Kirsty Kitchen, Director of The Birth Companions Institute  

Evidence shows that what happens in the first 1001 days from conception to a child’s second birthday lays the foundations for their long-term physical and mental health and wellbeing. Yet the criminal justice system (CJS) – policing, courts, prison and probation – is ill-equipped to deal with this critical period in the lives of mothers and their babies. This is creating huge risks to women, and the life chances of their children. 

The publication of the Independent Sentencing Review, led by David Gauke, and the subsequent Sentencing Bill this year mark a pivotal moment in the ongoing campaign to reform the treatment of women within the CJS, and particularly pregnant women and mothers of young children.  

These developments give cause for cautious optimism…with some significant caveats and concerns. 

A welcome shift in principle 

The Independent Sentencing Review made a clear and powerful case for change. It recognised the disproportionate harm caused by imprisoning pregnant women and new mothers, and called for a more flexible, community-based approach to sentencing. The report explicitly stated that custody should be a last resort for these women, and recommended the expansion of suspended sentences and deferred sentencing to better accommodate their complex needs. It also centered on reducing crime, by engaging with the drivers of offending.  

We welcomed these recommendations wholeheartedly. For years, the charity Birth Companions has advocated for sentencing reforms that prioritise the health, wellbeing, and familial bonds of women in the criminal justice system, and the needs of their children. The proposed extension of suspended sentence orders to three years, and the increase in deferred sentencing, are particularly significant. These changes offer women the chance to stay in their communities, engage with health and social care services, stabilise their lives, and remain with their children—outcomes that are humane and more effective in reducing reoffending. 

The then Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood responded to David Gauke’s report in parliament by saying “I am particularly keen to ensure that pregnant women and mothers of young children are not anywhere near our female prison estate in future.”  

The Sentencing Bill: promise and pitfalls 

The Sentencing Bill, introduced in September, incorporates several of the Review’s key recommendations. It includes a presumption against short custodial sentences (under 12 months), enhanced bail provisions for pregnant women and primary caregivers, and the changes to suspended and deferred sentencing. These measures have the potential to significantly reduce the number of women in prison, including those on remand. 

However, as ever, the devil lies in the detail and in the implementation. The Bill’s provisions are embedded within a complex and often contradictory sentencing framework. Without clear guidance, robust oversight, and adequate resourcing of community-based alternatives, the reforms risk being undermined by systemic inertia and inconsistent application. 

While the Bill rightly acknowledges the need to consider pregnancy, caregiving responsibilities, and experiences of domestic abuse in bail decisions, it does not address the practical challenges that women face when subjected to electronic monitoring or curfews—particularly during late pregnancy or labour. Nor does it provide sufficient clarity on how probation services and voluntary sector partners will be resourced and enabled to meet women’s specific needs in pregnancy and early motherhood. 

Concerns over rhetoric  

In a letter to the Ministry of Justice following the Bill’s announcement, Birth Companions expressed concern over the framing and language used in official communications, which leant heavily on punitive rhetoric.  

The use of phrases such as “bed and board in prison covered by taxpayers” in the government press release, referring to the deporting foreign national offenders,  reinforces harmful narratives that have long shaped public attitudes and policy decisions around women’s offending. Plans to ‘name and shame’ those doing unpaid work as part of a community order through being photographed and named in the press create significant safeguarding risks to those serving sentences and their families.  

It was deeply disappointing to see no mention of the government’s approach to women in the CJS in the public announcement of the Bill. This omission, combined with emphasis on punishment, is harmful to the public’s understanding of the distinctive nature of women’s criminalisation. Instead it centres discourse on stigma and shame, and fails to engage with the structural drivers of women’s offending, which are overwhelmingly linked to poverty, trauma, and abuse. The announcement’s focus on deporting foreign offenders failed to acknowledge the specific vulnerabilities of foreign national women, many of whom may be victims of trafficking or coercive control.  

We have urged the government to adopt a more thoughtful and evidence-based approach to public communication around the Bill moving forward, to build understanding and support for reform rather than fuelling fear and division. 

Implementation: the critical next step 

The potential benefits of the Sentencing Bill will only be realised if its provisions are implemented with care, consistency, and a deep understanding of women’s lived experiences. This will require a coordinated effort across the criminal justice system, led by the Women’s Justice Board and supported by cross-governmental delivery groups. 

Key to this effort will be the role of women’s centres and specialist organisations. These services must be sustainably funded and empowered to provide support that addresses the root causes of offending with a prevention focus. They must also be able to work closely with a trauma-informed policing and probation system that recognises and responds to the needs of women, including pregnant women and mothers. Without this, even the most progressive sentencing options will fall short. 

In our campaign ‘1001 days in the CJS’, the Birth Companions Institute is calling for significant changes to policy and practice across the system, including: 

• An end to the imprisonment of women during the 1001 days, in all but the most exceptional of circumstances, including through remand and recall. 

 

• Increased use of community, deferred and suspended sentencing for women during the 1001 days. 

 

• Mandatory 1001 days impact assessments to inform sentencing decisions, license conditions and community orders. 

 

• New policy to guide police, prosecution and probation services in their work with women during the 1001 days. 

 

• Increased funding and support for community alternatives to custody to support women during the 1001 days, including investment in women’s centres and specialist services.  

 

• Improved recognition of, and responsiveness to, the needs of women who have CJS contact in the 1001 days across wider systems and services, including health, children’s social care, and housing. 

These changes would embed a trauma-informed and compassionate response to pregnancy and early motherhood throughout and beyond this system, improving outcomes for mothers and children, and breaking intergenerational cycles of harm and disadvantage.   

Conclusion 

Birth Companions remains committed to working with the Ministry of Justice, HMPPS, the Women’s Justice Board, and other partners to ensure that the promise of reform becomes a reality. We will continue to advocate for policies that prioritise care over custody, and for a justice system that truly understands and responds to the needs of women and their families. 

 

The Birth Companions Institute is a new centre of expertise focusing on achieving better care, equity and justice for pregnant women, mothers and their babies. It is part of the charity Birth Companions www.birthcompanions.org.uk/institute.   

Contact: institute@birthcompanions.org.uk