Recognition is not reform (yet) - reflections on the Women’s Justice Board recommendations

The publication of the Women’s Justice Board recommendations marks an important moment in the conversation about women and the criminal justice system in England and Wales. At Coming Home, we welcome the seriousness with which the issue of women’s imprisonment is now being approached at a national level.

We also want to acknowledge the people behind the work. The Board brings together an impressive group of advocates, researchers and sector leaders whose work has shaped the discussion on women and justice for many years. The inclusion of lived experience voices is particularly important. Advocates such as Michaela Booth represent the reality that policy must be informed by those who have experienced the system directly. The work of criminologists such as Dr Shona Minson has helped illuminate the wider consequences of imprisonment, particularly for children and families, alongside the influence of Dame Vera Baird, whose longstanding work has helped bring women’s experiences within the justice system into public and policy focus, cannot be ignored.

These voices matter. They represent decades of advocacy, research and lived experience that have pushed the issue of women’s imprisonment further into the national conversation.

But while we welcome the recommendations, we also find ourselves asking a familiar question.

Does this go far enough?

In terms of the recommendations themselves, the direction of travel is absolutely right. The emphasis on reducing the use of custody, expanding community provision and recognising the complex social drivers of women’s offending reflects what practitioners and researchers have been saying for decades.

The difficulty has rarely been the absence of knowledge.

The difficulty has been implementation.

Nearly twenty years ago, the Corston Report laid out a clear blueprint for reform. It called for a system that recognised the distinct experiences of women, the prevalence of trauma and abuse in women’s pathways into offending, and the need for community based support rather than imprisonment. Since then, review after review has reached similar conclusions. The evidence is not new. The solutions are not unknown. Yet the system continues to rely on imprisonment for women whose lives are often already shaped by profound social harm long before they enter the criminal justice system.

There is, however, one recommendation that deserves particular recognition. The proposal to drastically reduce, and in most cases end, the imprisonment of pregnant women represents a significant and humane step forward. For too long, pregnancy has intersected with custody in ways that create profound risks for both mother and child. A justice system that recognises pregnancy as an exceptional circumstance, requiring care and protection rather than incarceration, is long overdue. If implemented properly, this change could mark an important shift in how vulnerability and motherhood are understood within sentencing and custody decisions.

The government has announced £32 million of funding linked to the Board’s work. Any investment in women’s services is welcome; but the reality is that organisations working directly with justice involved women have long operated in an environment defined by short term funding cycles, restricted grants and constant uncertainty about sustainability.

If genuine reform is the goal, investment must look different.

Women’s services require longevity. They require stability. They require the freedom to respond flexibly to the realities women face when leaving prison - unstable housing, financial hardship, trauma, stigma and barriers to employment. Work of this nature cannot be delivered through short term pilots or tightly restricted funding streams. It requires trust in the organisations doing the work.

There is an interesting parallel here with the leadership philosophy of James Timpson, now serving as Minister for Prisons and Probation. The Timpson company became well known for its “upside down hierarchy” model, where decision making authority sits closest to those delivering the service. The people on the frontline are trusted to understand what their communities need.

If that same principle were applied to women’s justice reform, we might finally see the kind of progress that has been recommended for decades.

Because the truth is that the community sector already understands what works.

Across the country, women’s centres and grassroots organisations have spent years supporting women to rebuild their lives through trauma informed practice, practical skills and meaningful opportunities. These organisations have continued this work despite limited resources, often delivering outcomes that policy frameworks aspire to achieve.

At Coming Home we see this transformation regularly.

Since the pilot phase of our programme began, every woman who has taken part has remained offence free for more than 12 months. The majority are now in employment, volunteering roles, further education or have taken on caring responsibilities - and all have secured stable housing and remain connected to a supportive community network.

These outcomes are not achieved through punishment.

They come through opportunity, stability and belief.

The Women’s Justice Board represents a genuine opportunity to move the conversation forward. The recommendations are thoughtful, informed by evidence and shaped by people who understand the realities of women’s lives.

But after two decades of reports and strategies, the real test will not be what has been written.

It will be whether the system is finally prepared to act on what we already know.