This article presents findings from a new qualitative study into female offenders' experiences of restorative conferencing in England and Wales. It is argued that gendered factors of crime and victimization have a definite impact on the restorative conference process, particularly in the areas of complex and interacting needs, differently natured conference engagements, and risks around shame, mental health, and stereotypical ideals of female behavior. For women to reap the full benefits of restorative justice, it is argued that the particular needs and circumstances of female offenders must not only be acknowledged, but also incorporated into the field and mainstreamed into practice.

No abstract

No abstract

Despite a recent increase in restorative justice practice in the criminal justice system, to date there has been no in-depth consideration of the impact of gender in these settings. This paper presents findings from a unique qualitative study on female offenders' experiences of restorative conferencing in England and Wales, drawing on interviews with practitioners who have worked with female cases, as well as with women who have gone through a restorative justice conference in a perpetrator capacity. Gender specific factors, suggested to be especially valuable for practitioners to consider when delivering effective and ethical restorative conferences with female offenders, are outlined.

Recent years have seen an emerging link between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and criminal behaviour. Sweden is a leader in this field of research, and high levels of ADHD are reported in the Swedish criminal justice system. The aetiology of the condition, however, remains unclear and there is definite ambivalence in the literature regarding both diagnosis and treatments. Offering a unique qualitative perspective on the role of ADHD diagnoses, this article critically explores female first‐hand narratives of ADHD in the Swedish criminal justice system. A number of diagnostic functions are proposed; (i) on the individual level – via a rationalised explanatory framework of behaviour; (ii) on a societal level – with attention effectively being deflected from social and environmental contexts; (iii) on an institutional level – linked to the medicalised management of offender populations, and lastly; (iv) on a broader market level – including huge pharmaceutical interests in a relentlessly expanding ‘treatment’ market.