A closer look at electronic monitoring and women
Electronic monitoring is becoming an increasingly popular tool in the criminal justice system, supposedly offering an alternative to traditional forms of custody, including remand and supervision.
However, while much of the focus on its use has been on the general offender population, Revolving Doors believe there is a pressing need to understand how electronic monitoring uniquely impacts women, as the system, like so many criminal justice systems was built upon expectations and assumptions about male offending and lifestyles.
Yet, women in the criminal justice system often face distinct challenges, such as caregiving responsibilities, experiences of trauma, and socio-economic disadvantages, all of which can make their experiences with electronic monitoring vastly different from those of men.
It’s worth noting that compliance rates with tags for women are typically lower than for men. Many women report that their non-compliance was due to running essential errands or attending to childcare, with single mothers particularly vulnerable to breaching the conditions of their monitoring.
One particularly poignant insight from our female members is that wearing a tag can increase their vulnerability to exploitation by inadvertently exposing their vulnerabilities to exploiters.
“It [wearing a tag] highlighted to my exploiters that I was already committing crimes so they could persuade me to commit more crimes. It highlighted that I was a vulnerable young woman who could be taken advantage of because I was clearly in trouble. I don’t think it was a positive experience for me. I was pregnant when I was on tag and was tagged to an unsafe area. The police and council knew I was in the area of my exploiters, but I had to go there or I would be remanded. How many more women are tagged to unsafe areas too?”
The idea of a tag increasing a woman’s risk of victimisation and targeting is something that has been given little consideration until now, but which should be explored more fully before a tag is issued. We believe that in cases like the one our member outlined above the choice should not be a binary one between remand or tagging – but should instead be about putting a support package in place instead.
The forum also discussed how wearing a tag can severely impact self-esteem and contribute to cycles of isolation. One woman shared how the tag made her feel trapped and alienated, which hindered her rehabilitation:
“I was on tag for about eight weeks – it was really detrimental to how I felt about myself and the relationship I had with the police. It negatively affected my mental health because I was in hostels at the time, alone, and I was a teenager trapped. It’s also detrimental to rehabilitation and fitting into the community. If I wanted to do a course, it would make it clear I was different from everyone else.”
Another woman described how the visibility of the tag exacerbated her friend’s mental health struggles and led to further isolation:
“A friend of mine in the AA fellowship is not attending meetings due to the embarrassment of the tag being so visible (big and bulky). It’s also difficult for her to build relationships and make friends with others within the fellowship due to the stigma of the tag (people feel intimidated which creates tension). She, therefore, is now isolating and doesn’t talk to anyone, which is now affecting her sobriety and has escalated her mental health issues. So yes, I agree that the tags should be made less visible.”
Beyond the stigma and social isolation, there is also the issue of tagging being potentially triggering for women who have experienced abuse and coercive control in the past. The experience of being curfewed and tagged to a specific address can feel eerily similar to the control tactics used by their abusers.
“For so many women who have been controlled throughout their lives, this feels like the worst control ever, where you know that the authorities know where you are at all times.”
However, some women in our forum did express gratitude for the option of electronic monitoring, particularly as it allowed them to remain with their families.
“I’ve completed four tags. One was 4.5 months, one was 6 weeks. I believe that tags are very good, especially for women, but I do believe they should be less obvious.”
For those serving prison sentences, the prospect of early release with a tag was seen as a lifeline.
“When I realised I could get out of prison early on tag, it gave me something to look forward to. Tags are hideous and could be more discreet, but it’s worth it.”
On the other hand, being denied a tag, particularly after making significant progress during their sentence, was devastating for some women.
“I was refused tag at Drake Hall, but I’d done everything on my sentence planning and more – I got off drugs and meds, but then I got the knockback, and it was mortifying. It was because my address was previously used by my partner for crime.”
The experiences shared by the women in our forum highlight the complex and often challenging impact of electronic monitoring on women in the criminal justice system. While electronic monitoring can offer significant benefits, particularly as an alternative to incarceration, it is clear that a one-size-fits-all approach does not work.
Revolving Doors is committed to advocating for a more nuanced and gender-responsive approach to electronic monitoring—one that takes into account the specific needs and circumstances of women. By listening to the voices of those directly affected, we can work towards a system that not only protects public safety but also supports the rehabilitation and well-being of women in the justice system.
