Introduction
Despite the increased research focus on gender in criminology in recent decades, theories to explain youth offending typically do not distinguish between boys and girls and there are still gaps in the scholarship on the underlying needs influencing girls’ pathways to offending. We conducted a rapid review of literature which synthesised recent international research to evidence the gendered needs and factors influencing girls’ and young women’s contact with the youth justice system (Rice et al., 2025). We conducted this research as part of our work with the Stable Lives Safer Streets Hub, a cross-border, policy-led research hub funded by the Higher Education Authority. A review in August 2024 identified 19 relevant studies investigating young women’s contact with the justice system. While the majority of studies in this review focus on the US, UK, and Australia, the findings offer insights for youth justice policy in Ireland, where similar systemic challenges and gendered dynamics exist. Most literature included in this review only included girls and young women in their sample. Rather than simply describe girls’ experiences, there is a need for criminologists to situate these experiences, and the insights derived from them, within a gender-sensitive lens.
Method
A rapid review was conducted, following PRISMA guidelines, across five social science databases in August 2024 [IBSS; Sociological Abstracts; ASSIA, PsycInfo, and Academic Search Complete]. A self-directed search was also conducted across two additional databases [Google Scholar and the University of Limerick Library catalogue]. 84 articles were sought for full-text screening, and 19 articles were eventually included in the review.
- Inclusion Criteria: English-language publications published between 2014-2024.
- Exclusion Criteria: non-peer reviewed sources, books, and studies focused on women generally, rather than girls and young women.
Findings
Persistent Abuse and Nested Harm
Girls in contact with youth justice systems are disproportionately affected by polyvictimisation, including sexual abuse, neglect, and domestic violence. These experiences often begin in early childhood and are nested within broader social structures that perpetuate harm. Abuse within the family home is particularly significant, often leading to further exploitation and criminalisation outside the home. The wider literature implies that girls in the justice system are more acutely affected by family-level adversity, social care involvement, and family dysfunction than boys (Baidawi et al., 2023). Further, girls appear to experience, on average, more variation in adversities during childhood (Baglivio et al., 2014).
Neglect appears to be a particularly problematic iteration of abuse because it not only prevents girls from access to often basic needs (e.g., warmth, food), but also motivates them to seek these things elsewhere, a factor known to contribute to sexual and criminal exploitation (Baidawi et al., 2023; Flores et al., 2020). Indeed, relationships with parents were described as critical to their offending trajectories. Low emotional warmth, little control and poor supervision elevated risks and pushed girls out of the home and into the community. Thus, abuse and neglect can propel girls and young women into unsafe environments, increasing vulnerability to exploitation.
These early experiences also inform girls’ understanding of appropriate relationships, replacing positive and nurturing expectations with assumptions of mistreatment and exploitation. That justice-involved girls have suffered sexual violence is “one of the most consistent findings of feminist pathways research” (Sharpe, 2016, p. 10). Girls who offend also carry the gendered risk of unplanned and/or unwanted pregnancy that boys do not (Parrish et al., 2021). Pasko and Chesney-Lind’s (2016) study examined how commercial sexual exploitation shapes pathways into female offending and revealed that early experiences of sexual abuse could significantly influence participants’ choices and lead to criminal behaviour.
Trauma Reactions and Coping
Girls’ responses to trauma, including substance use and aggressive behaviour, are often criminalised rather than understood as coping mechanisms. These behaviours reflect attempts to manage psychological distress stemming from abuse and neglect. In terms of the offending pathways that leads girls into contact with the justice system, DeHart and Moran found that “girls tend to become involved in fighting slightly before becoming involved in substance use, followed by stealing and running away” and involvement in sex work later on in girls’ adolescence (2015, p. 301).
Stress literature has long documented gendered differences in trauma exposure and response. For instance, as previously mentioned, girls and young women are significantly more likely to experience sexual abuse, while boys and young men are more likely to experience community violence (Fowler et al., 2009). Girls are more likely than boys to internalise trauma. The literature illustrates that abuse, adversity, and trauma responses are highly clustered among the justice population, and this is elevated among girls and young women. Not only are girls more likely to experience trauma-inducing adversities that are different from those affecting boys and young men, but their responses may also differ, requiring different preventative supports that are gender conscious, as well as gender-sensitive criminal justice responses. That said, few studies have actually examined these gendered dimensions.
Gendered Norms and Assumptions
The review highlights how societal norms and stereotypes shape girls’ pathways into offending and influence how they are treated within justice systems. A 2015 longitudinal study by Cauffman et al. examined female offending pathways from adolescence to young adulthood in the US. The findings highlighted similarities between male and female pathways to crime but also key differences. Notably, males did not report romantic relationships as having an anti-social influence. This study indicates that romantic relationships may be more destabilising and more likely to be criminogenic for (heterosexual) women than for men.
Female offending is moderated by dominant social expectations, informal social controls, and the resources (psychological and physical) available to girls. Risk-taking (i.e. offending) behaviour in girls is more likely to be relationally driven, whereas boys are more typically driven by “status, power, monetary gain, or competitive advantage” (Schwartz & Steffensmeier, 2017, p. 132).
Almost a third of youth justice worker respondents to Parrish et al.’s survey preferred to work with boys and young men over girls and young women (2021). The authors cite other research on staff perceptions that suggest that staff use negative, gendered language to describe how girls are more challenging to work with: “needy”, “manipulative”, “promiscuous”, “whiny”, “emotional”, and “dramatic” (2021, p. 459). Staines et al. reported similar findings from their interviews with youth justice staff (2024). Girls were seen as “complex”, “volatile”, and “emotionally dependent” on staff (pp. 195–196), though this complexity may well stem both from the fact that girls who offend are placed in a system designed for boys and men, and that boys and girls are held to different (gendered) norms and expectations.
Justice-involved girls face additional stigma by transgressing ‘the laws of femininity’ as well as criminal legislation (Staines et al., 2024; Terry & Williams, 2021). Violence, aggression, and toughness are typically regarded as masculine traits (Terry & Williams, 2021), thus violent, aggressive, or tough girls are “doubly deviant” and may be treated more punitively (Staines et al., 2024, p. 188). For example, one of the research participants in Terry and Williams interview study, convicted of killing her husband, was described at trial “as a ‘dangerous, sex-crazed woman’”, notwithstanding that she was a victim of intimate partner violence at the hands of her husband (2021, p. 378).
Systemic Failures and Effective Solutions
Systemic failures contribute to girls’ justice involvement. From this review of the literature, it can be concluded that “girls need targeted, gender-specific support before they enter the youth justice system” (Staines et al., 2024, p. 199, emphasis added).
DeHart and Moran reported that girls involved in sex work and drug use may not report their related victimisation because interacting with the formal justice system may result in them being prosecuted for their involvement (2015). The authors also emphasised that interventions needed to do more than target vulnerable girls themselves, as this kind of messaging can be seen as ‘responsibilising’ girls for their own victimisation (see Sharpe, 2016). For example, they point to legislation on the “provision of alcohol and drugs to minors, statutory rape, and enticement of youth into criminal activities” that could be reformed in other to better protect girls (DeHart & Moran, 2015, p. 305).
Several studies in this rapid review touched on justice-involved girls who were also involved in the care system. Care-experienced girls, particularly those belonging to ethnic minorities, are overrepresented in youth justice systems across the Western world (Staines et al., 2024), indicating that there are some systemic factors/failures at play within the care system that influence girls’ pathways to offending. Girls in care are overpoliced and underprotected.
In terms of other system-level biases within organisations, and as previously mentioned, some research indicates that youth justice staff perceive working with girls (as opposed to boys) as more challenging (Parrish et al., 2021). This may lead to biased interventions.
The review revealed the importance of good and high-quality relationships for both justice-involved girls (Staines et al., 2024; Larsson et al., 2024), though staff in Staines et al.’s study spoke about the difficulties in maintaining professional boundaries (2024). Positive relationships with staff and caregivers can be transformative and are critical to desistance and wellbeing, especially for girls. The need for gender-sensitive interventions was a major recommendation found in the literature analysed. The review identifies a lack of early intervention, limited resources, and staff training as key gaps in support for girls.
Conclusion
Gender-specific approaches to addressing offending have emerged in the last two decades, partly in response to increasing numbers of justice-involved girls (Sharpe, 2016), partly in response to feminist pathways research, and partly in response to the salience of gender equity as a societal value. Despite this increased focus on girls and young women, this rapid review revealed some gaps in the current scholarship on the underlying needs influencing girls’ pathways to offending. Notably, the jurisdictions covered by this rapid review were almost exclusively limited to the US, the UK, and Australia. There is a need for further research in different (smaller) contexts, and jurisdictions outside of the Global North. Much of the literature covered by this rapid review identifies gender neutral or mixed gender risk factors. Few studies seek to disentangle the needs of girls and young women that are gender specific.
Nonetheless, the ecological context and home environment appears to be more important for girls than for boys. Girls also appear to be more affected by instability, and those in residential care appear to be most at risk. Providing support for parents and families appears to be critical in reducing girls’ formal contact with the justice system. This review underscores the urgent need for youth justice systems to move beyond gender-neutral approaches and embrace gender-responsive, trauma-informed, and relationally focused policies. Girls’ pathways into offending are shaped by complex, intersecting factors that require nuanced understanding and targeted support. By addressing systemic failures and investing in tailored interventions, justice systems can better meet the needs of girls and young women, reduce offending, and promote long-term wellbeing.
Policy Recommendations
- Conduct Further Research: Conduct research that compares both boys and girls in order to disentangle gender-specific needs.
- Develop Gender-Responsive Youth Justice Strategies: Create tailored interventions and resources for girls, informed by feminist pathways research and with an emphasis on positive relationship development.
- Train Youth Justice Professionals: Provide training on gender sensitivity, trauma-informed care, and intersectionality.
- Enhance Early Intervention: Enhance screening for trauma and mental health needs in schools and social services. Make resources available to girls before justice contact.
- Strengthen Cross-Departmental and Inter-Agency Collaboration: Promote holistic approaches that support girls’ wellbeing across youth justice, justice, health, education, and social care.
- Evaluate Gender-Specific Programmes: Conduct empirical evaluations of any existing interventions and scale effective interventions.
- Foreground Intersectionality: Recognise the compounded vulnerabilities of girls from minority (ethnic, racial, sexual identity, religious, neurodivergent) backgrounds.
References
Baglivio, M. T., Epps, N., Swartz, K., Hug, M. S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N. S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences in the lives of juvenile offenders. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3(2), 1–23.
Baidawi, S., Papalia, N., & Featherston, R. (2023). Gender differences in the maltreatment-youth offending relationship: A scoping review. SAGE Publications
Cauffman, E., Monahan, K. C., & Thomas, A. G. (2015). Pathways to persistence: Female offending from 14 to 25. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 1(3), 236–268
DeHart, D. D., & Moran, R. (2015). Poly-victimization among girls in the justice system: Trajectories of risk and associations to juvenile offending. Violence against Women, 21(3), 291–312
Flores, J., Hawes, J., & Bhinder, B. (2020). Incarcerated girls, criminal pathways and multiple forms of abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 35(5), 509–518
Larsson, B., Schofield, G., Biggart, L., Ward, E., Dodsworth, J., & Scaife, V. (2024). Navigating risk: Young women’s pathways through the care, education and criminal justice systems. Child & Family Social Work, 29(3), 818–829.
Parrish, D. E., Thompson, R., Negi, N., & Alquicira, L. (2021). A national survey of probation staff of the needs, services and barriers of female youth in juvenile justice settings. Women & Criminal Justice, 31(6), 445–462
Pasko, L., & Chesney-Lind, M. (2016). Running the gauntlet: Understanding commercial sexual exploitation and the pathways perspective to female offending. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 2(3), 275–295
Rice, O., Walsh, C. & Kelly, M. (2025), “The Underlying Needs Influencing Young Women’s Contact with the Youth Justice System: A Rapid Review”, Child & Youth Services, pp. 1-25.
Sharpe, G. (2016). Re-imagining justice for girls: A new agenda for research. Youth Justice, 16(1), 3–17
Staines, J., Fitzpatrick, C., Shaw, J., & Hunter, K. (2024). ‘We need to tackle their well being first’: Understanding and supporting care-experienced girls in the youth justice system. Youth Justice, 24(2), 185–203.
Terry, A. N., & Williams, L. S. (2021). On the outside looking in: Rural girls, trauma, and involvement in the criminal justice system. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 30(3), 368–388