Women who challenge - Nacro

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CHAPTER 4schemes – uses drug workers, whose function isto identify drug misusers at police stations atthe point of arrest and to refer them forappropriate treatment. The strategy documentclaims that pilot schemes have achieved an 80%reduction in offending by those successfullyreferred for treatment but, as with other drugservices, it appears that women may be lesslikely than men to access help through theschemes. Research into barriers to access bywomen has apparently been initiated.The second – the Drug Treatment and TestingOrder (DTTO) – was introduced by the Crimeand Disorder Act 1998. It provides courts withthe option to sentence an offender to drugtreatment, provided the person consents, and isaimed specifically at those who commitproperty crimes in order to fund a drug habit.The sentencing court is able to monitor theoffender’s progress and response to treatmentby means of regular testing. In its strategydocument, the Government indicates that usageof the order in terms of gender breakdown willbe monitored. The Howard League for PenalReform 3 has assessed the effectiveness of pilotschemes in terms of their impact in meeting theneeds of women offenders. It believes the DTTOhas considerable potential for reducing thenumbers of women in prison, if the specificneeds of women are addressed in itsdevelopment.The Committee considers that a key element ofany strategy aimed at women offenders must bethe policy for tackling drug dependency andmisuse and wholeheartedly supports initiativeswhich work with offenders in the community soas to avoid sentencing offenders to custody.The Committee urges that all such new initiativeswithin the criminal justice system should beapproached with gender sensitivity and that theassessment of any gender bias or barriers toaccess should automatically be an integral partof any evaluation process.A major problem so far as women prisoners areconcerned is that the vast majority are servingshort sentences (75% of women prisoners areserving sentences of 12 months or less,according to the strategy document), whichgives very little opportunity for them to getaccess to drug rehabilitation programmes whilein prison or to benefit from them.The Committee recommends that there should bea major initiative to ensure that every prisonerwith a drug problem is identified – no matterhow short their sentence – and arrangementsmade for them to receive post-release help in thecommunity. For this to be achieved, there will bea need, above all, for a genuinely joined-upapproach to work with women offenders,involving a wide range of agencies from thePrison Service through CARATS initiatives toProbation; Drug Action Teams (DATs); local drug,health and mental health services; and thevoluntary sector.When it comes to mental health, the strategydocument refers to the Government’scommitment to modernising health and socialservices, as set out in the Mental HealthNational Service Framework, published by theDepartment of Health 4 , which is consideredseparately below (see page 34), and to theexistence of court assessment schemes atmagistrates’ courts, which, it says, theGovernment encourages.The Committee is very disappointed that thestrategy for women offenders proposes nothingnew to tackle mental health issues.As we have seen, court assessment or diversionschemes provide courts with advice ondefendants’ mental condition and any necessarytreatment, enabling the courts to make referralsto mental health services where appropriate,instead of automatically pursuing a prosecutionwith the prospect of mentally disturbedoffenders ending up in prison.There are 200 or so such schemes throughoutEngland and Wales and Nacro’s Mental HealthAdvisory Committee has worked hard topromote their use as part of effective interagencyworking in dealing with mentallydisturbed offenders. However, as we said inChapter 3 – and the report of the Health SelectCommittee 5 makes clear – current arrangementsare far from adequate. In his review of diversionwork, James (1999) 6 concluded that, if court3 The Howard League for Penal Reform (2000) A Chance to Break theCycle: Women and the Drug Treatment and Testing Order London:Howard League for Penal Reform4 Department of Health (1999) National Service Framework for MentalHealth: Modern Standards and Service Models London: Department ofHealth5 Health Select Committee (2000) op cit6 James D (1999) op citpage 32
Women who challenge: women offenders and mental health issuesdiversion was to be successfully developed as auseful tool, there needed to be central planningfor a comprehensive strategy based on joinedupthinking at government level, which wouldfacilitate inter-agency working at a local level.He expressed the view that diversion servicesneed to become an integral part of mainstreampsychiatric provision if they are to becontinued. This is also the view of Nacro’sMental Health Unit which is working on behalfof the Home Office to achieve this.The Health Select Committee recommended thatit should be a requirement for courts and localmental health providers to liaise so that allcourts had access to a court diversion scheme.Although the Government’s stated aim is toencourage such schemes, so far nothing hasbeen done to implement the Health Committee’srecommendation and there is nothing in thestrategy on women offenders to suggest that itintends to do so. The Mental Health NationalService Framework includes several referencesto the existence of court diversion schemes andsays that they should be linked into local mentalhealth services. It also says that effective out-ofhoursservices should be accessible to thecriminal justice system. However, there isnothing to stipulate that all courts should haveaccess to a court diversion scheme.Notwithstanding the Government’s claims tosupport court diversion schemes, far frompromoting the establishment of furtherschemes, central funding for existing schemes isbeing withdrawn with effect from April 2002and schemes will in future have to be supportedentirely through local resources.The Committee does not object in principle toschemes being funded at a local level butquestions whether this move gives the rightmessage at a time when the establishment offurther schemes needs to be encouraged and thecentral planning and comprehensive strategyrecommended by James, which we endorse, havenot yet been put in place.The Health Select Committee also recommendedthat research should be commissioned toimprove the efficacy of court diversionschemes. Research to date has been limited,especially in relation to their efficacy for womenoffenders.The Committee believes further research isneeded:• to establish whether there is any gender bias inthe use or efficacy of diversion schemes• to determine the effectiveness of such schemesin identifying the particular problems ofwomen offenders• to establish what constitutes best practice forthe purpose of identifying mentally disturbedoffenders.The evidence in Chapter 2 above indicatesclearly that, as with male offenders, the peakperiod for female offending is the teenage years.The strategy document states that research isbeing carried out into two crime reductionprojects aimed at young people, to ensure thatspecific lessons can be learned about the riskfactors predictive of offending in young women.The Committee believes that research is alsoneeded into the identification of that proportionof young offenders who will not grow out ofoffending but will go on to commit a catalogue ofoffences. Gender differences in this group needto be analysed so that the specific problems oftackling their reoffending can be considered.A key omission from the strategy – no doubtdue to the fact that so little attention is paid tomental health issues – is recognition thatdeviant behaviour may be seen as criminal,when in fact it represents the first stages of adeveloping mental disorder, and proposals forhow this issue should be addressed. This isparticularly important in relation to disorders,such as the schizophrenias, which have definedperiods of onset.The Committee recommends that the importanceof this issue should not be overlooked in theformulation of an offending strategy.At the end of September 2001, the Governmentannounced that a major cross-governmentalstrategy – the Women’s Offending ReductionProgramme 2002-2005 – was being launched inthe light of the feedback received in response tothe strategy document published the previousyear. That feedback has been published in afurther report 7 , from which five key messageshave been identified:7 Home Office (2001a) The Government’s Strategy for Women Offenders:Consultation Report September 2001 London: Home Officepage 33
Page 2: Women who challenge:women offenders
Page 7: Women who challenge: women offender
Page 10 and 11: CHAPTER 2Table 1 Offenders found gu
Page 12 and 13: CHAPTER 2study by Dell et al (1993)
Page 14 and 15: CHAPTER 2indicated above, it is dif
Page 16 and 17: CHAPTER 2Table 4 Patients admitted
Page 18 and 19: CHAPTER 3‘typically male’ (viol
Page 20 and 21: CHAPTER 3health problems have been
Page 22 and 23: CHAPTER 32% had a child with foster
Page 24 and 25: CHAPTER 3the frustrations of female
Page 26 and 27: CHAPTER 3women shown by the statist
Page 28 and 29: CHAPTER 3remand and 41% of female s
Page 30 and 31: CHAPTER 3seclusion was used primari
Page 32 and 33: CHAPTER 4What are Government strate
Page 36 and 37: CHAPTER 4• alternatives to custod
Page 38 and 39: CHAPTER 4In the case of women espec
Page 40 and 41: CHAPTER 4distributed throughout hea
Page 42 and 43: CHAPTER 5Where do we go from here?I
Page 44 and 45: CHAPTER 5Accessing a job and/or tra
Page 46 and 47: CHAPTER 5Evidence from the CARAT pr
Page 48 and 49: BibliographyAllen H (1987) Justice
Page 50 and 51: APPENDIX 2Service modelsForensic me
Page 52 and 53: APPENDIX 2Community-based servicesB
Page 54 and 55: APPENDIX 2The SamaritansThe Upper M

Women who challenge - Nacro

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?