Gendering Police Custody: Learning about, and from, women’s experiences of police custody
A gap in our knowledge: women’s experiences of police custody
Police custody is arguably the most important phase of the criminal process. It involves the deprivation of a person’s liberty and evidence gathered during their detention and questioning is often determinative of whether the case will proceed to prosecution, to other less formal modes of case disposition, or indeed whether the police will take no further action in the matter. The fair and appropriate treatment of those detained is therefore crucial. Although women make up a significant minority of suspects detained (around 16%: Home Office, 2025), police custody in England and Wales remains a space heavily dominated by men, not only in terms of detainees but also in the demographics of custody officers and the procedures in place to deal with those detained. What is more, women are a cohort who may be likely to present distinctive needs, risks and experiences. Despite this,
there has been remarkably little research conducted to date on the adequacy of treatment provided to women detainees or the wider suitability of the custody environment for them as a cohort.
This is so, notwithstanding high-profile instances of poor practice that have been uncovered in both Greater Manchester and the Metropolitan Police forces, which give rise to particular concern (Casey, 2023; Baird, 2024). Following a review of existing legislation, practice guidance, policy and academic literature, a team of researchers – based across the Universities of Sheffield, Warwick and Cardiff – concluded that women’s treatment in police custody had rarely been considered in any depth within the wider body of empirical police custody research. What is more, despite there being numerous policies and procedures that regulate the custody environment, specific reference to the needs and experiences of women within them was markedly absent; and, in the wider context of the various policy and practice reviews regarding women’s general treatment in the criminal process, there was a paucity of focus on police custody specifically (Skinns et al, 2026).
The police data: how women arrive and are treated in custody
With funding from the Police Chief Scientific Office under the STAR fund scheme, our team - working in collaboration with West Yorkshire Police (WYP) - set out to bridge this knowledge gap. We conducted an analysis of over 52,000 WYP custody records which provided data in relation to all those aged 16 and over who had been held in 2025. From this, we extrapolated key information regarding detainees’ demographic profiles as well as markers regarding their treatment during, and outcomes from, police detention. This demonstrated that, in 2025, some 17% of detainees aged 16 or over were women. Overall, women tended to be arrested for less serious offences than men, with the three main reasons for women’s arrest relating to violence against the person, summary (ie minor offences tried in the magistrates’ court) non-motoring and theft offences. Within this violence against the person category, we found a particularly high prevalence amongst women (c.f. men) detainees of offences involving assault of an emergency worker, and of cruelty to, or neglect of, children; and in line with this we found that child protection was indicated as a factor in the arrest of a greater percentage of women (6%) than men (3%). Men were somewhat more likely than women to remain in detention overnight, and the time between arrival and first disposal tended to be somewhat shorter for women also. The data suggested that handcuffs and force were more likely to be used in the arrest and detention of men than in respect of women, but women were slightly more likely than men to experience strip searches (recorded for 4% of women, c.f. 3% of men).
Notably, a considerably greater proportion of women than men indicated that they had needs or vulnerabilities that were relevant to their treatment in custody: 67% of women reported suffering from mental health problems, depression or being mentally vulnerable (c.f. 49% of men); 63% of women said they were taking or supposed to be taking medication (c.f. 47% of men); and 51% of women reported having tried to self-harm (c.f. 35% of men). Women’s responses to risk assessment questions demonstrated a heightened level of risk and need overall, when compared to the responses provided by men detainees; although of course there may also be gendered dimensions to that disclosure.
In terms of first disposal outcomes, we found that women were more likely to receive a ‘no further action’ decision (32.2% of women, c.f. 25.7% of men), and for those charged as the first disposal, women were more likely than men to receive conditional bail. The rate of ‘no further action’ for women was particularly high in relation to cruelty to, or neglect of, a child and assault of an emergency worker, which made up a substantial proportion of the violence against the person offences for which they were arrested; and in many other arrests, it later emerged that the women had in fact been the victim of domestic abuse but detained following counter-allegations made by their partner.
Observations and interviews
This custody data from WYP thus reflects a predicted pattern at national level – of women being arrested less frequently than men, but also for less serious offences, and for having more, or more-pronounced, needs and potential vulnerabilities during their detention.
Our research sought to learn more about whether and/or how women’s pre-existing vulnerabilities may be heightened by their experience of a custody space that is dominated by men (both detainees and staff) and has not been designed with their gender-specific needs in mind.
Alongside the custody record analysis, we conducted a total of 179 hours of observation across day-to-day operations of two busy WYP custody suites and of relevant out-of-court-resolution and scrutiny panels where decisions regarding entry into, treatment during, and outcomes arising from police detention were reviewed. In addition, we undertook a total of 96 semi-structured interviews, spanning 44 women with lived experience of police custody (across a range of age groups and ethnicities), 43 police custody staff and stakeholders in the West Yorkshire police force area, and 9 national level custody experts.
Our findings
These observations and interviews underscored the extent to which the custody environment can feel male-dominated and especially oppressive for women, many of whom have experienced abusive treatment by men in their lives.
Though most shifts in custody were staffed by a mix of men and women, the gender balance among staff was precarious, with reports of difficulties in finding a woman officer at short notice for incoming women detainees, even despite the introduction of a commitment to providing a ‘female welfare officer’ as a ‘single point of contact’ for women coming into police custody. Those fulfilling this point of contact role did so with differing levels of experience and enthusiasm, and in some cases, it was apparent that it had been taken on as a consequence of the necessity of being the only woman on staff in a position to do so. Even when access to a woman officer was initially provided, the remainder of women detainees’ treatment in custody was inevitably provided for by men. This was often distressing for women, who felt surveilled by men while in their cell, especially when required to remove a religious head covering , or when using the toilet facilities. Though providing a gender-matched point of contact does not automatically ensure improved treatment, for those detainees who express this preference, it is likely to increase the chances of disclosure of welfare needs or concerns that might otherwise be left unspoken. Further measures to increase this likelihood, which we found to be relatively rarely relied upon in custody suites, include the use of separate and private spaces in which women could be booked in and made to feel sufficiently comfortable to discuss sensitive issues.
Our data also highlighted the extent to which women’s needs during detention should not be uncritically assumed to be the same as men.
As noted above, women enter custody disclosing poorer mental and physical health than their men counterparts; women may be breastfeeding, pregnant, menstruating, or menopausal. They are more likely to have caring responsibilities, and with lesser support structures in place to ‘pick this up’ whilst they are detained. Though much of this is formally addressed in risk assessment questions asked of detainees on arrival into custody, we found that this was sometimes raised by staff in a robotic and rushed manner, with little opportunity for comprehension or anything beyond the briefest of responses. There was also a sense amongst some of our interviewees, that women detainees were more likely to be seen by staff as problematic and demanding, either because of their complex needs or emotionality. Though all detainees have key rights and entitlements in custody, we found that women’s access to this was inconsistent with opportunities to shower, have time outside, or speak to healthcare professionals not always being offered. Some women interviewees also reported having been denied requests made to custody staff for more toilet paper or food. Much work has been done in police custody spaces to provide easier access to menstrual products for women detainees, but we continued to detect hesitancy amongst some staff to broach this subject and such products were not always routinely provided. Women that we spoke to who were menstruating during detention often highlighted difficulties associated with not being able to wash, or wash their hands properly, in cells.
While the concept of vulnerable detainees is not a new one in police custody, it was clear in our data that staff had conflicting views about the extent to which it was appropriate to consider women as a cohort vulnerable on account of any gender-specific need. Some suggested that to do so would be “offensive” to women; and there was a tendency instead for staff to look for particular markers of vulnerability disclosed or exhibited by individual women. This, however, was not a neutral process. Although we did observe instances of patience, presence and recognition of women’s distress, with staff providing sensitive onward referrals and treatment driven by care, we also encountered several instances where women’s disclosures appeared to be met with scepticism and a lack of sympathy.
It is of credit to WYP that they opened their doors to us, allowing researchers into custody and providing us with extensive custody record data and access to officers. They demonstrated a desire to understand how their processes work in practice, and how the care and treatment of women in their custody might be improved. This is vital research and while conducted in the WYP area, as a large metropolitan force, our observations and findings are likely to be typical of other areas of the country too.
The research points to the need for a national interrogation of women’s routes into and out of, and treatment during, police custody with our findings suggesting that there is much more to be done in order to understand their gender-specific needs and to ensure that these are responded to appropriately and on a consistent basis.
You can watch a short animation in which the two main characters reflect many of the stories, experiences and treatment of women detainees in our research.
Prof Vanessa Munro & Prof Jackie Hodgson, School of Law, University of Warwick