The latest criminal justice statistics show that the average custodial sentence in England and Wales has risen to 20.5 months.
Meanwhile, 57% of immediate custodial sentences are still for less than 12 months.
These figures raise some interesting questions.
We hear a great deal about whether sentences are long enough. It’s a subject that understandably generates strong feelings, particularly among victims of crime.
But perhaps we should also ask another question.
What are we expecting prison to achieve?
Punishment? Certainly.
Public protection? Absolutely.
But what about rehabilitation?
If someone is going to return to society, surely it makes sense to use their time in custody constructively.
I spent time in both closed and open women’s prisons. One thing that experience taught me is that prison is not a single, uniform environment. The opportunities and expectations can differ enormously.
That matters when we discuss what people might realistically achieve during a sentence.
A longer sentence may be appropriate for many reasons, including the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect the public.
But sentence length alone doesn’t tell us whether someone will leave prison better equipped to live without offending.
Perhaps the most important question isn’t simply how long people spend inside.
It’s what happens during that time — and what happens when they come out.
Source: Ministry of Justice, Criminal Justice Statistics, year ending June 2026, published 22 October 2026. www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-june-2026/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-june-2026-html
Lou Myx is the author of Crime Doesn’t Pay, a memoir of life inside HMP Bronzefield and HMP East Sutton Park. Read more at loumyx.com.

Electronic tagging is one of those subjects that sounds wonderfully straightforward.
Fit someone with a device, set the conditions, and monitor whether they comply.
The latest Ministry of Justice figures show that 27,496 people were assigned electronic-monitoring equipment at the end of September 2026. Of those, 10,290 were in the post-release monitoring category.
That’s a considerable number of people whose freedom is subject to electronic monitoring.
But what exactly are we measuring?
A tag can help authorities check whether someone is at a particular location or complying with certain restrictions, depending on the type of monitoring.
What it cannot tell us is whether that person has somewhere safe to live, whether they’re finding work, or whether they’re managing to rebuild their life.
Electronic monitoring can be a useful part of supervision. It may help enforce conditions and provide reassurance.
But it isn’t a substitute for the practical support people may need when leaving prison.
I think we need to distinguish between monitoring somebody’s movements and helping them move forward.
Both may have a place in the criminal justice system. They simply aren’t the same thing.
Source: Ministry of Justice, Electronic Monitoring Statistics, 22 October 2026. www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-september-2026/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-england-and-wales-september-2026
Lou Myx is the author of Crime Doesn’t Pay, a memoir of life inside HMP Bronzefield and HMP East Sutton Park. Read more at loumyx.com.

Prison overcrowding has become a familiar headline. Too many prisoners, not enough places, and governments searching for ways to create space.
One answer has been early release.
But here’s a question: What happens after the prison gate opens?
Recent reporting in The Justice Gap describes probation officers considering industrial action amid concerns about pay and growing workloads.
It’s easy to talk about releasing prisoners as though the job is finished once they’ve walked out of the gate.
It isn’t.
People leaving prison may need somewhere to live, a way to earn a living, support with practical problems and help navigating the conditions of their release.
And somebody has to supervise them.
I’ve experienced both a closed women’s prison, HMP Bronzefield, and an open prison, HMP East Sutton Park. They are very different environments, and that contrast has given me plenty to think about when it comes to preparing people for life outside.
Prison policy often seems to focus on numbers. How many cells are available? How many people can be released? How quickly can the population be reduced?
Those questions matter. But so does what happens next.
If probation services are overwhelmed, early release risks becoming a short-term solution to one problem while creating another.
Opening the prison gate is not the same as preparing someone for freedom.
Source: The Justice Gap, 19 October 2026, Marie-Diane Gemini. www.thejusticegap.com/probation-officers-vote-on-industrial-action-as-thousands-of-prisoners-are-released-early/
Lou Myx is the author of Crime Doesn’t Pay, a memoir of life inside HMP Bronzefield and HMP East Sutton Park. Read more at loumyx.com.

There is a new proposal to restrict prison privileges for offenders who refuse to attend sentencing. Among the potential sanctions are restrictions on social visits. Children’s visits are expected to be exempt.
I can understand why people want consequences for refusing to face a court. Victims and their families deserve to be heard, and the justice system should not simply shrug its shoulders when someone refuses to cooperate.
But there is another side to this.
When you take away a prison visit, who exactly are you punishing?
A prisoner’s partner hasn’t necessarily committed a crime. Neither have their parents. And their children certainly haven’t.
Yet these are the people who may lose the chance to see someone they love.
Having spent time in both HMP Bronzefield and HMP East Sutton Park, I know that imprisonment doesn’t happen in isolation. The sentence belongs to one person, but its consequences spread much further.
Maintaining family relationships can also be part of rehabilitation. We want people to leave prison with stable relationships and some prospect of rebuilding their lives. Making those relationships harder to maintain deserves careful thought.
There must be consequences for serious misconduct. But surely we should ask whether a punishment achieves anything useful, or simply creates more suffering.
Prison is supposed to be the punishment. We should be careful about punishing everyone else.
Source: The Guardian, 22 October 2026, Geneva Abdul. www.theguardian.com/law/2026/oct/22/criminals-who-refuse-to-attend-sentencing-could-lose-prison-privileges-under-new-rules
Lou Myx is the author of Crime Doesn’t Pay, a memoir of life inside HMP Bronzefield and HMP East Sutton Park. Read more at loumyx.com.

The opening of three new Intensive Supervision Courts for women in West Yorkshire, Merseyside and Northumbria is welcome news. These courts aim to address issues such as trauma and addiction while supervising women in the community, rather than sending every eligible offender to prison.
But when we talk about sentencing women, I believe we need to start with a group who have committed no offence at all: their children.
During my time in two women’s prisons, I formed the opinion that perhaps half the women I encountered could have been dealt with outside prison. That’s my personal assessment, not a statistic. Many were there for relatively minor offences, and I believe electronic tagging and other carefully supervised community sentences could have worked for a considerable number of them.
I met women who had lost absolutely everything through imprisonment: their jobs, their homes, their relationships and their financial stability.
And then there are the children.
When a mother goes to prison, the consequences can fall on a child who has done nothing wrong. They may be separated from the person who cares for them, uprooted from their home, or forced to adjust to a very different family life. Their mother is the person being sentenced, but they suffer too.
This is not simply an emotional argument. Research highlighted by the Prison Reform Trust shows that maternal imprisonment can disrupt children’s housing, education, health and wellbeing. Children affected by parental imprisonment may face increased risks later in life, including involvement with the criminal justice system. That is a risk, not a destiny. These children deserve support, not stigma.
Surely one of our aims should be to break that cycle before it begins.
Electronic tagging isn’t the soft option some people imagine. Depending on the terms of an order, it can mean being confined to home outside working hours, with no spontaneous nights away, no holidays, and real difficulty travelling to see a sick relative. Exceptions may be possible with permission, but the restrictions are serious.
The important difference is that, where suitable and safe, a woman may still be able to work, pay her bills, remain in her home and care for her children. She is being punished, but her entire life need not be dismantled.
I am not suggesting that having children should provide immunity from prison. Some offences and risks clearly require custody. Public safety matters, and so does accountability.
But if a woman has committed a relatively minor offence, poses a manageable risk and could be punished effectively in the community, why would we not consider the effect of imprisonment on her children as a central part of the decision?
A child’s wellbeing should not be an afterthought.
The new women’s courts offer an opportunity to think differently about punishment, rehabilitation and what it means to protect the public in the long term.
Because when a mother goes to prison, her children can pay a price too. And they never committed a crime.
Lou Myx Author of Crime Doesn’t Pay
Original announcement: Ministry of Justice, 15 October 2026, “New courts in the north to help women break the cycle of reoffending” www.gov.uk/government/news/new-courts-in-the-north-to-help-women-break-the-cycle-of-reoffending
Further reading: Prison Reform Trust, “What about me? The impact on children when mothers are involved in the criminal justice system” prisonreformtrust.org.uk/publication/what-about-me-the-impact-on-children-when-mothers-are-involved-in-the-criminal-justice-system/

The Reading Agency’s announcement that nearly half a million Quick Reads books will be distributed to prisons across the UK is wonderful news. The initiative, backed by author Lee Child, is designed to make reading more accessible to people in custody.
Having worked in a women’s prison library myself, I know how important these places can be.
Of course, women came in to borrow books and DVDs. But not everyone came in for something to read or watch. Some simply wanted a chat. Women I’d become friendly with would often pop in to talk. For some, the library provided a little human contact and a sense of normality.
That wasn’t everyone’s experience, and I wouldn’t pretend otherwise. Some women just wanted a book and were perfectly happy with that.
There was also a surprising amount going on behind the library doors. Helping to organise activities was part of my job. We ran reading challenges, including reading and reviewing five books to win small prizes, as well as general knowledge competitions and other activities.
One of the loveliest was Storybook Mums. Mothers could record themselves reading a story for their children, keeping a connection with home even while they were apart.
I helped organise the sessions and watched the recordings being made. I wasn’t allowed to touch the camera myself; the head librarian came in once a week to handle that. One of those odd little restrictions that came with prison life.
Watching those mothers make their recordings was lovely. And it was a reminder that prison libraries can offer far more than access to reading material.
Books matter enormously, particularly for women who want to build their confidence, learn, or simply escape into a story for a while. But the library itself matters too. It can offer conversation, activities, small achievements and moments of everyday life.
So I wholeheartedly welcome The Reading Agency’s new initiative.
Because a prison library is about more than books. It’s about people.
Lou Myx Author of Crime Doesn’t Pay
Original news report: The Guardian, 16 October 2026 — Lee Child backs launch of reading scheme to send prisons half a million books www.theguardian.com/books/2026/oct/16/lee-child-backs-launch-of-reading-scheme-to-send-prisons-half-a-million-books