top of page
Search

When Women Carry the Weight of Desistance: Reflections on Our New Article


New publication

For years, desistance research has highlighted the importance of intimate relationships in helping people move away from offending. But one question has remained largely unasked: what does this support demand from women?


Our new article, published in the Howard Journal of Crime and Justice, takes this question seriously. Working with a co‑authored case study, Dr Lauren Hall, "Karla" and I, explore the emotional, practical and relational labour women often shoulder when supporting a partner’s desistance — labour that is rarely acknowledged, let alone supported.


Why We Need to Rethink “Supportive Relationships”

Much of the desistance literature celebrates the stabilising role of partners. Yet this framing can unintentionally reinforce gendered expectations: that women should absorb the emotional fallout, manage crises, provide unconditional encouragement, and hold everything together.

The Desistance Emotional Work (DEW) framework was developed to name and analyse this hidden labour. Our article builds on DEW by adding a “pains of desistance” lens. This recognises that women, as affected others, can experience their own harms, pressures and losses when supporting someone through the long, often not linear, process of change. 

What the Case Study Revealed

Through one woman’s story, we trace the complexity of supporting a partner’s desistance:

  • the emotional strain of managing hope, fear and uncertainty

  • the pressure to stay strong, patient and understanding

  • the impact on her own wellbeing, identity and relationships

  • the sense of responsibility for preventing lapses or setbacks

These experiences mirror the “pains of desistance” typically associated with people trying to change their own behaviour but here, they fall on the partner. This shift in perspective matters. It challenges the assumption that desistance is an individual journey supported by a passive, endlessly resilient partner. Instead, it shows desistance as relational, interdependent, and often costly for women. Indeed, it is important when considering how policy and practice might work to support women and reduce their potential, unnecessary, contact with the criminal justice system. This we can see has the potential to provide one upstream prevention opportunity the Women's Justice Board have identified is important. 

Why This Matters for Practice and Policy

If women are carrying this emotional and practical load, then services must recognise and respond to it. Our recommendations emphasise the need for:

  • Holistic support that sees women not as extensions of the desister, but as individuals with their own needs and aspirations.

  • Trauma‑informed approaches that understand how past experiences shape women’s responses to stress, risk and relational strain.

  • Gender‑sensitive practice that challenges assumptions about women’s roles and avoids placing responsibility for a partner’s success on their shoulders.

  • Support that enhances women’s agency, rather than reinforcing expectations of self‑sacrifice or emotional labour.

When women are better supported, the benefits extend beyond their own wellbeing. It also reduces the risk of desistance lapses, strengthens relational stability, and creates healthier conditions for long‑term change.

Moving the Conversation Forward

This article is part of a growing body of work that asks us to look beyond the individual desister and consider the wider relational ecosystem around them. Women’s experiences, their labour, their pain, their resilience, must be part of how we understand and support desistance.



At Gender Responsive Insight, we remain committed to amplifying these voices and advocating for systems that recognise the full picture of change. Desistance should not come at the cost of women’s wellbeing.

 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page