Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of assisted desistance from the perspective of women involved in the criminal justice system. It focusses on two community projects set up in the aftermath of the 2007 Corston Report, Northshire Women’s Centres (WCs) and the Housing for Northshire project. Design/methodology/approach Through analysis of a year of observation in these settings and 23 narrative interviews with staff and service users, the paper notes the differences between risk-focussed and desistance-focussed justice for women. Findings Neither projects are a panacea; however, they offer an insight into desistance-focussed practice. The findings would suggest that the projects provide social justice as opposed to criminal justice, particularly because of their flexible approach and awareness of the relational elements involved in female desistance. Originality/value The in-depth, qualitative data provided challenges the “payment by results” rhetoric which demands positivist research that promotes an understanding of desistance as a binary outcome. Implications for policy are considered.

中文翻译：

---

性别辅助中止：距离科斯顿十年

目的本文的目的是从参与刑事司法系统的妇女的角度研究辅助性中止的作用。它关注于2007年《科尔斯顿报告》之后设立的两个社区项目，北郡妇女中心（WCs）和北郡住房项目。设计/方法/方法通过对在这些环境中观察到的一年的观察结果进行分析，以及对员工和服务使用者进行23次叙述性访谈，该论文指出了针对女性的以风险为重点和以戒断为重点的司法之间的差异。调查结果这两个项目都不是万能药。但是，他们提供了以停战为中心的练习的见识。调查结果表明，这些项目提供的是社会正义，而不是刑事正义，尤其是因为他们灵活的方法和对女性戒断所涉及的关系因素的认识。原创性/价值所提供的深入，定性的数据对“按结果付费”的说法提出了挑战，这需要实证主义研究，以促进人们对作为二元结果的抗震性的理解。考虑政策的含义。