Search results

There is a lack of clarity about the prevalence of offenders with learning disabilities and learning difficulties. However, it is clear is that, regardless of actual numbers, many offenders have learning disabilities and learning difficulties that interfere with their ability to cope within the criminal justice system. No One Knows is a UK‐wide programme led by the Prison Reform Trust that aims to effect change by exploring and publicising the experiences of people with learning disabilities and learning difficulties who come into contact with the criminal justice system. The article highlights the aims of the No One Knows programme and considers recent research on prevalence, drawing attention to some of the reasons for the different findings.

No One Knows (Prison Reform Trust, 2008) is concerned with people with learning disabilities and difficulties who come into contact with the police and who enter the criminal justice system. The terms ‘learning disabilities’ and ‘learning difficulties’ are often used interchangeably to describe people with an intellectual disability, excluding those who, for example, have dyslexia. No One Knows, however, has adopted a more inclusive approach, and has included in its remit offenders with learning disabilities as defined by the World Health Organisation as well as those with a broader range of learning difficulties. Although there is some disagreement on prevalence, it is clear that a large number of people with learning disabilities and difficulties are caught up in the criminal justice system. Once in the criminal justice system, people with learning disabilities and difficulties, because of their impairments, struggle to cope. At worst this can affect their right to a fair hearing in court and, if they are sentenced to custody, may mean longer in prison. UK criminal justice agencies do not recognise, let alone meet, the particular needs of people who have learning disabilities or difficulties.

No One Knows is concerned about people with learning disabilities and difficulties who get into trouble with the police and who enter the criminal justice system. The terms ‘learning difficulties’ and ‘learning difficulties’ are often used interchangeably to describe people with an intellectual disability, excluding those who, for example, have dyslexia or Asperger syndrome. No One Knows, however, has adopted a more inclusive approach and has included in its remit offenders with learning disabilities as defined by the World Health Organization as well as those with a broader range of learning difficulties. Although there is some discrepancy on prevalence, it is clear that high numbers of people with learning disabilities and difficulties are caught up in the criminal justice system. Once in the criminal justice system it is unlikely that an individual with learning disabilities or difficulties will be identified or that their support needs will be met. This causes difficulties for the individual concerned and for the staff who work with them, who receive little or no training for working with this group of people. The question of whether people with learning disabilities (meaning intellectual disabilities) should be diverted from the criminal justice system is considered.

No One Knows is a major initiative by the UK Prison Reform Trust which highlights the plight and predicament of prisoners with learning disabilities and of those with less severe degrees of learning difficulties. This major initiative has been sponsored by the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund and has yielded a number of pivotal recommendations which are already being explored actively by the Department of Health (England) and the Prison Health Service.

Social Identity Theory proposes that identity and thinking style are strongly related. Research also suggests that the process of depersonalization is responsible for shifting from personal identity to social identity and assimilating group attitudes. The purpose of this study is to investigate the nature of personality in the relationship between criminal social identity and criminal thinking style.

The Measure of Criminal Attitudes, the Measure of Criminal Social Identity, and The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire was administrated to a sample of recidivistic male prisoners with learning difficulties (n=312).

Sequential moderated multiple regression analyses indicated the unique main effect of extraversion, psychoticism, in‐group affect, and in‐group ties on criminal thinking style. In terms of the moderating role of personality, the in‐group affect was more strongly associated with criminal thinking for low levels of extraversion, whereas high levels of extraversion moderated the positive relationship between in‐group ties and criminal thinking style.

The findings provide the first empirical support for the moderating role of personality in the relationship between criminal identity and criminal thinking style of offenders with learning difficulties.

Although precise numbers are unknown, it is generally acknowledged that between 5‐10% of the offending population are people with learning disabilities. While there are few provisions that explicitly target defendants with learning disabilities there is a general recognition in law that defendants must be able to understand and participate effectively in the criminal proceedings of which they are a part. The implications of the principle of effective participation are that criminal prosecution may be deemed inappropriate for certain defendants with learning disabilities, in which case they may be diverted away from criminal justice and into health care. There is scope for a variety of measures to be put into place to support defendants with learning disabilities to maximise their chances of participating effectively. However, in terms of statutory provision, there is a lack of parity between vulnerable witnesses and vulnerable defendants. Further, the absence of effective screening procedures to identify defendants' learning disabilities means that their support needs often go unrecognised and unmet.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the experience of a southern English young offenders institution in developing and implementing standards to improve awareness and care of prisoners with autistic spectrum disorders (ASD).

Some contextual factors driving the project are discussed, the multi-agency process involved in the development and implementation of the standards is described and recommendations are made regarding implementation of the standards in other settings.

It is expected that successful implementation of the standards will reduce the level of distress and difficulty experienced by people with ASD who find themselves in custody, it will also improve the prison’s ability to meet the needs of prisoners with ASD and thereby improve rehabilitation and reduce any adverse impact on everyday operational processes. Demonstrating success in meeting the standards will enable the prison to achieve accreditation by the National Autistic Society. In March 2015 the prisons minister encouraged all prisons to follow this approach and this will have practice and resource implications.

This paper describes a clear framework which prisons can use to work systematically towards achieving good practice in addressing the needs of prisoners with ASD. It will enable prisons to meet the duties imposed on them by the Autism Act, 2009 and the Equalities Act, 2010.

The purpose of this paper is to review the evidence on providing services to people with neurodevelopmental disorders in prisons, with a focus on those prisoners with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

Electronic databases were used to search for literature specifically on ASD in prisons. The literature was supplemented with the authors’ experiences of carrying out research on ASD in prison.

The searches only identified four articles and therefore the broader literature on people with ASD and other developmental disorders was reviewed in relation to the prison context.

The paper highlights the current limited evidence base on prisoners with autism spectrum disorders.

This paper aims to examine the relationship between patterns of functioning in four domains (attention and concentration; social and communication; coordination and organisation; and literacy and numeracy) in women in prison. Also, to consider potential associations between functioning and previous Neurodevelopmental Disorder (NDD) diagnoses, previous mental health diagnoses and history of head injury, self-harm and attempted suicide.

Women in one Scottish prison were invited to participate; 87 consented. Women were screened for functional difficulties and asked about their relevant educational and medical history.

Half of participants reported difficulties in one or more domains. All possible combinations of functional difficulties were found. Only eight women reported previous NDD diagnoses. Functional difficulties were significantly associated with history of self-harm, history of attempted suicide and mental health diagnoses. In total, 32% of women reported at least one head injury, but this was not significantly associated with functional difficulties.

The sample was comparatively small and questions were self-report. Analyses were based on within-cohort comparisons due to a lack of appropriate general population data.

There is a clear need for timely, practical and comprehensive profiling of females in the Justice System. Current systems do not appear to adequately identify women with functional difficulties or other adversity. Greater use of interdisciplinary working and shared training is indicated, as is a move from categorical diagnostic systems towards dimensional approaches.

This study is the first to investigate associations between difficulties associated with NDDs, mental health difficulties and head injury in women in prison.