Neurodisability and the criminal justice system: Sharing insights to inform international progress

ADR UK Research Fellow, Hope Kent, shares her personal reflections on her attendance at the Council of Europe Conference for Directors of Prison and Probation 2025.

In September, I had the privilege of travelling to Kraków to attend the 30^th Council of Europe Conference for Directors of Prison and Probation. The Polish hosts extended remarkable hospitality, welcoming us with traditional folk music and dance that set the tone for an engaging and collaborative event.

This year’s theme was “Can we move away from the over-use of penal sanctions?”, a question which reflects the pressing prison overcrowding crisis across Europe and the urgent need for alternative approaches. Against this backdrop, I was invited to speak about neurodisability in prisons, a topic I have researched using ADR UK’s flagship Ministry of Justice & Department for Education linked dataset - England.

Neurodisability is an umbrella term, referring to any conditions which affect the brain and nervous system – for example, Acquired Brain Injury, Autism, ADHD, or Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. These conditions are all spectrum conditions, but they are grouped together because they often create functional difficulties in a number of key domains, including; attention and concentration, social communication, emotional regulation and impulsivity, physical co-ordination, and cognition (including memory).   

Establishing the scale of the issue

We first discussed the scale of the issue: people with neurodisabilities are consistently overrepresented in prisons, often without diagnosis or support. This is not a specialist population in the criminal justice system; the majority of people in contact with prisons or probations have neurodisability.

These unmet needs create barriers in every part of the system. For example, someone struggling with their memory and executive function may find it hard to remember probation appointments or co-ordinate attending them – but failing to keep these appointments can lead to further penal sanctions. This means that it is more difficult to break out of the cycle of crisis and crime, leading to ‘revolving door’ contact with the criminal justice system.

However, this over-representation starts upstream, as people with neurodisability are marginalised across education, health, and social care systems long before they reach the criminal justice system. Our work using the Ministry of Justice & Department for Education linked dataset has demonstrated that children with neurodevelopmental conditions who also live in poverty are at particularly increased risk of being criminalised. Our work using prison screening data has suggested that school exclusion may be a key mechanism in pathways into the criminal justice system for children with neurodisability.

This means that particularly targeted interventions to re-engage people with education and opportunities for housing and other social supports are needed once inside the justice system, to change life-course trajectories and provide opportunity.  

I am especially grateful to David Breakspear, who is an advocate for criminal justice reform and an expert by lived experience. He spoke powerfully about his ADHD diagnosis, and how the criminal justice system creates barriers for people with neurodivergent conditions at every stage; from difficulties navigating complex courtroom language, to the overwhelming sensory environment of prison. His call for greater compassion and understanding was warmly applauded by the international audience.

Taking a rights-based approach

I framed my talk within a rights-based approach. Both the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) make it clear that failing to accommodate neurodisability in the criminal justice system means that these individuals are denied their rights on an equal basis with their peers. For example, if an individual cannot understand the complex language used in the courtroom, they cannot realise their right to access all the relevant information about the trial. They then cannot participate in their trial in a way that differs from being a bystander.

In fact, the UNCRC General Comment no. 24 (2019) explicitly states that;

‘Children with developmental delays or neurodevelopmental disorders or disabilities (for example, autism spectrum disorders, foetal alcohol spectrum disorders, or acquired brain injuries) should not be in the child justice system at all, even if they have reached the minimum age of criminal responsibility. If not automatically excluded, such children should be individually assessed.’

Equal access to justice, rehabilitation, and opportunities for change is fundamental. If people with neurodisabilities cannot understand courtroom proceedings, engage in education, or cope with prison environments without unnecessary distress, their rights are not being upheld. This is reflected in poorer outcomes in prison and on probation.

The challenge of creating an accessible system

The challenge of creating a more accessible system in practice is not straightforward, particularly across diverse legal and cultural contexts. Our talks were interpreted live into several languages, and it was clear that finding messages that resonate across contexts is complex – yet the response was encouraging. Several delegates told me they had not previously considered neurodisability in their prison systems but now intended to take these insights back home. For me, that was a measure of success: research sparking new conversations and influencing practice internationally.

We also had the opportunity to tour Montelupich Prison, a site steeped in history. Built on the foundations of a 16th-century monastery, it later became a place of incarceration for Polish academics, activists and resistance members during the Second World War, and subsequently the site of the execution of 21 Nazi war criminals.

That layered history – political, religious and social – was a striking reminder that penal institutions are not static. Instead, they flex with the politics and priorities of the day. Currently, “tough on crime” messaging is prominent in a range of political manifestos across Europe, and this can arguably risk undermining a core purpose of the criminal justice system - rehabilitation. Further challenges, such as overcrowded prisons, unaddressed health and social needs, and custodial sentences for offences that could potentially be better addressed through community-based interventions all increase the likelihood of reoffending – compromising the safety of our societies.

Final thoughts

The conference was a very humbling opportunity to connect my research with leaders across Europe. It reinforced that the intersections of neurodisability, social disadvantage, and justice are not peripheral but central to how we build fairer, more effective systems.

Our collective challenge is to ensure that penal institutions of the future do not simply detain those who have committed an offence, but uphold their rights, and support successful rehabilitation to make our communities safer. I am grateful to the Council of Europe and our Polish hosts for the chance to contribute, and to bring these ideas into an international arena.

Hope is an ADR UK Research Fellow currently using the Education and Child Health Insights from Linked Data (ECHILD) - England dataset. Find out more about her project.