Analysing the impact of being a sole or primary carer for dependent relatives on the sentencing of women in the Crown Court, England and Wales
| Published date | 01 July 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/17488958221087490 |
| Author | Erica Kane,Shona Minson |
| Date | 01 July 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958221087490
Criminology & Criminal Justice
2023, Vol. 23(3) 366 –386
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/17488958221087490
journals.sagepub.com/home/crj
Analysing the impact of being
a sole or primary carer for
dependent relatives on the
sentencing of women in the
Crown Court, England and
Wales
Erica Kane
University of Leeds, UK
Shona Minson
University of Oxford, UK
Abstract
Most quantitative sentencing research treats women and men as a homogeneous group
leading to gaps in the literature regarding women’s experiences of sentencing procedures.
This is problematic given the vast array of known harms that result from incarcerating women,
particularly those with caring responsibilities for children. This exploratory article shares the
findings from a quantitative study which considers the sentencing of women, with a particular
focus on the ‘sole or primary carer for dependent relatives’ mitigation when applied to mothers.
Using data from the Crown Court Sentencing Survey 2011–2015, a sample of 18,314 women
defendants was derived and investigated using descriptive, bivariate and regression analysis to
explore the relationship between the ‘caring’ mitigation and non-custodial sentences. The findings
suggest that when the mitigation is applied to sentences of women who are carers of dependents,
it does not have a strong enough relationship with non-custodial sentences. This article provides
hitherto unknown statistical data and highlights the need for further research.
Keywords
Caring responsibilities, Crown Court Sentencing Survey (CCSS), maternal sentencing, personal
mitigation, women in prison
Corresponding author:
Erica Kane, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
Email: lw16em@leeds.ac.uk
1087490CRJ0010.1177/17488958221087490Criminology & Criminal JusticeKane and Minson
research-article2022
Article
Kane and Minson 367
Introduction
Women make up only 4% of the total prison population in England and Wales (Prison
Reform Trust, 2021). However, incarcerated women are one of the fastest growing prison
populations. Since 1993, the number of women in prison has more than doubled reaching
3130 in January 2021 (Prison Reform Trust, 2021). Many of these women are likely to
be mothers as although data are not collected about whether women in prison had
dependent children living with them prior to their imprisonment, recent inspections in
Her Majesty’s Prisons and Young Offender Institution Bronzefield and Peterborough
(HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, 2017, 2018) estimated that between 50% and 60% of
women in prison were mothers to children under 18 years. In the general population,
statistics on sole or primary carer status are not readily availble. However, a recent report
suggests that more women than men fulfill this role as it states that 75% of mothers with
children are in work compared to 93% of men (Office of National Statistics, 2019).
Therefore, it is very likely that women in prison who are mothers are also the primary
carer for their children. The combination of increased punitiveness and attention to sen-
tencing mothers and its consequences (Breger, 2012; Minson, 2015, 2019a) has created
an opportune time to statistically explore the effectiveness of any mitigations in place to
avoid such unwanted consequences.
In the Crown Courts of England and Wales, the recognition of a person’s sole or pri-
mary caring responsibilities can be applied as a mitigating factor in sentencing and has
been included in the list of mitigating factors in every sentencing guideline published
since the Assault Guideline in 2011 (Sentencing Council, 2011). An ‘expanded explana-
tion’ for this mitigating factor was set out in the General Guideline: Overarching
Principles which became effective in 2019 (Sentencing Council, 2019). This mitigation
can affect where the conviction sits within a category range, potentially lowering a sen-
tence from custody to a non-custodial punishment. Such a reduction enables a person to
continue to fulfil their caring responsibilities alongside their punishment. Although there
will be offences where the sentencing range excludes non-custodial options, 82% of
women in prison have been sentenced to less than 2 years, meaning that a non-custodial
or suspended sentencing option would be available to the sentencer (Ministry of Justice,
2020). In addition, Sentencing Guidelines do not regulate when and how a judge must
apply any factor in mitigation. This is concerning when the application of a mitigating
factor could, in the case of a primary carer, impact not only the defendant but also non-
offending third parties who require full-time care from the defendant.
The influence of mitigation is under-researched, with a focus on this particular factor
being rarer still (Minson, 2014). Studies centred around maternal sentencing have been
qualitative in nature, focussing on when judges take caring responsibilities into account,
the context surrounding these decisions and the impacts (Epstein, 2013; Minson, 2020;
Minson and Condry, 2015). Their findings include that sentencers are unsure when they
should apply mitigations for motherhood, can be reluctant to acknowledge the impacts
on children, and may not rate the caring mitigation as important compared to other fac-
tors. While the findings of these studies have provided key insights into the field of
maternal sentencing, there is still a need to explore how frequently the mitigation is
applied and its relationship to non-custodial sentences.
To continue reading
Request your trial