabilitation Companies’, Criminology and Criminal Justice 19:1 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calderbank, L., Fuller, M. and Hardwick, N. (2011), Thematic Inspection Report: Equal but Different? An Inspection of the Use of Alternatives to Custody for Women Offenders, London: HM Inspectorate of Probation.Google Scholar
Centre for Justice Innovation (2016), Problem-Solving Courts: An Evidence Review, London: Centre for Justice Innovation.Google Scholar
Centre for Social Justice (2017), What Happened to the Rehabilitation Revolution?, London: Centre for Social Justice.Google Scholar
Donoghue, J. (2014), Transforming Criminal Justice? Problem-Solving and Court Specialisation, Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eunson, J., Murray, L., Graham, H., Malloch, M. and McIvor, G. (2018), Review of The Aberdeen Problem Solving Approach, Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.Google Scholar
Fawcett Society (2012), The Impact of Austerity on Women. Available at: https://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=f61c3b7e-b0d9-4968-baf6-e3fa0ef7d17f Google Scholar
Flynn, S. (2005), ‘The Red Hook Community Justice Center: An Evaluation of a Community Court’, The Journal of Psychiatry and Law 33:1 43–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garland, D. (2001), The Culture of Control, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelsthorpe, L. (2017), ‘The Potential and Pitfalls of ‘Problem-Solving-Courts for Women’, Howard League ECAN Bulletin 33.Google Scholar
Gelsthorpe, L. and Hedderman, C. (2012), ‘Providing for women offenders: The risks of adopting a payment by results approach’, Probation Journal, 59:4 374–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelsthorpe, L., Sharpe, G. and Roberts, J. (2007), Provision for Women Offenders in the Community, London: Fawcett Society.Google Scholar
Gibbs, P. (2014), Fit for Purpose: Do Magistrates Get the Training and Development They Need?, London: Transform Justice.Google Scholar
Hedge, J. (2007), Increasing the confidence of sentencers in community penalties: A programme of work with magistrates in the Thames Valley 2006/7. Available at: http://rethink.org.uk/publications/index.shtml.Google Scholar
Heidensohn, F. (1985), Women and Crime, New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation (2016), Thematic Inspection of the Provision and Quality of Services in the Community for Women Who Offend, Manchester: HMIP.Google Scholar
Home Office (2002), Justice for All, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Home Office (2003), Respect and Responsibility – Taking a Stand Against Anti-Social Behaviour, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Home Office (2007), The Corston Report: A Review by Baroness Jean Corston of Women with Particular Vulnerabilities in the Criminal Justice System, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Home Office (2009), Engaging Communities in Criminal Justice, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Hough, M., Jacobson, J. and Millie, A. (2003), The Decision to Imprison: Sentencing and the Prison Population, London: Prison Reform Trust.Google Scholar
House of Commons Justice Select Committee (2016), The Role of the Magistracy. Sixth Report of Session 2016-17. HC 165, London: House of Commons.Google Scholar
Howard League (2016), Is this the end of women’s centres? Pamphlet published on behalf of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Women Offenders. Available at:http://women’s-breakout.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/11/Is-it-the-end-of-womens-centre.pdf Google Scholar
Jacobson, J. and Fair, H. (2016), Problem-Solving Approaches: A Review of Learning from the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust Prison Reform Fellowships – Part III, London: Prison Reform Trust.Google Scholar
Kinsella, R., Clarke, B., Lowthian, J., Ellison, M., Kiss, Z. and Wong, K. (2018), Whole System Approach for Women Offenders Final Evaluation Report. Manchester Metropolitan University Policy Evaluation and Research Unit. Available at: https://www.mmuperu.co.uk/assets/uploads/files/WSA_FINAL_REPORT_18_05_30.pdf Google Scholar
Lee, C., Cheesman, F. Rottman, D., Swaner, R., Lambson, S., Rempel, M. and Curtis, R. (2013), A Community Court Grows in Brooklyn: A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Red Hook Community Justice Center, Willamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Mair, G. and Millings, M. (2011), Doing Justice Locally: The North Liverpool Community Justice Centre, London: Centre for Crime and Justice Studies.Google Scholar
Marougka, M. (2012), Sentencing women: Considering the factors that influence decision-making, The Griffins Society Research Paper, 2012/03.Google Scholar
Marples, R. (2013), ‘Transforming Rehabilitation: The risks for the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector in engaging in commercial contracts with tier 1 providers’, British Journal of Community Justice, 11:2/3 21–32.Google Scholar
McIvor, G. (2009), ‘Therapeutic jurisprudence and procedural justice in Scottish drug courts’, Criminology and Criminal Justice, 9:1 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Justice (2012), North Liverpool Community Justice Centre: Analysis of Re-Offending Rates and Efficiency of Court Processes. 10/12, London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
Ministry of Justice (2013), Strategic Objectives for Female Offenders, London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
Ministry of Justice (2016), Government Response to the Justice Committee’s Sixth Report of Session 2016-17: The Role of the Magistracy, London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
Ministry of Justice (2018a), Female Offender Strategy, London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
Ministry of Justice (2018b), A Whole System Approach for Female Offenders: Emerging Evidence, London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
New Economy (2013), Stockport Problem-Solving Court: An Evaluation of the Pilot Scheme. Available at: http://www.neweconomymanchester.com/media/1397/stockport_problem_solving_court_pilot_evaluation_-_final.pdf Google Scholar
Plechowicz, L. (2015), ‘Women’s Centres’, in Annison, J., Brayford, J. and Dearing, J. (Eds.), Women and Criminal Justice: From the Corston Report to Transforming Rehabilitation, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Povey, L. (2017), ‘Where welfare and criminal justice meet: applying Wacquant to the experiences of marginalized women in austerity Britain’, Social Policy and Society, 16: 2 271–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prison Reform Trust (2018), Broken Trust: The rising numbers of women recalled to prison, London: Prison Reform Trust.Google Scholar
Radcliffe, P., Hunter, G. and Vass, R. (2013), The development and impact of community service for women offenders: An evaluation, London: ICPR, Birkbeck College.Google Scholar
Richardson, E., Thom, K. and McKenna, B. (2013), ‘The Evolution of Problem-Solving Courts in Australia and New Zealand: A Trans-Tasman Comparative Perspective’ in Weiner, R. and Brank, E. (Eds.), Problem-Solving Courts, New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Scottish Government (2012), Commission on Women Offenders. Available at: https://www2.gov.scot/Resource/0039/00391828.pdf Google Scholar
Slinger, E. and Roesch, R. (2010), ‘Problem-Solving Courts in Canada: A Review and a Call for Empirically-Based Evaluation Methods’, International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33:4 258–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, J. (2014), Are problem-solving courts the way forward for justice? Howard League What is Justice? Working Papers 2/2014.Google Scholar
Wexler, D.B. (2001), ‘Robes and Rehabilitation: How Judges Can Help Offenders ‘Make Good’. Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper 38 Ct. Review. 18.Google Scholar
Worrall, A. (1981), ‘Out of Place: Female Offenders in Court’, Probation Journal 28:3 90–93.Google Scholar
Worrall, A. (1990), Offending Women, London: Routledge.Google Scholar