The Lived Experiences of Women Criminalised as Part of County Lines Enforcement: Victims or Offenders?

The Lived Experiences of Women Criminalised as Part of County Lines Enforcement: Victims or Offenders? | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The Lived Experiences of Women Criminalised as Part of County Lines Enforcement: Victims or Offenders? Jonna Barry, Zetta G. Kougiali This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7584525/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This research aimed to capture the lived experiences of women criminalised in the context of county lines enforcement, focusing on exploring the impact of the victim-offender dichotomy in this context. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used to examine and explore participants’ lived experiences. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with three women who have experiences of being criminalised as part of the county lines response. The findings reveal that women were impacted by experiences of multiple disadvantage, trauma, and abuse, further compounded by county lines enforcement and involvement. A culture of coercion and violence was reported, with participants’ lived reality within a ‘victim-offender’ dichotomy resulting in being marginalised from support. The findings suggest that punitive approaches serve to further re-traumatise women and that professionals need to have an awareness of trauma-informed practice. The findings also indicate that interventions should ensure to increase agency for women experiencing exploitation. Criminology Psychology county lines multiple disadvantage victim-offender dichotomy criminalised women Introduction Much of the literature and research available in relation to county lines and gangs has focused on young people and the risks and harms they are exposed to (Abrams et al., 2020 ; Havard et al., 2021 ; Olver & Cockbain, 2021 ; Windle & Briggs, 2015 ). Due to the focus of relevant research on young people, there is a recognition in the literature that there is a need for further research that could inform practice and shape responses to the inherent vulnerabilities of adults with experiences of exploitation and county lines (Olver & Cockbain, 2021 ). This project aims to address a significant gap in research by exploring the lived experience of adult women affected by county lines and their experiences within the ‘victim-offender dichotomy’ (Olver & Cockbain, 2021 ). This qualitative research with a marginalised group of women experiencing multiple disadvantage aims to explore the impact of criminalisation and how this may, in turn, impact disclosures of abuse and harm by vulnerable groups. Research indicates that women with experience of intersecting issues of multiple disadvantage often have compounded trauma as a result of abuse and societal stigma (Covington, 2007 ; Agenda, 2019 ). The relationship between experiences of multiple disadvantage and offending has been highlighted as a commonality in women imprisoned for violent offences (Batchelor, 2005 ), while the experience of imprisonment can further exacerbate disadvantage and re-traumatise criminalised women with experiences of violence and abuse (Du Rose, 2015 ). As indicated in Agenda’s recent report on young women’s experiences of the criminal justice system (Agenda, 2022 ), young women had disproportional experiences of rape and domestic abuse and criminal justice responses contributed to additional marginalisation and re-traumatisation. It has been previously argued that positioning drug policy within the crime response tends to result in a lack of measures to address structural and social disadvantages that contribute to harmful drug behaviours (Brown & Wincup, 2019 ). Increases in enforcement could directly impact the most disadvantaged, resulting in further criminalisation and reoffending. Research suggests that responses that ‘problematise’ or focus solely on offending behaviour are less successful in engaging young women as they do not value the reality and impact of the young woman’s life experiences (Batchelor, 2005 ; Agenda, 2022 ). The present research follows recent policies around the climate of a “crackdown” on county lines gangs and drug use as described in the current government drugs strategy (HM Government, 2021 ). The National Crime Agency briefing in 2016 highlighted that “90% of police force areas reported that gangs are utilising consenting adult females to assist criminal activities” (NCA, 2016, p8). Between 2016–2019 one Constabulary area’s response to ‘County lines’ activity ‘Operation Gravity’ resulted in 1,503 arrests, of which almost 200 were women, and nearly 200 were under 18yrs (Walsh, 2019 ). It is necessary to relate the prevalence of both groups to the Home Office’s definition of county lines and the specific mention of the exploitation of vulnerable children and adults (HM Government, 2018 ). The impact of county lines, from a policing perspective, has resulted in a new pilot project called ADDER (Addiction, Diversion, Disruption, Enforcement and Recovery) as the response in several force areas, including the area of data collection for this project (Home Office, 2021 ). Existing research involving adults in county lines has included ethnographic research focusing on the dynamics of and evolution of the ‘crack house’ (Briggs, 2010 ). More recently, research has tended to focus on the drug user, market, supply and issues related to ‘cuckooing’ (Moyle, 2019 ; Spicer et al., 2019 ; Spicer, 2021 ). The county lines strategy, which is centred around criminalisation and enforcement, is heavily linked to the vulnerability agenda; much of the existing research involves adults in relation to the difficulties of this in practice from a policing and frontline perspective (Moyle, 2019 ; Spicer et al., 2019 ; Spicer, 2021 ). Spicer ( 2021 ) argues that the widely used practice of welfare checks, utilised by Police as a means of protecting those at risk, can result in the criminalisation of the vulnerable tenant when drug dealers are present. Similarly, Leonard & Windle ( 2020 ) note that drug users overwhelmingly support that criminalisation does not stop people from using drugs. Windle & Briggs ( 2015 ) identified disadvantage and poverty as the primary societal factors contributing to a young person’s pathway into county lines activity. A recent study with professional respondents highlighted the difficulty in practice when the exploited young person becomes the exploiter, particularly when they have committed modern slavery offences (Olver & Cockbain, 2021 ). The young person previously identified as needing statutory input in relation to child sexual exploitation (CSE) concerns can become the groomer or exploiter. It has been recognised that exploitation does not stop at 18yrs and that statutory safeguarding responses are ill-equipped to manage this in practice (Dept of Health & Social Care, 2020, 3.1). Research recently conducted in the U.S. has described how victims of CSE are overrepresented in the criminal justice system (Abrams et al., 2021). International literature suggests a need for more research on this phenomenon while also highlighting a gap in capturing the voice of the criminalised individual rather than professionals (Havard et al., 2021 ; Olver & Cockbain, 2021 ). The nuances of exploitation feature heavily in the literature relating to county lines, particularly highlighting the idea of the victim-offender dichotomy (Havard et al., 2021 ; Olver & Cockbain, 2021 ; Pyrooz et al., 2013 ). Notably, gang members are identified as being twice as likely to fit into both categories, experiencing violence as the victim and in offending behaviour (Pyrooz et al., 2013 ). The overarching theme of exploitation in considering adults’ involvement in county lines raises points for discussion around agency and choice. It has been suggested that women tend to be absent from drug policy due to the prevalence of men using substances; references to women are made within a framework of vulnerability, contributing to their portrayal as victims without agency (Wincup, 2019 ). In examining women’s involvement in county lines, consent must be considered; women’s involvement is described as linked with domestic abuse, cuckooing and transactional sexual arrangements, thereby suggesting coercive control is inherent in the exchanges (NCA, 2016). There is much debate regarding agency and choice in relation to county lines and cuckooing (Moyle, 2019 ; Spicer et al., 2019 ). Havard et al. ( 2021 ) suggest viewing the involvement of women and girls in gangs through the lens of the coercive control model, highlighting the threat of and experience of violence to exert power and control. The increase in the use of the ‘vulnerable’ person in research policy and practice, while a positive step in avoiding victim blaming, can also be as labelling and assuming a lack of agency in someone’s decision-making (Brown, 2012 ; Munro & Scoular, 2012 ). Recent research has sought to challenge the notion of the exploited individual by narrowing it to structural and societal issues related to deprivation, where involvement in county lines is seen as the better option (Moyle, 2019 ; Spicer et al., 2019 ). The current study seeks to offer valuable insight into the experience of young women being criminalised within the context of county lines, offering recommendations to improve responses to women affected by county lines “… we cannot simply arrest our way out of this problem” (Moyle, 2019 , p755). Research suggests that we do not yet fully understand the risk and needs of adults within the context of county lines, which has broader implications for safeguarding and the concept of vulnerability (Moyle, 2019 ; Olver & Cockbain, 2021 ). The complexities of safeguarding adults experiencing exploitation and the inability of current legislation (The Care Act, 2014) to respond are acknowledged alongside the difficulty in managing safeguarding in frontline policing within a delicate balance of responding to crime and vulnerability simultaneously. The current study aims to offer valuable insight into the experiences of an identified ‘vulnerable’ group and how it feels to face barriers to accessing statutory support and contribute to the debate around agency, choice and vulnerability in how this is experienced or referred to by the participants. As recently noted, valuing women as partners and recognising their input is imperative in rebuilding trust and supporting women to effect positive change in their lives (Batchelor, 2005 ; Agenda, 2022 ). Vulnerability, agency, capacity, and how these factors relate to responses to women and safeguarding practices are central to the current study. Following on from The Female Offender Strategy (2018), The Concordat on Women in or at risk of contact with the Criminal Justice System recognises the need for trauma and gender-informed responses to women and advocates for multi-agency working in a ‘whole systems approach’ (Ministry of Justice, 2021 ). Ensuring a trauma-informed approach under a new pilot focused on enforcement may come with challenges; the current study will shed light on the implications of ADDER in practice by hearing from women directly impacted by the new approach. Methods Theoretical and analytical approach This research aimed to capture the lived experiences of women’s shared reality of being criminalised as part of the county lines response. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was chosen to elicit the most in-depth results and prioritise women’s voices and experiences. As an analytical framework, IPA aims to get close to the individual to examine, explore and highlight their lived experience (Eatough & Smith, 2017; Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2012), in agreement with the study’s positioning and consideration of participants as experts by experience (Smith & Nizza, 2021). Research procedures Participants were recruited via a local specialist women’s third-sector service who have an established trusted relationship with this marginalised group. Considering the depth of analysis in an IPA study, a smaller sample size of six women were initially recruited, and three of those took part (Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2012). Participants were recruited using a purposive sampling method, ensuring a homogenous sample with the ability to provide insight into their personal experiences of the issues in the research (Larkin & Thompson, Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2012; Smith & Nizza, 2021). The criteria used to identify suitable participants included women aged 18–40 years who had experiences of multiple disadvantage, particularly within the criminal justice system, and experiences of exploitation in the context of county lines before and after 18 years of age. Participants were initially approached by their women’s services practitioner and provided with the participant information sheet; they were then contacted by telephone by the first author following verbal consent. Data Collection The first author was the primary interviewer and had previous professional background in this area. Due to the participants’ experience of multiple disadvantage, much consideration was given to the guiding principle of respect for the participant, and participant wellbeing was ensured by a flexible, adaptable and respectful approach towards the complexities of the participants’ lives and adhering to trauma-informed principles (Elliott et al., 1999). Considering the reality of the participants’ lives, interviews were attempted on numerous occasions, and the interviewer remained flexible and available to attend the service at a time that suited the participant. In some cases, interviews were rearranged several times, as was expected when working with such a marginalised group. Semi-structured interviews, lasting between 35 to 65 minutes, were conducted at the service with three participants and were audio recorded. Although a modest sample size, the recruited participants were part of a significantly marginalised group, often mistrustful of services and professionals and have been noted to struggle to have their voices heard. Originally six women agreed to partake and were keen to describe their experiences; however, the reality of experiences of multiple disadvantage, including, for example, sexual violence, homelessness, court appearances and arrests, at the time of recruitment led to difficulties in engagement in the process within the planned timescales. The interviews were participant-led; however, an interview protocol including prompts was used flexibly to facilitate the interview flow. Participants were made aware of the context of the interview prior to beginning, and to ensure clarity and informed consent, the interviewer repeated the areas that would be explored during the interview, such as the experience of becoming involved in county lines and the experience of being criminalised. Participants were informed they were free to structure the content or mention anything they were comfortable with, while the interviewer would only interject to clarify or get the participant to elaborate. The interview began with an open question relating to the participants’ understanding and experience of county lines. To ensure confidentiality, once recorded, each interview was immediately anonymised, removing identifiers, transcribed, and then stored in a password-protected folder in line with the host University’s policy. Ethical Considerations This research was given ethical approval by the host University’s Ethics Committee. Ethical issues were considered in conjunction with the BPS Code of Human Research Ethics, the BPS Code of Ethics and the host University’s Ethical Guidelines. The interviewer adhered to trauma-informed principles and relevant codes of ethics by ensuring to gain clear, informed consent from participants. This process was facilitated by requesting a practitioner to approach the participants initially. Once there was an expression of interest, the interviewer met with the participant before the interview to gain written informed consent, reasserting the right to stop or withdraw throughout the process. In recognition of the possible re-traumatising nature of the interview, the interviewer ensured to be flexible in their approach, allowing numerous opportunities to reschedule and suggesting breaks if needed. The interviewer allowed 15 minutes to discuss anything at the end of each interview and ensured each participant had access to a debrief with a women’s services practitioner should they need it. Risk of harm was considered, particularly within the nature of the specific research area and the limits of confidentiality under the BPS guidelines and clarified areas where confidentiality would need to be broken, such as disclosure of risk of harm to self or others. The interviewer was aware of the local safeguarding landscape and that some women had multi-agency involvement related to any ongoing exploitation or abuse and had a prior professional relationship with the service in a victim-focused role. Although this previous experience allowed establishing rapport with a marginalised group, it was imperative, before the start of the interview, to ensure the participants had clarity and understood the role and obligations of the researcher as opposed to a supportive practitioner role. Analysis Interviews were transcribed verbatim, with multiple readings and note-taking, to become fully immersed in the data, giving voice to participants (Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2012). Each transcript was analysed individually before moving to the next to ensure an idiographic approach to the data (Willig, 2008 ). A reflective approach was employed throughout the data analysis process, acknowledging that such reflection and recognition of potential bias can allow for increased insight and understanding of the participants’ experience than others would have (Elliott et al., 1999). A four-stage analysis was conducted, guided by the principles and procedures set out in Smith & Nizza (2021). The first stage involved multiple readings and exploratory note-keeping, capturing the essence and meaning of participants’ experiences. The second stage of the analysis involved clustering the experiential statements looking for any connections or similarities to inform the personal experiential statements in the next stage. A table of personal experiential themes was created as part of the third analytical stage, including naming the clusters of experiential themes to acknowledge accurate reflection of participants’ accounts. The fourth stage of the analysis involved a cross-case analysis to allow the exploration of any connections, similarities, or differences across each of the participants’ cases, leading to a group of experiential themes. During this process, themes and subthemes were renamed and restructured several times, consistent with the iterative nature of IPA (Smith & Nizza, 2021). Results This section presents the four experiential themes identified following analysis of the interviews: agency, choice and loss of control; from protection to coercion; prison as a marginalised place of safety; and nowhere to turn. Each participant has been given a pseudonym to protect anonymity [1] . Agency, Choice and Loss of Control Participants’ attempts to make sense of their addiction and how this, in turn, led to involvement in the criminal justice system was evident in the data, and their accounts describe shared experiences of abuse, the removal of children and mental ill health leading to the use of drugs as a coping mechanism. Ella describes the circumstances leading to initial drug use as linked to adverse life circumstances “…like no one has had the perfect life and decided one day oh let me pick up a crack pipe…”. Olivia describes how she was diagnosed with depression and began smoking heroin as a coping mechanism resulting in the removal of her children “…and then I lost my children, cause I just couldn’t cope…lost everythin’ ((pause)) so yeah and then I went to prison”. Participants’ perception of their own agency and choice in becoming involved in county lines drug dealing; resorting to running drugs was often perceived as a response to structural factors such as poverty and as a way to manage their addiction. Initial agentic action was particularly notable in descriptions of actively choosing to get involved in dealing and ‘inviting dealers around’, as reported by Charlotte . Ella describes how dealing seemed like a worthwhile money-making opportunity while other options and resources were restricted “… I just got outta jail, and I thought he’s offering me £150 …I didn’t feel like I was getting made to do something I didn’t want to do… I was actually getting paid for it this time…”. Like Ella, participants described their involvement as helping create a sense of belonging, make connections and live a certain lifestyle, but also a gained sense of importance. Charlotte recounts, “ …I was very in like in with everybody… I knew a lot of people… a good connection… I had so many customers there for them… I was always the one they would come to first…” indicating agentic choice towards a perceived lucrative activity with associated social gains. Prior to escalation, participants identified incidents and requests that appeared to be initially harmless. Charlotte, for example, described the sudden nature of getting a phone call from someone wanting to come to the area, which at first is friendly, offering to “…look after you…”. Another participant described being introduced to a dealer through older influences who, at first, minimised the risk associated with her involvement by asking her to accompany him and just hang out or sit in a hotel for the night while not being involved in any dealing. Such seemingly harmless requests appear to suddenly escalate and were perceived by participants as the targeting stage of exploitation, leading to an escalation in involvement. Each of the participants described an eventual feeling of a loss of control in their experiences, highlighting the dynamic process of perceived agentic personal choice being used as a means of their own exploitation. Participants described how having dealers at their property quickly escalated to an influx of people and their inability to remove them from the premises. The sudden escalation towards an entrapment of participants, often with the use of intimidating practices within the cuckooing environment, was described by Olivia “… they’ve just gone off their heads… they slit the sofas and had a knife up to us…”. Participants also reflected on the role of their addiction in their initial involvement, as dealing would facilitate easier access to drugs. Drug use was consistently reported as a common element in participants’ accounts, enabling further relational dependence and control through violence, leading to an escalation in how participants’ exploitation and role in county lines evolved. From Protection to Coercion Participants’ experience of the coercive nature of the county lines environment was evident throughout the data. Participants describe a climate of fear, with violence and intimidation tactics employed to ensure compliance. Participants describe turning to a relationship with a male to feel a sense of safety, perceiving this to be a protective factor in the exploitative environment. These relationships tended to be exploitative in nature, further compounding negative experiences, while the data indicate that prior experiences of trauma, abuse, and dysfunctional relational histories impacted perceptions of relationships in this context. Participants gave multiple examples of demeaning language and behaviour used towards them by the dealers or ‘shotters’, describing how women are spoken to completely differently, interpreted as an element of the coercive aspect of county lines. Charlotte describes, “…they speak to women completely different to how they speak to the men; you know it’s not good.”. Participants describe experiences as both a woman and a sex worker in the context of county lines, with this being perceived as increasing the level of felt vulnerability. Participants recalled the added pressure when dealers knew they were sex working. This was evident in accounts of the drug user/drug dealer relationship and personal relationships where a dependency had been created. Participants who identified as sex workers describe elements of coercive control and assumptions of sexual engagement as trading currency where drug provision was involved. Olivia describes this exchange as an inherent element of transactions with dealers “… obviously do favours for em you know sexual favours… they’d take the mickey… give a five-pound shot…really little money… the dealers… they think you’ll do anything for the drugs.” Ella describes how the possession of drugs by her partner defined the direction of power in the relationship “… he had the drugs… he had the power… I had to do anything he wanted… the last thing you want to do is have sex or you know doing sexual favours… but he’d make me do that so I had to get better…”. One of the women described her shock at the reality of the ‘trap house’ when she was first introduced to the county lines environment at 16. Ella reflects on the nature of her relationship with a much older male, framed within a context of fear and sought as an attempt for protection “ … he sort of took me under his wing(…) I just wanted to be protected and stuff… I was so scared about living this new life by myself…”. Olivia describes having a relationship as an essential protective factor when involved in county lines “ … if you’ve got a partner, they protect you don’t they… and they don’t seem to prey on you…”. Olivia presents the possibility, but not certainty, of her partner not preying on her as a positive element and, similar to other participants, seems to be balancing feeling safe in an unsafe environment through unhealthy relationships. Ella describes how this attempt to seek protection and the associated feelings of helplessness and vulnerability allowed for an exploitative relationship of complete dependence, “ …I relied on him so much for everything my feeling of safety, feel like, feeling of wanted and loved and stuff ((pause)).” While involved in relationships, participants describe more frequent encounters with law enforcement. One of the women, for example, was subjected to numerous arrests and strip searches, which she reported as a highly frightening experience, after having been coerced into ‘plugging’ drugs. The seriousness and risks around such actions were portrayed as being minimised by the partner whom she relied upon for protection and reassurance. Despite such incidents, women describe how protective they felt of their relationship, even after being arrested. Ella recounts: “ … I thought I was really in love with this guy and I didn’t wana um, snitch on him… I thought we were gona get out and be together I was that deluded mate….” Ella reflected on the contradictory attempts to protect her partner, who had made her feel threatened throughout the relationship by alluding to knowing where her mom lived. Participants’ accounts highlighted the power imbalance existing in their relationships within the context of county lines. In most instances, the relationships offered a sense of safety while being simultaneously exploitative and abusive, often through the dependence created by women’s need for protection. The coercive aspect of such relationships led to compliance, resulting in women taking lengthy sentences to protect a perceived equally protective partner, being further criminalised and re-traumatised. Prison as a marginalised place of Safety All accounts highlighted the level of multiple disadvantage each faced, including homelessness, substance use, domestic abuse, mental ill health, and sexual violence. Participants perceived prison as a place of safety, as opposed to a site of oppression, which has been previously noted as a common occurrence in vulnerable, criminalised women who have experienced violence or have limited access to support (see, for example, Bradley & Davino, 2002; Rowe, 2011). Such accounts were presented within a comparative context with prior ‘chaotic’ life in the community, exacerbated by further marginalisation and barriers to support.Charlotte recalls her experience before imprisonment “…when you’ve got such a chaotic lifestyle and you don’t know where you’re sleepin from one night to the next it’s not always easy to get to these appointments and stuff you know… if you’re not on a script…”, indicating the unpredictability of daily life and the level of uncertainty in accessing secure housing and other sources of support. Similarly, Ella describes a sense of hopelessness, fatalism and surrender in the level of disadvantage that felt insurmountable “ …you can never see where you can start getting that better life…getting housed or getting away from relationship or getting off the drugs ever…”. Participants’ shared sense of desperation in relation to their experiences of substance use, homelessness and particularly violence was highlighted in their realisation that their arrest and sentence might have saved their life. Contextual factors and experiences of harm in county lines exploitation are implicit in participants’ perception of prison as a place of safety or escape. Ella, for example, highlights how prison removed her from a controlling environment and interrupted the experience of violence and victimisation “… I wasn’t like being controlled by this, being hit for that… it was like a break from it all…”. Involvement in county lines and lived realities of multiple disadvantage often led to women being further removed from services and facing increased barriers to accessing support and having their basic needs met in the community. Olivia recalls how prison restored a missed sense of normality: “ … I was like oh I’m eatin again and I’m actually doin normal things and makin myself better…” and Charlotte evalutates prison as an improvement on the minimum basis of basic needs, not previously met in the community: “…at least I was safe, I had a roof over my head, I had three meals a day…”. Although prison served as a temporary disruptor of prior distressing experiences, incarceration exacerbated the perceived sense of social inequality and disadvantage. Participants reported feelings of felt stigma and shame, ‘othering’ as an outsider in society, and a sense of hopelessness and fear for the future; rather than addressing the underlying issues, prison added to experiences of multiple disadvantage by further marginalising the participants and rendering return to the community even more difficult. Olivia described her feelings of shame at being in the newspaper following her arrest “ …when you’ve had your name in the paper and then my mum… she’s been embarrassed by me…” whil e Ella reflects, with a sense of hopelessness, how a prison sentence will have a long lasting impact on her future “ … even if you go to prison once you’ve got that on your record… you have that first sentence and think well I’ve fucked it for myself now …”. When discussing how she felt following her release from prison, Olivia described “I just got worse I think, yeah, I was homeless…” and Ella added “… I got recalled I got out and came back to him and it was really bad violence, like the worst sort of violence I’ve had in a relationship…”. While prison can be initially perceived as a place of safety by physically enabling women to be removed from unsafe environments, as participants’ accounts revealed, the underlying causes and associated issues are not addressed. Return to the same environment after release, then, has the potential to increase violence and victimisation. Nowhere to Turn All the participants described feeling unable to disclose to professionals out of fear of being criminalised but also due to fear of reprisals. The participants provided accounts of a breakdown in relationships with Police leading to a sense of mistrust, experienced as a power imbalance due to gender, the hierarchy in the drug user/ drug dealer relationship and the exploitative nature of county lines. Participants discussed their feelings around opening up to professionals and predominantly around their fear of being criminalised. Participants described a breakdown in relationships with the Police due to feeling let down by previous responses, particularly in relation to domestic abuse; Ella describes “…they see that the situation is fine and they leave…make women believe well they’re not here to protect me you know what I mean why would I talk to them?”. Ella describes her experience of CSE “…tried to push me into prostitution basically and I told them about that, and they did nothing yeah… you know like I was 17 at the time I was clearly scared…”. The women described feeling complicit in offending and undeserving of support as they had contributed to establishing a ‘line’. Charlotte explained how, in the context of law enforcement, criminal involvement is expected to overpower and undermine experiences of victimisation, leading to any support-seeking attempts being hindered or halted: “ … I’ve sold and been the runner and all this and that… you’ve already played your role and you’ve already broke the law so you can’t exactly phone up the police…”. Participants also describe occasions of ‘cuckooing’ where homeowners were penalised when professionals were involved; as Olivia noted “ … that’s a bit difficult cause if you’ve got a flat you’re gona get in trouble yourself… my friend… he lost his flat through that…”. Participants also disclosed similar experiences of the safeguarding arena and described the fear of information being passed on and having confidentiality broken, highlighting a felt power imbalance and reluctance to trust professionals. In these cases, agency and choice of disclosure were exercised under the expectation of a punitive response, contributing to the potential prolonging of victimisation and restricted routes to support. The hierarchical structures in county lines were evident in the ways participants separated themselves from other levels of the chain. Charlotte refers to “… people like me… we’re the addicts… than the main guys…” positioning herself and people experiencing addiction on a subordinate level to those higher up in the hierarchical structure. It is in this context that the participants refer to themselves as vulnerable, trapped within multiple hierarchical layers and power imbalances of opposing legalities. Ella, for example, described a sense of unfairness and injustice as to the targeting and criminalisation of the users at the ‘bottom’ of the hierarchical chain, and the multiplication of vulnerability within the several hierarchical levels and power imbalances: “ …these are like the bottom people… the users… they’re vulnerable…I just think it’s wrong… they’re getting the fuckin users that are literally runnin out for their…one bit of dark and one bit of white… you’re targeting the same people you’re meant to be protecting you know… it’s sort of defeating the object…” Discussion and conclusion This research aimed to address the gap in the exploration of the lived experiences of women criminalised in the context of county lines enforcement. The findings suggest that women have gendered experiences of trauma and abuse, and they are further re-traumatised by punitive responses in the context of county lines enforcement. The findings highlight that women are positioned at both sides of the victim-offender dichotomy, which defines enforcement responses and access to support. The research findings are consistent with the literature relating to women in the criminal justice system having experiences of intersecting issues of multiple disadvantage (Covington, 2007; Agenda, 2019). All the participants had experiences of intersecting issues of homelessness, substance use, mental ill health, domestic abuse, and sexual violence. Participants identified that these experiences led to them facing increased barriers to support, marginalisation and involvement in the criminal justice system. Participants identified that homelessness and substance use led to increased vulnerability in the context of county lines exploitation. Previous research has highlighted that criminalising women serves to further exacerbate experiences of multiple disadvantage and that solely problematising behaviours does not value the reality and impact of women’s life experiences (Batchelor, 2005; Du Rose, 2015; Agenda, 2022). Research also suggests that prison is often seen as a break or a safe haven (Du Rose, 2015). The findings of the present study further suggest that the experience of multiple disadvantage directly contributes to a view that prison is an escape, with each participant identifying that experiences of homelessness, substance use and abuse led to prison feeling like the only way to meet their basic needs. Participants identified that experiences of violence and control in the context of county lines led to prison being viewed as a place of safety and an easier route to escape abuse. Consistent with previous research, prison was reported as further compounding participants’ experience of multiple disadvantage without addressing any underlying issues that led to offending behaviour and contributed to victimisation. Participants identified that going to prison led to feelings of stigma and shame, which further marginalised them from mainstream society and resources of support. More specifically for young women, the findings pointed to the abject fear of going to prison for the first time as a teenager and the impact this has going forward. Participants were of the view that a prison record did not, in fact, deter offending behaviour but instilled a sense of hopelessness and a sense that their future was already affected. The women participating in this research highlighted gendered experiences of trauma and abuse which, in turn, led to the use of coping strategies such as substance use, in agreement with previous findings (Covington, 2017; Agenda, 2019; Agenda, 2022) and often resort to drug use as a form of escape from psychological pain (Du Rose, 2015). An overarching theme of re-traumatisation was evident in the findings, especially in participants’ experiences of violence and control in the county lines environment and relationships in that context. Participants identified that prison has the impact of further compounding traumatic experiences; as expressed through their own experiences but also through recollections of other women’s experiences in prison. There is a consensus in the literature that drug policy often criminalises women rather than addresses the underlying structural and personal causes of their drug use (Brown & Wincup, 2017; Wincup, 2017). This was also true for participants' experiences of trauma and victimisation within county lines, raising concern that women will still effectively be receiving treatment from the structures that are designed to punish them (Du Rose, 2015). Participants’ accounts point against criminalising drug policies and towards incorporating a more therapeutic approach alongside treatment. The findings in the research contribute to the debate around agency and choice in the context of exploitation and county lines indicating that agency and choice exist simultaneously with exploitation. The notion of vulnerability and how it relates to agency is much debated in the literature, with research suggesting it can be labelling and posit a lack of agency (Brown, 2012; Munro & Scoular, 2012). Participants described themselves as vulnerable, but this was attached to negative experiences, such as sexual exploitation, violence and abuse, in line with research on sex workers and vulnerability, suggesting it helps reflect on experiences (Brown & Sanders, 2017). Relevant studies have indicated that there is agency in involvement in county lines and cuckooing as a response to structural factors of poverty, suggesting drug users are making choices in relation to managing their addiction (Moyle, 2019; Spicer et al., 2019). The findings in the research support this position; participants identified that allowing dealers into their flats was often seen as the best option to avoid resorting to shoplifting or other means of managing their addiction. Participants also recognised that the ‘drug world’ created a sense of belonging and connection while also providing economic advantages, consistent with DuRose’s (2015) findings. Conversely, a thread of the stages of exploitation was evident in the findings alongside an overwhelming sense of a loss of control, suggesting that looking at the involvement of women in county lines through a coercive control lens would serve to conceptualise this experience (Havard et al., 2021). One of the aims of this research was to capture women’s experiences within the victim-offender dichotomy in relation to county lines and exploitation. The findings support the literature, which considers the nuances of exploitation and how this plays out in the context of county lines (Havard et al., 2021; Olver & Cockbain, 2021; Pyrooz et al., 2013), with participants identifying early trauma and homelessness at a young age as increased vulnerabilities in their case. Many participants felt at risk of harm in the county lines environment and turned to a relationship with a male as a protective factor. These relationships often led to further exploitation and an escalation in county lines involvement. The notion of the victim-offender dichotomy is a thread in each of the findings in relation to women’s experiences of being criminalised as part of county lines enforcement. The research findings shed light on the impact of the victim-offender dichotomy on those involved in county lines particularly within the context of restricted resources for support and entrapment in multiple hierarchical structures and power imbalances. Undeniably, frontline practitioners faces real challenges in responding to county lines when the strategy is so heavily centred around criminalisation and enforcement while also linked to the vulnerability agenda (Moyle, 2019; Spicer et al., 2019; Spicer, 2021). This is especially true for policing; the findings pointed towards a power imbalance that was pervasive in the participants’ experiences leading e to a reluctance to disclose their victimisations and, in turn, be removed and marginalised from the services that could support them. Participants felt strongly against disclosing to professionals both for fear of reprisals and fear they would be considered complicit in the offending or county lines activity. This was most evident in cases of cuckooing where property ownership overlapped with vulnerability and victimisation, leading either to loss of property or criminalisation (also reported in Spicer, 2021). Relationships with the Police appear to be further impacted by participants’ experiences of responses to CSE and domestic abuse. Participants identified feeling let down by responses that impacted their ability to disclose any further harm and strongly felt a sense of unfairness and injustice in the county lines environment. Participants also highlighted the hierarchy that was implicit with most of them identifying as the voiceless addict and identified that enforcement responses were only serving to penalise the most vulnerable, those at the bottom of the hierarchy, reinforcing the belief that the Police do not serve to protect, but to criminalise. The sense of the coercive and controlling nature of the county lines environment to ensure compliance was especially prevalent in the data. Participants identified feeling a loss of control in the cuckooing environment through sexual exploitation and relationships. Participants’ experiences of violence and intimidation often led to them engaging in a relationship with a male to feel protected. Findings highlighted that these relationships were often exploitative and were used to perpetuate the control and involvement in county lines. This is consistent with the literature suggesting that the threat of and use of violence exerts power and control in county lines (Havard et al., 2021). These perceived relationships, while instilling fear of reprisal, also imbue a sense of loyalty, resulting in participants being willing to accept a sentence to protect the relationship, resulting in increased criminalisation. The findings suggest there is a valuable argument for looking at county lines through a coercive control lens when considering the part played by women and girls (Havard et al., 2021). The experience of a loss of control appeared to permeate more than the county lines environment. Participants experienced a loss of control in criminal justice responses and responses from professionals in the safeguarding arena where participants felt like their confidentiality had been broken. There are some limitations to be noted in this research. This research is representative of women experiencing multiple disadvantage in the context of county lines and therefore is not intended to be generalised to all drug users’ experiences. Although the data were rich and each participants’ account provided an in-depth account of their experience, the sample was undoubtedly small; this is reflective of the difficulty of engaging with the specific population and the attempt to do so in a way that is respectful of their lifestyle and priorities over research aims. The findings of this research have highlighted the complexities in managing safeguarding practice in frontline policing in response to county lines exploitation and the difficulties inherent in balancing an enforcement response while responding to vulnerability and harm simultaneously. The findings of this research add context to the suggestion that there is an inability of current legislation (The Care Act, 2014) to respond to exploitation post 18 years creating barriers for adult women experiencing exploitation to access statutory support. The findings here add to the literature relating to women’s experience as both victim and offender and how punitive criminal justice responses further re-traumatise an identified vulnerable group. Consistent with the literature, the findings in this study add weight to the assertion that women in the criminal justice system disproportionally have experience of trauma and abuse. It is therefore imperative that professionals, have awareness of the impact of trauma and abuse on behaviours. It is suggested that professionals need to facilitate opportunities for acknowledging and managing the impact of trauma (Covington, 2022) and have an understanding of trauma to enhance practice, and develop trauma-informed approaches and psychologically informed environments to best meet women’s needs. The increased barriers faced by women experiencing multiple disadvantage, when attempting to access services that could support them in the community are evident throughout this study and lend support to the view that punitive approaches serve to further marginalise and stigmatise women. Overwhelmingly participants reflected on the benefit of having a relationship with a trusted professional and the benefit of non-judgemental, flexible support. It has been highlighted in the literature that to rebuild trust and support women, they must be considered valued partners and input into the process of making positive changes in their lives (Batchelor, 2005; Agenda, 2022). This is particularly relevant in the context of county lines exploitation with participants repeatedly identifying a feeling of a loss of control. Rather than perpetuate this with punitive approaches, professionals and responses should take an approach that emphasises choice and increases agency of women allowing them to be active participants in managing their safety and lives. References Abrams, L. S., Godoy, S. M., Bath, E. P., & Barnert, E. S. (2020). Collaborative Responses to Commercial Sexual Exploitation as a Model of Smart Decarceration. Social Work , 65(4), 387–396. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swaa040 Agenda. (2019). Breaking down the barriers. https://weareagenda.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Breaking-down-the-Barriers-full-report-FINAL.pdf Agenda. (2022, March). Young women surviving the criminal justice system. https://weareagenda.org/young-women-surviving-the-cjs/ BARLOW, C., & WEARE, S. (2018). Women as Co-Offenders: Pathways into Crime and Offending Motivations. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice , 58(1), 86–103. Batchelor, S. (2005). ‘Prove me the bam!’: Victimisation and agency in the lives of young women who commit violent offences. Probation Journal , 52(4), 358–375. Bradley, R. G., & Davino, K. M. (2002). Women’s perceptions of the prison environment: When prison is “the safest place I’ve ever been”. Psychology of women quarterly , 26(4), 351-359. Briggs, D. (2010). Crack houses in the UK: some observations on their operations. Drugs and Alcohol Today , 10(4), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.5042/daat.2010.0726 Brown, K. (2012). Re-moralising’ Vulnerability’. People Place and Policy Online , 6(1), 41–53. Brown, K., & Sanders, T. (2017). Pragmatic, progressive, problematic: Addressing vulnerability through a local street sex work partnership initiative. Social Policy and Society , 16(3), 429-441. Brown, K., & Wincup, E. (2020). Producing the vulnerable subject in English drug policy. International Journal of Drug Policy , 80, 102525. Covington, S. (2007). The Relational Theory of Women’s Psychological Development: Implications for the Criminal Justice System. In R. Zaplin (Ed.), female offenders: critical perspectives and effective interventions (2nd ed., pp. 113–131). Jones & Bartlett Learning. Covington, S. (2022). Creating a Trauma‐Informed Justice System for Women. The Wiley Handbook on What Works with Girls and Women in Conflict with the Law: A Critical Review of Theory, Practice, and Policy, 172-184. Department of Health & Social Care. (2020). Chief Social Workers’ Annual Report: 2019-2020 . https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-social-workers-for-adults-annual-report-2019-to-2020/chief-social-workers-annual-report-2019-to-2020 Du Rose, N. (2015). The governance of female drug users: Women’s experiences of drug policy . Policy Press. Havard, T. E., Densley, J. A., Whittaker, A., & Wills, J. (2021). Street gangs and coercive control: The gendered exploitation of young women and girls in county lines . Criminology & Criminal Justice , 174889582110515. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211051513 HM Government. (2018). Serious Violence Strategy . https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/698009/serious-violence-strategy.pdf HM Government. (2021). From Harm to Hope: A 10-year drugs plan to cut crime and save lives . https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043484/From_harm_to_hope_PDF.pdf Home Office. (2021, January 20). £148 million to cut drugs crime. GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/148-million-to-cut-drugs-crime Leonard, J., & Windle, J. (2020). ‘I could have went down a different path’: Talking to people who used drugs problematically and service providers about Irish drug policy alternatives. International Journal of Drug Policy , 84, 102891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.102891 Ministry of Justice. (2021, January 23). Concordat on women in or at risk of contact with the Criminal Justice System . GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/concordat-on-women-in-or-at-risk-of-contact-with-the-criminal-justice-system Moyle, L. (2019). Situating Vulnerability and Exploitation in Street-Level Drug Markets: Cuckooing, Commuting, and the “County Lines” Drug Supply Model. Journal of Drug Issues , 49(4), 739–755. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042619861938 Munro, V. E., & Scoular, J. (2012). Abusing vulnerability? Contemporary law and policy responses to sex work in the UK. Feminist Legal Studies , 20(3), 189-206. Olver, K., & Cockbain, E. (2021). Professionals’ Views on Responding to County Lines‐Related Criminal Exploitation in the West Midlands, UK. Child Abuse Review , 30(4), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2704 Pyrooz, D. C., Moule, R. K., & Decker, S. H. (2013). The Contribution of Gang Membership to the Victim–Offender Overlap. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquenc y, 51(3), 315–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427813516128 Rowe, A. (2011). Narratives of self and identity in women’s prisons: Stigma and the struggle for self-definition in penal regimes. Punishment & Society , 13(5), 571-591. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. SAGE Publications Ltd. Sorsa, M. A., Kiikkala, I., & Åstedt-Kurki, P. (2015). Bracketing as a skill in conducting unstructured qualitative interviews. Nurse researcher , 22(4). Spicer, J., Moyle, L., & Coomber, R. (2019). The variable and evolving nature of ‘cuckooing’ as a form of criminal exploitation in street level drug markets. Trends in Organized Crime , 23(4), 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-019-09368-5 Spicer, J. (2021). The policing of cuckooing in ‘County Lines’ drug dealing: An ethnographic study of an amplification spiral. The British Journal of Criminology , 61(5), 1390–1406. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azab027 The National Crime Agency. (2016, November). County Lines Gang Violence, Exploitation & Drug Supply 2016. Drug Threat Team, Organised Crime. https://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/who-we-are/publications/15-county-lines-gang-violence-exploitation-and-drug-supply-2016/file Walsh, P. (2019, December 2). More than 1500 arrests in drug dealing crackdown. Eastern Daily Press. Retrieved 18 January 2022, from https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/more-than-1500-arrested-after-three-years-of-new-drug-1483102 Wincup, E. (2019). Women as vulnerable subjects: A gendered reading of the English and Irish drug strategies. Addictive Behaviors , 98. Willig, C. (2008 ). Introducing qualitative research in psychology: Adventures in theory and method (2nd ed.). Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press. Windle, J., & Briggs, D. (2015). ‘It’s like working away for two weeks’: The harms associated with young drug dealers commuting from a saturated London drug market. Crime Prevention and Community Safety , 17(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2015.2 Footnotes Any identifiable information in the quotations has been removed to protect anonymity. Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7584525","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":513206897,"identity":"29266677-2213-4c62-8791-24ffb87cb297","order_by":0,"name":"Jonna Barry","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Roehampton","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jonna","middleName":"","lastName":"Barry","suffix":""},{"id":513206898,"identity":"4b6dde62-f934-4899-ba15-b7940c138c6b","order_by":1,"name":"Zetta G. Kougiali","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8840-5579","institution":"Liverpool John Moores University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zetta","middleName":"G.","lastName":"Kougiali","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-09-10 15:39:22","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7584525/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7584525/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":91063780,"identity":"c957f822-825c-4fc0-9afa-15bf9f657720","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-11 09:29:38","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":427352,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7584525/v1/599bd557-8620-4866-9d3d-18007d50c8e2.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eThe Lived Experiences of Women Criminalised as Part of County Lines Enforcement: Victims or Offenders?\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eMuch of the literature and research available in relation to county lines and gangs has focused on young people and the risks and harms they are exposed to (Abrams et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Havard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Windle \u0026amp; Briggs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Due to the focus of relevant research on young people, there is a recognition in the literature that there is a need for further research that could inform practice and shape responses to the inherent vulnerabilities of adults with experiences of exploitation and county lines (Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This project aims to address a significant gap in research by exploring the lived experience of adult women affected by county lines and their experiences within the \u0026lsquo;victim-offender dichotomy\u0026rsquo; (Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This qualitative research with a marginalised group of women experiencing multiple disadvantage aims to explore the impact of criminalisation and how this may, in turn, impact disclosures of abuse and harm by vulnerable groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch indicates that women with experience of intersecting issues of multiple disadvantage often have compounded trauma as a result of abuse and societal stigma (Covington, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Agenda, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The relationship between experiences of multiple disadvantage and offending has been highlighted as a commonality in women imprisoned for violent offences (Batchelor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e), while the experience of imprisonment can further exacerbate disadvantage and re-traumatise criminalised women with experiences of violence and abuse (Du Rose, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). As indicated in Agenda\u0026rsquo;s recent report on young women\u0026rsquo;s experiences of the criminal justice system (Agenda, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), young women had disproportional experiences of rape and domestic abuse and criminal justice responses contributed to additional marginalisation and re-traumatisation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt has been previously argued that positioning drug policy within the crime response tends to result in a lack of measures to address structural and social disadvantages that contribute to harmful drug behaviours (Brown \u0026amp; Wincup, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Increases in enforcement could directly impact the most disadvantaged, resulting in further criminalisation and reoffending. Research suggests that responses that \u0026lsquo;problematise\u0026rsquo; or focus solely on offending behaviour are less successful in engaging young women as they do not value the reality and impact of the young woman\u0026rsquo;s life experiences (Batchelor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Agenda, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The present research follows recent policies around the climate of a \u0026ldquo;crackdown\u0026rdquo; on county lines gangs and drug use as described in the current government drugs strategy (HM Government, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The National Crime Agency briefing in 2016 highlighted that \u0026ldquo;90% of police force areas reported that gangs are utilising consenting adult females to assist criminal activities\u0026rdquo; (NCA, 2016, p8). Between 2016\u0026ndash;2019 one Constabulary area\u0026rsquo;s response to \u0026lsquo;County lines\u0026rsquo; activity \u0026lsquo;Operation Gravity\u0026rsquo; resulted in 1,503 arrests, of which almost 200 were women, and nearly 200 were under 18yrs (Walsh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). It is necessary to relate the prevalence of both groups to the Home Office\u0026rsquo;s definition of county lines and the specific mention of the exploitation of vulnerable children and adults (HM Government, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The impact of county lines, from a policing perspective, has resulted in a new pilot project called ADDER (Addiction, Diversion, Disruption, Enforcement and Recovery) as the response in several force areas, including the area of data collection for this project (Home Office, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExisting research involving adults in county lines has included ethnographic research focusing on the dynamics of and evolution of the \u0026lsquo;crack house\u0026rsquo; (Briggs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). More recently, research has tended to focus on the drug user, market, supply and issues related to \u0026lsquo;cuckooing\u0026rsquo; (Moyle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Spicer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Spicer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The county lines strategy, which is centred around criminalisation and enforcement, is heavily linked to the vulnerability agenda; much of the existing research involves adults in relation to the difficulties of this in practice from a policing and frontline perspective (Moyle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Spicer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Spicer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Spicer (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) argues that the widely used practice of welfare checks, utilised by Police as a means of protecting those at risk, can result in the criminalisation of the vulnerable tenant when drug dealers are present. Similarly, Leonard \u0026amp; Windle (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) note that drug users overwhelmingly support that criminalisation does not stop people from using drugs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWindle \u0026amp; Briggs (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) identified disadvantage and poverty as the primary societal factors contributing to a young person\u0026rsquo;s pathway into county lines activity. A recent study with professional respondents highlighted the difficulty in practice when the exploited young person becomes the exploiter, particularly when they have committed modern slavery offences (Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The young person previously identified as needing statutory input in relation to child sexual exploitation (CSE) concerns can become the groomer or exploiter. It has been recognised that exploitation does not stop at 18yrs and that statutory safeguarding responses are ill-equipped to manage this in practice (Dept of Health \u0026amp; Social Care, 2020, 3.1). Research recently conducted in the U.S. has described how victims of CSE are overrepresented in the criminal justice system (Abrams et al., 2021). International literature suggests a need for more research on this phenomenon while also highlighting a gap in capturing the voice of the criminalised individual rather than professionals (Havard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The nuances of exploitation feature heavily in the literature relating to county lines, particularly highlighting the idea of the victim-offender dichotomy (Havard et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Pyrooz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Notably, gang members are identified as being twice as likely to fit into both categories, experiencing violence as the victim and in offending behaviour (Pyrooz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The overarching theme of exploitation in considering adults\u0026rsquo; involvement in county lines raises points for discussion around agency and choice. It has been suggested that women tend to be absent from drug policy due to the prevalence of men using substances; references to women are made within a framework of vulnerability, contributing to their portrayal as victims without agency (Wincup, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In examining women\u0026rsquo;s involvement in county lines, consent must be considered; women\u0026rsquo;s involvement is described as linked with domestic abuse, cuckooing and transactional sexual arrangements, thereby suggesting coercive control is inherent in the exchanges (NCA, 2016). There is much debate regarding agency and choice in relation to county lines and cuckooing (Moyle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Spicer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Havard et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) suggest viewing the involvement of women and girls in gangs through the lens of the coercive control model, highlighting the threat of and experience of violence to exert power and control. The increase in the use of the \u0026lsquo;vulnerable\u0026rsquo; person in research policy and practice, while a positive step in avoiding victim blaming, can also be as labelling and assuming a lack of agency in someone\u0026rsquo;s decision-making (Brown, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Munro \u0026amp; Scoular, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Recent research has sought to challenge the notion of the exploited individual by narrowing it to structural and societal issues related to deprivation, where involvement in county lines is seen as the better option (Moyle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Spicer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe current study seeks to offer valuable insight into the experience of young women being criminalised within the context of county lines, offering recommendations to improve responses to women affected by county lines \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip; we cannot simply arrest our way out of this problem\u0026rdquo; (Moyle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, p755). Research suggests that we do not yet fully understand the risk and needs of adults within the context of county lines, which has broader implications for safeguarding and the concept of vulnerability (Moyle, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The complexities of safeguarding adults experiencing exploitation and the inability of current legislation (The Care Act, 2014) to respond are acknowledged alongside the difficulty in managing safeguarding in frontline policing within a delicate balance of responding to crime and vulnerability simultaneously.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe current study aims to offer valuable insight into the experiences of an identified \u0026lsquo;vulnerable\u0026rsquo; group and how it feels to face barriers to accessing statutory support and contribute to the debate around agency, choice and vulnerability in how this is experienced or referred to by the participants. As recently noted, valuing women as partners and recognising their input is imperative in rebuilding trust and supporting women to effect positive change in their lives (Batchelor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Agenda, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Vulnerability, agency, capacity, and how these factors relate to responses to women and safeguarding practices are central to the current study. Following on from The Female Offender Strategy (2018), The Concordat on Women in or at risk of contact with the Criminal Justice System recognises the need for trauma and gender-informed responses to women and advocates for multi-agency working in a \u0026lsquo;whole systems approach\u0026rsquo; (Ministry of Justice, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Ensuring a trauma-informed approach under a new pilot focused on enforcement may come with challenges; the current study will shed light on the implications of ADDER in practice by hearing from women directly impacted by the new approach.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eTheoretical and analytical approach\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research aimed to capture the lived experiences of women\u0026rsquo;s shared reality of being criminalised as part of the county lines response. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was chosen to elicit the most in-depth results and prioritise women\u0026rsquo;s voices and experiences. As an analytical framework, IPA aims to get close to the individual to examine, explore and highlight their lived experience (Eatough \u0026amp; Smith, 2017; Pietkiewicz \u0026amp; Smith, 2012), in agreement with the study\u0026rsquo;s positioning and consideration of participants as experts by experience (Smith \u0026amp; Nizza, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch procedures\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were recruited via a local specialist women\u0026rsquo;s third-sector service who have an established trusted relationship with this marginalised group. Considering the depth of analysis in an IPA study, a smaller sample size of six women were initially recruited, and three of those took part (Pietkiewicz \u0026amp; Smith, 2012). Participants were recruited using a purposive sampling method, ensuring a homogenous sample with the ability to provide insight into their personal experiences of the issues in the research (Larkin \u0026amp; Thompson, Pietkiewicz \u0026amp; Smith, 2012; Smith \u0026amp; Nizza, 2021). The criteria used to identify suitable participants included women aged 18\u0026ndash;40 years who had experiences of multiple disadvantage, particularly within the criminal justice system, and experiences of exploitation in the context of county lines before and after 18 years of age. Participants were initially approached by their women\u0026rsquo;s services practitioner and provided with the participant information sheet; they were then contacted by telephone by the first author following verbal consent.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData Collection\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe first author was the primary interviewer and had previous professional background in this area. Due to the participants\u0026rsquo; experience of multiple disadvantage, much consideration was given to the guiding principle of respect for the participant, and participant wellbeing was ensured by a flexible, adaptable and respectful approach towards the complexities of the participants\u0026rsquo; lives and adhering to trauma-informed principles (Elliott et al., 1999). Considering the reality of the participants\u0026rsquo; lives, interviews were attempted on numerous occasions, and the interviewer remained flexible and available to attend the service at a time that suited the participant. In some cases, interviews were rearranged several times, as was expected when working with such a marginalised group. Semi-structured interviews, lasting between 35 to 65 minutes, were conducted at the service with three participants and were audio recorded. Although a modest sample size, the recruited participants were part of a significantly marginalised group, often mistrustful of services and professionals and have been noted to struggle to have their voices heard. Originally six women agreed to partake and were keen to describe their experiences; however, the reality of experiences of multiple disadvantage, including, for example, sexual violence, homelessness, court appearances and arrests, at the time of recruitment led to difficulties in engagement in the process within the planned timescales.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e The interviews were participant-led; however, an interview protocol including prompts was used flexibly to facilitate the interview flow. Participants were made aware of the context of the interview prior to beginning, and to ensure clarity and informed consent, the interviewer repeated the areas that would be explored during the interview, such as the experience of becoming involved in county lines and the experience of being criminalised. Participants were informed they were free to structure the content or mention anything they were comfortable with, while the interviewer would only interject to clarify or get the participant to elaborate. The interview began with an open question relating to the participants\u0026rsquo; understanding and experience of county lines. To ensure confidentiality, once recorded, each interview was immediately anonymised, removing identifiers, transcribed, and then stored in a password-protected folder in line with the host University\u0026rsquo;s policy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eEthical Considerations\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e This research was given ethical approval by the host University\u0026rsquo;s Ethics Committee. Ethical issues were considered in conjunction with the BPS Code of Human Research Ethics, the BPS Code of Ethics and the host University\u0026rsquo;s Ethical Guidelines. The interviewer adhered to trauma-informed principles and relevant codes of ethics by ensuring to gain clear, informed consent from participants. This process was facilitated by requesting a practitioner to approach the participants initially. Once there was an expression of interest, the interviewer met with the participant before the interview to gain written informed consent, reasserting the right to stop or withdraw throughout the process. In recognition of the possible re-traumatising nature of the interview, the interviewer ensured to be flexible in their approach, allowing numerous opportunities to reschedule and suggesting breaks if needed. The interviewer allowed 15 minutes to discuss anything at the end of each interview and ensured each participant had access to a debrief with a women\u0026rsquo;s services practitioner should they need it.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e Risk of harm was considered, particularly within the nature of the specific research area and the limits of confidentiality under the BPS guidelines and clarified areas where confidentiality would need to be broken, such as disclosure of risk of harm to self or others. The interviewer was aware of the local safeguarding landscape and that some women had multi-agency involvement related to any ongoing exploitation or abuse and had a prior professional relationship with the service in a victim-focused role. Although this previous experience allowed establishing rapport with a marginalised group, it was imperative, before the start of the interview, to ensure the participants had clarity and understood the role and obligations of the researcher as opposed to a supportive practitioner role.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAnalysis\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInterviews were transcribed verbatim, with multiple readings and note-taking, to become fully immersed in the data, giving voice to participants (Pietkiewicz \u0026amp; Smith, 2012). Each transcript was analysed individually before moving to the next to ensure an idiographic approach to the data (Willig, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). A reflective approach was employed throughout the data analysis process, acknowledging that such reflection and recognition of potential bias can allow for increased insight and understanding of the participants\u0026rsquo; experience than others would have (Elliott et al., 1999).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA four-stage analysis was conducted, guided by the principles and procedures set out in Smith \u0026amp; Nizza (2021). The first stage involved multiple readings and exploratory note-keeping, capturing the essence and meaning of participants\u0026rsquo; experiences. The second stage of the analysis involved clustering the experiential statements looking for any connections or similarities to inform the personal experiential statements in the next stage. A table of personal experiential themes was created as part of the third analytical stage, including naming the clusters of experiential themes to acknowledge accurate reflection of participants\u0026rsquo; accounts. The fourth stage of the analysis involved a cross-case analysis to allow the exploration of any connections, similarities, or differences across each of the participants\u0026rsquo; cases, leading to a group of experiential themes. During this process, themes and subthemes were renamed and restructured several times, consistent with the iterative nature of IPA (Smith \u0026amp; Nizza, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis section presents the four experiential themes identified following analysis of the interviews: agency, choice and loss of control; from protection to coercion; prison as a marginalised place of safety; and nowhere to turn. Each participant has been given a pseudonym to protect anonymity\u003csup\u003e\u003csup\u003e[1]\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAgency, Choice and Loss of Control \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants’ attempts to make sense of their addiction and how this, in turn, led to involvement in the criminal justice system was evident in the data, and their accounts describe shared experiences of abuse, the removal of children and mental ill health leading to the use of drugs as a coping mechanism. Ella describes the circumstances leading to initial drug use as linked to adverse life circumstances “…like no one has had the perfect life and decided one day oh let me pick up a crack pipe…”. Olivia describes how she was diagnosed with depression and began smoking heroin as a coping mechanism resulting in the removal of her children “…and then I lost my children, cause I just couldn’t cope…lost everythin’ ((pause)) so yeah and then I went to prison”. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants’ perception of their own agency and choice in becoming involved in county lines drug dealing; resorting to running drugs was often perceived as a response to structural factors such as poverty and as a way to manage their addiction. Initial agentic action was particularly notable in descriptions of actively choosing to get involved in dealing and ‘inviting dealers around’, as reported by Charlotte\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003eElla describes how dealing seemed like a worthwhile money-making opportunity while other options and resources were restricted \u003cem\u003e“… I just got outta jail, and I thought he’s offering me £150 …I didn’t feel like I was getting made to do something I didn’t want to do… I was actually getting paid for it this time…”. \u003c/em\u003eLike Ella, participants described their involvement as helping create a sense of belonging, make connections and live a certain lifestyle, but also a gained sense of importance. Charlotte recounts, “\u003cem\u003e…I was very in like in with everybody… I knew a lot of people… a good connection… I had so many customers there for them… I was always the one they would come to first…” \u003c/em\u003eindicating agentic choice towards a perceived lucrative activity with associated social gains. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to escalation, participants identified incidents and requests that appeared to be initially harmless. Charlotte, for example, described the sudden nature of getting a phone call from someone wanting to come to the area, which at first is friendly, offering to \u003cem\u003e“…look after you…”. \u003c/em\u003eAnother participant described being introduced to a dealer through older influences who, at first, minimised the risk associated with her involvement by asking her to accompany him and just hang out or sit in a hotel for the night while not being involved in any dealing. Such seemingly harmless requests appear to suddenly escalate and were perceived by participants as the targeting stage of exploitation, leading to an escalation in involvement. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEach of the participants described an eventual feeling of a loss of control in their experiences, highlighting the dynamic process of perceived agentic personal choice being used as a means of their own exploitation. Participants described how having dealers at their property quickly escalated to an influx of people and their inability to remove them from the premises. The sudden escalation towards an entrapment of participants, often with the use of intimidating practices within the cuckooing environment, was described by Olivia \u003cem\u003e“… they’ve just gone off their heads… they slit the sofas and had a knife up to us…”. \u003c/em\u003eParticipants also reflected on the role of their addiction in their initial involvement, as dealing would facilitate easier access to drugs. Drug use was consistently reported as a common element in participants’ accounts, enabling further relational dependence and control through violence, leading to an escalation in how participants’ exploitation and role in county lines evolved.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrom Protection to Coercion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants’ experience of the coercive nature of the county lines environment was evident throughout the data. Participants describe a climate of fear, with violence and intimidation tactics employed to ensure compliance. Participants describe turning to a relationship with a male to feel a sense of safety, perceiving this to be a protective factor in the exploitative environment. These relationships tended to be exploitative in nature, further compounding negative experiences, while the data indicate that prior experiences of trauma, abuse, and dysfunctional relational histories impacted perceptions of relationships in this context. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants gave multiple examples of demeaning language and behaviour used towards them by the dealers or ‘shotters’, describing how women are spoken to completely differently, interpreted as an element of the coercive aspect of county lines. Charlotte describes, “…they speak to women completely different to how they speak to the men; you know it’s not good.”. Participants describe experiences as both a woman and a sex worker in the context of county lines, with this being perceived as increasing the level of felt vulnerability. Participants recalled the added pressure when dealers knew they were sex working. This was evident in accounts of the drug user/drug dealer relationship and personal relationships where a dependency had been created. Participants who identified as sex workers describe elements of coercive control and assumptions of sexual engagement as trading currency where drug provision was involved. Olivia describes this exchange as an inherent element of transactions with dealers “… obviously do favours for em you know sexual favours… they’d take the mickey… give a five-pound shot…really little money… the dealers… they think you’ll do anything for the drugs.” Ella describes how the possession of drugs by her partner defined the direction of power in the relationship “… he had the drugs… he had the power… I had to do anything he wanted… the last thing you want to do is have sex or you know doing sexual favours… but he’d make me do that so I had to get better…”. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne of the women described her shock at the reality of the ‘trap house’ when she was first introduced to the county lines environment at 16. Ella reflects on the nature of her relationship with a much older male, framed within a context of fear and sought as an attempt for protection “\u003cem\u003e… he sort of took me under his wing(…) I just wanted to be protected and stuff… I was so scared about living this new life by myself…”. \u003c/em\u003eOlivia describes having a relationship as an essential protective factor when involved in county lines “\u003cem\u003e… if you’ve got a partner, they protect you don’t they… and they don’t seem to prey on you…”. \u003c/em\u003eOlivia presents the possibility, but not certainty, of her partner not preying on her as a positive element and, similar to other participants, seems to be balancing feeling safe in an unsafe environment through unhealthy relationships. Ella describes how this attempt to seek protection and the associated feelings of helplessness and vulnerability allowed for an exploitative relationship of complete dependence, “\u003cem\u003e…I relied on him so much for everything my feeling of safety, feel like, feeling of wanted and loved and stuff ((pause)).” \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eWhile involved in relationships, participants describe more frequent encounters with law enforcement. One of the women, for example, was subjected to numerous arrests and strip searches, which she reported as a highly frightening experience, after having been coerced into ‘plugging’ drugs. The seriousness and risks around such actions were portrayed as being minimised by the partner whom she relied upon for protection and reassurance. Despite such incidents, women describe how protective they felt of their relationship, even after being arrested. Ella recounts: “\u003cem\u003e… I thought I was really in love with this guy and I didn’t wana um, snitch on him… I thought we were gona get out and be together I was that deluded mate….” \u003c/em\u003eElla reflected on the contradictory attempts to protect her partner, who had made her feel threatened throughout the relationship by alluding to knowing where her mom lived. Participants’ accounts highlighted the power imbalance existing in their relationships within the context of county lines. In most instances, the relationships offered a sense of safety while being simultaneously exploitative and abusive, often through the dependence created by women’s need for protection. The coercive aspect of such relationships led to compliance, resulting in women taking lengthy sentences to protect a perceived equally protective partner, being further criminalised and re-traumatised.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePrison as a marginalised place of Safety\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll accounts highlighted the level of multiple disadvantage each faced, including homelessness, substance use, domestic abuse, mental ill health, and sexual violence. Participants perceived prison as a place of safety, as opposed to a site of oppression, which has been previously noted as a common occurrence in vulnerable, criminalised women who have experienced violence or have limited access to support (see, for example, Bradley \u0026amp; Davino, 2002; Rowe, 2011). Such accounts were presented within a comparative context with prior ‘chaotic’ life in the community, exacerbated by further marginalisation and barriers to support.Charlotte recalls her experience before imprisonment\u003cem\u003e “…when you’ve got such a chaotic lifestyle and you don’t know where you’re sleepin from one night to the next it’s not always easy to get to these appointments and stuff you know… if you’re not on a script…”, indicating the unpredictability of daily life and the level of uncertainty in accessing secure housing and other sources of support.\u003c/em\u003e Similarly, Ella describes a sense of hopelessness, fatalism and surrender in the level of disadvantage that felt insurmountable “\u003cem\u003e…you can never see where you can start getting that better life…getting housed or getting away from relationship or getting off the drugs ever…”. \u003c/em\u003eParticipants’ shared sense of desperation in relation to their experiences of substance use, homelessness and particularly violence was highlighted in their realisation that their arrest and sentence might have saved their life.\u003cem\u003e Contextual factors and experiences of harm in county lines exploitation are implicit in participants’ perception of prison as a place of safety or escape. Ella, for example, highlights how prison removed her from a controlling environment and interrupted the experience of violence and victimisation “… I wasn’t like being controlled by this, being hit for that… it was like a break from it all…”.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInvolvement in county lines and lived realities of multiple disadvantage often led to women being further removed from services and facing increased barriers to accessing support and having their basic needs met in the community. Olivia recalls how prison restored a missed sense of normality: “\u003cem\u003e… I was like oh I’m eatin again and I’m actually doin normal things and makin myself better…” \u003c/em\u003eand Charlotte evalutates prison as an improvement on the minimum basis of basic needs, not previously met in the community: \u003cem\u003e“…at least I was safe, I had a roof over my head, I had three meals a day…”. \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eAlthough prison served as a temporary disruptor of prior distressing experiences, incarceration exacerbated the perceived sense of social inequality and disadvantage. Participants reported feelings of felt stigma and shame, ‘othering’ as an outsider in society, and a sense of hopelessness and fear for the future; rather than addressing the underlying issues, prison added to experiences of multiple disadvantage by further marginalising the participants and rendering return to the community even more difficult. \u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eOlivia described her feelings of shame at being in the newspaper following her arrest “\u003cem\u003e…when you’ve had your name in the paper and then my mum… she’s been embarrassed by me…” \u003c/em\u003ewhil\u003cem\u003ee \u003c/em\u003eElla reflects, with a sense of hopelessness, how a prison sentence will have a long lasting impact on her future “\u003cem\u003e… even if you go to prison once you’ve got that on your record… you have that first sentence and think well I’ve fucked it for myself now\u003c/em\u003e…”. When discussing how she felt following her release from prison, Olivia described\u003cem\u003e “I just got worse I think, yeah, I was homeless…” \u003c/em\u003eand Ella added\u003cem\u003e “… I got recalled I got out and came back to him and it was really bad violence, like the worst sort of violence I’ve had in a relationship…”. \u003c/em\u003eWhile prison can be initially perceived as a place of safety by physically enabling women to be removed from unsafe environments, as participants’ accounts revealed, the underlying causes and associated issues are not addressed. Return to the same environment after release, then, has the potential to increase violence and victimisation. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNowhere to Turn\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll the participants described feeling unable to disclose to professionals out of fear of being criminalised but also due to fear of reprisals. The participants provided accounts of a breakdown in relationships with Police leading to a sense of mistrust, experienced as a power imbalance due to gender, the hierarchy in the drug user/ drug dealer relationship and the exploitative nature of county lines. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants discussed their feelings around opening up to professionals and predominantly around their fear of being criminalised. Participants described a breakdown in relationships with the Police due to feeling let down by previous responses, particularly in relation to domestic abuse; Ella describes “…they see that the situation is fine and they leave…make women believe well they’re not here to protect me you know what I mean why would I talk to them?”. Ella describes her experience of CSE “…tried to push me into prostitution basically and I told them about that, and they did nothing yeah… you know like I was 17 at the time I was clearly scared…”. The women described feeling complicit in offending and undeserving of support as they had contributed to establishing a ‘line’. Charlotte explained how, in the context of law enforcement, criminal involvement is expected to overpower and undermine experiences of victimisation, leading to any support-seeking attempts being hindered or halted: “\u003cem\u003e… I’ve sold and been the runner and all this and that… you’ve already played your role and you’ve already broke the law so you can’t exactly phone up the police…”. \u003c/em\u003eParticipants also describe occasions of ‘cuckooing’ where homeowners were penalised when professionals were involved; as Olivia noted “\u003cem\u003e… that’s a bit difficult cause if you’ve got a flat you’re gona get in trouble yourself… my friend… he lost his flat through that…”.\u003c/em\u003e Participants also disclosed similar experiences of the safeguarding arena and described the fear of information being passed on and having confidentiality broken, highlighting a felt power imbalance and reluctance to trust professionals. In these cases, agency and choice of disclosure were exercised under the expectation of a punitive response, contributing to the potential prolonging of victimisation and restricted routes to support.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe hierarchical structures in county lines were evident in the ways participants separated themselves from other levels of the chain. Charlotte refers to \u003cem\u003e“… people like me… we’re the addicts… than the main guys…”\u003c/em\u003e positioning herself and people experiencing addiction on a subordinate level to those higher up in the hierarchical structure. It is in this context that the participants refer to themselves as vulnerable, trapped within multiple hierarchical layers and power imbalances of opposing legalities. Ella, for example, described a sense of unfairness and injustice as to the targeting and criminalisation of the users at the ‘bottom’ of the hierarchical chain, and the multiplication of vulnerability within the several hierarchical levels and power imbalances: “\u003cem\u003e…these are like the bottom people… the users… they’re vulnerable…I just think it’s wrong… they’re getting the fuckin users that are literally runnin out for their…one bit of dark and one bit of white… you’re targeting the same people you’re meant to be protecting you know… it’s sort of defeating the object…”\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"},{"header":"Discussion and conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis research aimed to address the gap in the exploration of the lived experiences of women criminalised in the context of county lines enforcement. The findings suggest that women have gendered experiences of trauma and abuse, and they are further re-traumatised by punitive responses in the context of county lines enforcement. The findings highlight that women are positioned at both sides of the victim-offender dichotomy, which defines enforcement responses and access to support.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe research findings are consistent with the literature relating to women in the criminal justice system having experiences of intersecting issues of multiple disadvantage (Covington, 2007; Agenda, 2019). All the participants had experiences of intersecting issues of homelessness, substance use, mental ill health, domestic abuse, and sexual violence. Participants identified that these experiences led to them facing increased barriers to support, marginalisation and involvement in the criminal justice system. Participants identified that homelessness and substance use led to increased vulnerability in the context of county lines exploitation. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrevious research has highlighted that criminalising women serves to further exacerbate experiences of multiple disadvantage and that solely problematising behaviours does not value the reality and impact of women’s life experiences (Batchelor, 2005; Du Rose, 2015; Agenda, 2022). Research also suggests that prison is often seen as a break or a safe haven (Du Rose, 2015). The findings of the present study further suggest that the experience of multiple disadvantage directly contributes to a view that prison is an escape, with each participant identifying that experiences of homelessness, substance use and abuse led to prison feeling like the only way to meet their basic needs. Participants identified that experiences of violence and control in the context of county lines led to prison being viewed as a place of safety and an easier route to escape abuse. Consistent with previous research, prison was reported as further compounding participants’ experience of multiple disadvantage without addressing any underlying issues that led to offending behaviour and contributed to victimisation. Participants identified that going to prison led to feelings of stigma and shame, which further marginalised them from mainstream society and resources of support. More specifically for young women, the findings pointed to the abject fear of going to prison for the first time as a teenager and the impact this has going forward. Participants were of the view that a prison record did not, in fact, deter offending behaviour but instilled a sense of hopelessness and a sense that their future was already affected. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe women participating in this research highlighted gendered experiences of trauma and abuse which, in turn, led to the use of coping strategies such as substance use, in agreement with previous findings (Covington, 2017; Agenda, 2019; Agenda, 2022) and often resort to drug use as a form of escape from psychological pain (Du Rose, 2015). An overarching theme of re-traumatisation was evident in the findings, especially in participants’ experiences of violence and control in the county lines environment and relationships in that context. Participants identified that prison has the impact of further compounding traumatic experiences; as expressed through their own experiences but also through recollections of other women’s experiences in prison. There is a consensus in the literature that drug policy often criminalises women rather than addresses the underlying structural and personal causes of their drug use (Brown \u0026amp; Wincup, 2017; Wincup, 2017). This was also true for participants' experiences of trauma and victimisation within county lines, raising concern that women will still effectively be receiving treatment from the structures that are designed to punish them (Du Rose, 2015). Participants’ accounts point against criminalising drug policies and towards incorporating a more therapeutic approach alongside treatment. The findings in the research contribute to the debate around agency and choice in the context of exploitation and county lines indicating that agency and choice exist simultaneously with exploitation. The notion of vulnerability and how it relates to agency is much debated in the literature, with research suggesting it can be labelling and posit a lack of agency (Brown, 2012; Munro \u0026amp; Scoular, 2012). Participants described themselves as vulnerable, but this was attached to negative experiences, such as sexual exploitation, violence and abuse, in line with research on sex workers and vulnerability, suggesting it helps reflect on experiences (Brown \u0026amp; Sanders, 2017). Relevant studies have indicated that there is agency in involvement in county lines and cuckooing as a response to structural factors of poverty, suggesting drug users are making choices in relation to managing their addiction (Moyle, 2019; Spicer et al., 2019). The findings in the research support this position; participants identified that allowing dealers into their flats was often seen as the best option to avoid resorting to shoplifting or other means of managing their addiction. Participants also recognised that the ‘drug world’ created a sense of belonging and connection while also providing economic advantages, consistent with DuRose’s (2015) findings. Conversely, a thread of the stages of exploitation was evident in the findings alongside an overwhelming sense of a loss of control, suggesting that looking at the involvement of women in county lines through a coercive control lens would serve to conceptualise this experience (Havard et al., 2021). \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne of the aims of this research was to capture women’s experiences within the victim-offender dichotomy in relation to county lines and exploitation. The findings support the literature, which considers the nuances of exploitation and how this plays out in the context of county lines (Havard et al., 2021; Olver \u0026amp; Cockbain, 2021; Pyrooz et al., 2013), with participants identifying early trauma and homelessness at a young age as increased vulnerabilities in their case. Many participants felt at risk of harm in the county lines environment and turned to a relationship with a male as a protective factor. These relationships often led to further exploitation and an escalation in county lines involvement. The notion of the victim-offender dichotomy is a thread in each of the findings in relation to women’s experiences of being criminalised as part of county lines enforcement. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe research findings shed light on the impact of the victim-offender dichotomy on those involved in county lines particularly within the context of restricted resources for support and entrapment in multiple hierarchical structures and power imbalances. Undeniably, frontline practitioners faces real challenges in responding to county lines when the strategy is so heavily centred around criminalisation and enforcement while also linked to the vulnerability agenda (Moyle, 2019; Spicer et al., 2019; Spicer, 2021). This is especially true for policing; the findings pointed towards a power imbalance that was pervasive in the participants’ experiences leading e to a reluctance to disclose their victimisations and, in turn, be removed and marginalised from the services that could support them. Participants felt strongly against disclosing to professionals both for fear of reprisals and fear they would be considered complicit in the offending or county lines activity. This was most evident in cases of cuckooing where property ownership overlapped with vulnerability and victimisation, leading either to loss of property or criminalisation (also reported in Spicer, 2021). Relationships with the Police appear to be further impacted by participants’ experiences of responses to CSE and domestic abuse. Participants identified feeling let down by responses that impacted their ability to disclose any further harm and strongly felt a sense of unfairness and injustice in the county lines environment. Participants also highlighted the hierarchy that was implicit with most of them identifying as the voiceless addict and identified that enforcement responses were only serving to penalise the most vulnerable, those at the bottom of the hierarchy, reinforcing the belief that the Police do not serve to protect, but to criminalise. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe sense of the coercive and controlling nature of the county lines environment to ensure compliance was especially prevalent in the data. Participants identified feeling a loss of control in the cuckooing environment through sexual exploitation and relationships. Participants’ experiences of violence and intimidation often led to them engaging in a relationship with a male to feel protected. Findings highlighted that these relationships were often exploitative and were used to perpetuate the control and involvement in county lines. This is consistent with the literature suggesting that the threat of and use of violence exerts power and control in county lines (Havard et al., 2021). These perceived relationships, while instilling fear of reprisal, also imbue a sense of loyalty, resulting in participants being willing to accept a sentence to protect the relationship, resulting in increased criminalisation. The findings suggest there is a valuable argument for looking at county lines through a coercive control lens when considering the part played by women and girls (Havard et al., 2021). The experience of a loss of control appeared to permeate more than the county lines environment. Participants experienced a loss of control in criminal justice responses and responses from professionals in the safeguarding arena where participants felt like their confidentiality had been broken. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere are some limitations to be noted in this research. This research is representative of women experiencing multiple disadvantage in the context of county lines and therefore is not intended to be generalised to all drug users’ experiences. Although the data were rich and each participants’ account provided an in-depth account of their experience, the sample was undoubtedly small; this is reflective of the difficulty of engaging with the specific population and the attempt to do so in a way that is respectful of their lifestyle and priorities over research aims.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this research have highlighted the complexities in managing safeguarding practice in frontline policing in response to county lines exploitation and the difficulties inherent in balancing an enforcement response while responding to vulnerability and harm simultaneously. The findings of this research add context to the suggestion that there is an inability of current legislation (The Care Act, 2014) to respond to exploitation post 18 years creating barriers for adult women experiencing exploitation to access statutory support. The findings here add to the literature relating to women’s experience as both victim and offender and how punitive criminal justice responses further re-traumatise an identified vulnerable group.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsistent with the literature, the findings in this study add weight to the assertion that women in the criminal justice system disproportionally have experience of trauma and abuse. It is therefore imperative that professionals, have awareness of the impact of trauma and abuse on behaviours. It is suggested that professionals need to facilitate opportunities for acknowledging and managing the impact of trauma (Covington, 2022) and have an understanding of trauma to enhance practice, and develop trauma-informed approaches and psychologically informed environments to best meet women’s needs. The increased barriers faced by women experiencing multiple disadvantage, when attempting to access services that could support them in the community are evident throughout this study and lend support to the view that punitive approaches serve to further marginalise and stigmatise women. Overwhelmingly participants reflected on the benefit of having a relationship with a trusted professional and the benefit of non-judgemental, flexible support. It has been highlighted in the literature that to rebuild trust and support women, they must be considered valued partners and input into the process of making positive changes in their lives (Batchelor, 2005; Agenda, 2022). This is particularly relevant in the context of county lines exploitation with participants repeatedly identifying a feeling of a loss of control. Rather than perpetuate this with punitive approaches, professionals and responses should take an approach that emphasises choice and increases agency of women allowing them to be active participants in managing their safety and lives. \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbrams, L. S., Godoy, S. M., Bath, E. P., \u0026amp; Barnert, E. S. (2020). Collaborative Responses to Commercial Sexual Exploitation as a Model of Smart Decarceration. \u003cem\u003eSocial Work\u003c/em\u003e, 65(4), 387\u0026ndash;396. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swaa040\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAgenda. (2019). Breaking down the barriers. https://weareagenda.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Breaking-down-the-Barriers-full-report-FINAL.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAgenda. (2022, March). Young women surviving the criminal justice system. https://weareagenda.org/young-women-surviving-the-cjs/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBARLOW, C., \u0026amp; WEARE, S. (2018). Women as Co-Offenders: Pathways into Crime and Offending Motivations. \u003cem\u003eThe Howard Journal of Crime and Justice\u003c/em\u003e, 58(1), 86\u0026ndash;103.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBatchelor, S. (2005). \u0026lsquo;Prove me the bam!\u0026rsquo;: Victimisation and agency in the lives of young women who commit violent offences. \u003cem\u003eProbation Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 52(4), 358\u0026ndash;375.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBradley, R. G., \u0026amp; Davino, K. M. (2002). Women\u0026rsquo;s perceptions of the prison environment: When prison is \u0026ldquo;the safest place I\u0026rsquo;ve ever been\u0026rdquo;. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of women quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, 26(4), 351-359.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBriggs, D. (2010). Crack houses in the UK: some observations on their operations. \u003cem\u003eDrugs and Alcohol Today\u003c/em\u003e, 10(4), 33\u0026ndash;42. https://doi.org/10.5042/daat.2010.0726\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown, K. (2012). Re-moralising\u0026rsquo; Vulnerability\u0026rsquo;. \u003cem\u003ePeople Place and Policy Online\u003c/em\u003e, 6(1), 41\u0026ndash;53.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown, K., \u0026amp; Sanders, T. (2017). Pragmatic, progressive, problematic: Addressing vulnerability through a local street sex work partnership initiative. \u003cem\u003eSocial Policy and Society\u003c/em\u003e, 16(3), 429-441.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown, K., \u0026amp; Wincup, E. (2020). Producing the vulnerable subject in English drug policy. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Drug Policy\u003c/em\u003e, 80, 102525.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCovington, S. (2007). The Relational Theory of Women\u0026rsquo;s Psychological Development: Implications for the Criminal Justice System. In R. Zaplin (Ed.), female offenders: critical perspectives and effective interventions (2nd ed., pp. 113\u0026ndash;131). Jones \u0026amp; Bartlett Learning.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCovington, S. (2022). Creating a Trauma‐Informed Justice System for Women. The Wiley Handbook on What Works with Girls and Women in Conflict with the Law: A Critical Review of Theory, Practice, and Policy, 172-184.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDepartment of Health \u0026amp; Social Care. (2020). \u003cem\u003eChief Social Workers\u0026rsquo; Annual Report: 2019-2020\u003c/em\u003e. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-social-workers-for-adults-annual-report-2019-to-2020/chief-social-workers-annual-report-2019-to-2020\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDu Rose, N. (2015). \u003cem\u003eThe governance of female drug users: Women\u0026rsquo;s experiences of drug policy\u003c/em\u003e. Policy Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHavard, T. E., Densley, J. A., Whittaker, A., \u0026amp; Wills, J. (2021). Street gangs and coercive control: The gendered exploitation of young women and girls in county lines\u003cem\u003e. Criminology \u0026amp; Criminal Justice\u003c/em\u003e, 174889582110515. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211051513\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHM Government. (2018). \u003cem\u003eSerious Violence Strategy\u003c/em\u003e. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/698009/serious-violence-strategy.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHM Government. (2021). \u003cem\u003eFrom Harm to Hope: A 10-year drugs plan to cut crime and save lives\u003c/em\u003e. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043484/From_harm_to_hope_PDF.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHome Office. (2021, January 20). \u003cem\u003e\u0026pound;148 million to cut drugs crime. \u003c/em\u003eGOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/148-million-to-cut-drugs-crime\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeonard, J., \u0026amp; Windle, J. (2020). \u0026lsquo;I could have went down a different path\u0026rsquo;: Talking to people who used drugs problematically and service providers about Irish drug policy alternatives. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Drug Policy\u003c/em\u003e, 84, 102891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.102891\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry of Justice. (2021, January 23). \u003cem\u003eConcordat on women in or at risk of contact with the Criminal Justice System\u003c/em\u003e. GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/concordat-on-women-in-or-at-risk-of-contact-with-the-criminal-justice-system\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoyle, L. (2019). Situating Vulnerability and Exploitation in Street-Level Drug Markets: Cuckooing, Commuting, and the \u0026ldquo;County Lines\u0026rdquo; Drug Supply Model. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Drug Issues\u003c/em\u003e, 49(4), 739\u0026ndash;755. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042619861938\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMunro, V. E., \u0026amp; Scoular, J. (2012). Abusing vulnerability? Contemporary law and policy responses to sex work in the UK. \u003cem\u003eFeminist Legal Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 20(3), 189-206.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOlver, K., \u0026amp; Cockbain, E. (2021). Professionals\u0026rsquo; Views on Responding to County Lines‐Related Criminal Exploitation in the West Midlands, UK. \u003cem\u003eChild Abuse Review\u003c/em\u003e, 30(4), 347\u0026ndash;362. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2704\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePyrooz, D. C., Moule, R. K., \u0026amp; Decker, S. H. (2013). The Contribution of Gang Membership to the Victim\u0026ndash;Offender Overlap. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Crime and Delinquenc\u003c/em\u003ey, 51(3), 315\u0026ndash;348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427813516128\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRowe, A. (2011). Narratives of self and identity in women\u0026rsquo;s prisons: Stigma and the struggle for self-definition in penal regimes. \u003cem\u003ePunishment \u0026amp; Society\u003c/em\u003e, 13(5), 571-591.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSmith, J. A., Flowers, P., \u0026amp; Larkin, M. (2009). \u003cem\u003eInterpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. \u003c/em\u003eSAGE Publications Ltd.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSorsa, M. A., Kiikkala, I., \u0026amp; \u0026Aring;stedt-Kurki, P. (2015). Bracketing as a skill in conducting unstructured qualitative interviews. \u003cem\u003eNurse researcher\u003c/em\u003e, 22(4).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpicer, J., Moyle, L., \u0026amp; Coomber, R. (2019). The variable and evolving nature of \u0026lsquo;cuckooing\u0026rsquo; as a form of criminal exploitation in street level drug markets. \u003cem\u003eTrends in Organized Crime\u003c/em\u003e, 23(4), 301\u0026ndash;323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-019-09368-5\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSpicer, J. (2021). The policing of cuckooing in \u0026lsquo;County Lines\u0026rsquo; drug dealing: An ethnographic study of an amplification spiral. \u003cem\u003eThe British Journal of Criminology\u003c/em\u003e, 61(5), 1390\u0026ndash;1406. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azab027\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe National Crime Agency. (2016, November). \u003cem\u003eCounty Lines Gang Violence, Exploitation \u0026amp; Drug Supply 2016. Drug Threat Team, Organised Crime.\u003c/em\u003e https://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/who-we-are/publications/15-county-lines-gang-violence-exploitation-and-drug-supply-2016/file\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWalsh, P. (2019, December 2). More than 1500 arrests in drug dealing crackdown. Eastern Daily Press. Retrieved 18 January 2022, from https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/more-than-1500-arrested-after-three-years-of-new-drug-1483102\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWincup, E. (2019). Women as vulnerable subjects: A gendered reading of the English and Irish drug strategies. \u003cem\u003eAddictive Behaviors\u003c/em\u003e, 98.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWillig, C. (2008\u003cem\u003e). Introducing qualitative research in psychology: Adventures in theory and method\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed.). Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWindle, J., \u0026amp; Briggs, D. (2015). \u0026lsquo;It\u0026rsquo;s like working away for two weeks\u0026rsquo;: The harms associated with young drug dealers commuting from a saturated London drug market. \u003cem\u003eCrime Prevention and Community Safety\u003c/em\u003e, 17(2), 105\u0026ndash;119. https://doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2015.2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Any identifiable information in the quotations has been removed to protect anonymity.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"University of Roehampton","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"county lines, multiple disadvantage, victim-offender dichotomy, criminalised women","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7584525/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7584525/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis research aimed to capture the lived experiences of women criminalised in the context of county lines enforcement, focusing on exploring the impact of the victim-offender dichotomy in this context. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used to examine and explore participants\u0026rsquo; lived experiences. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with three women who have experiences of being criminalised as part of the county lines response. The findings reveal that women were impacted by experiences of multiple disadvantage, trauma, and abuse, further compounded by county lines enforcement and involvement. A culture of coercion and violence was reported, with participants\u0026rsquo; lived reality within a \u0026lsquo;victim-offender\u0026rsquo; dichotomy resulting in being marginalised from support. The findings suggest that punitive approaches serve to further re-traumatise women and that professionals need to have an awareness of trauma-informed practice. The findings also indicate that interventions should ensure to increase agency for women experiencing exploitation.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Lived Experiences of Women Criminalised as Part of County Lines Enforcement: Victims or Offenders?","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-11 09:13:33","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7584525/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"ef87b142-b306-48f4-aa9f-0344490dbc4e","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 11th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":54521479,"name":"Criminology"},{"id":54521480,"name":"Psychology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-09-11T09:13:33+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-11 09:13:33","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7584525","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7584525","identity":"rs-7584525","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}