This paper, co-authored by individuals with direct experience of the criminal legal-punishment system and an academic, argues for the critical integration of lived experiences within the field of criminology. It begins with a poignant account from one author whose insights, gained during incarceration, were dismissed in academic settings, highlighting a systemic undervaluation of lived experience in criminological research and discourse. This narrative sets the stage for a broader examination of the role that firsthand experiences of incarceration should play in shaping criminological thought and policy. The authors advocate for a paradigm shift in criminology that recognises lived experience as not merely anecdotal but as invaluable expertise capable of enriching the field. They argue that the unique perspectives of those who have navigated the criminal legal-punishment system offer indispensable insights into its complexities, challenges, and areas for reform. The narrative further explores the barriers faced by individuals with lived experience within academic and professional realms, including marginalisation and scepticism. It critiques the existing criminological discourse for its failure to adequately incorporate these perspectives, which are often sidelined in favour of “traditional” academic knowledge. The paper calls for a more inclusive approach that values and utilises the insights of those directly affected by the criminal legal-punishment system as equal contributors to research, policy-making, and practice. Through vignettes and personal reflections, the authors illustrate the transformative potential of integrating lived experience into criminology. They highlight successful examples of advocacy and reform led by individuals with lived prison experience, demonstrating how these perspectives can drive meaningful change within the criminal justice sector. The paper challenges criminological academia and policy-makers to reevaluate their engagement with lived experience, advocating for a shift towards a more participatory, empathetic, and effective discourse. In conclusion, this paper serves as both a critique of the current state of criminology and a call to action for the recognition and integration of lived experience as essential expertise. It argues for the dismantling of barriers to inclusion and the embracing of diverse perspectives to foster a more comprehensive, informed, and just criminal legal-punishment system. The authors contend that by valuing and incorporating the insights of those with lived experience, criminology can move towards more equitable, human-centred and impactful outcomes.

The term “Lived Experience” seems to indicate that this is something that has happened in the past and that it has now somehow ended. However, for many leaving prison is just the beginning of the real sentence as stigma, discrimination and lack of opportunity continue to blight the path to desistance.

This paper is an autoethnographical account of one person’s journey from leaving a Scottish prison after a short-term sentence, working for a Scottish Charity involved in the justice sector, right through to an aspiring academic career.

It will include the “Release Project”, a mixed methods approach that researches the pathways from prison to community and how healthcare is a part of that. This project has a lived experience action panel (LEAP) and this helps direct the research. Reflections from the LEAP will then shed light on what has been gained by the application of this approach in a Criminological context. We will conclude by advocating for increased attention to meaningful engagement of those with LE across the research process and challenge the tendency to ‘pick out the powerful and not necessarily the knowledgeable or truthful’ (Wylie, 2011 p. 160).

The Prison Expert Group (PEG) was set up by the Chief Inspector of Prisons in Scotland. The aims of the group are simply to use their collective tacit knowledge to help improve engagement and the efficiency and effectiveness of the inspectorate. It is a group of formerly incarcerated individuals and it reports directly to the chief inspector/deputy chief inspector. This is a brief overview of some of the issues that they have been asked to review and work on.

This might seem like a success story, but the stigma and discrimination are still very much evident. There were some notable successes on this journey but also some notable setbacks.

Abstract:
Child Criminal Exploitation (CCE) is said to occur when an individual or group takes advantage of an imbalance of power to coerce, control, manipulate or deceive a child under the age of 18 (Shaw and Greenhow, 2021). Research suggests children in care are more likely to be exploited as a consequence of the feelings of rejection, resentment, and isolation that come from being care-experienced (Home Office, 2018; Stone, 2018; Baidawi et al, 2020). Additionally, the culture in many care environments alongside destabilising home moves, multiple social workers and other professionals all combine to create a perfect toxic storm for children some consider to be society's most ‘vulnerable’ (Darker et al., 2008; Berridge et al., 2011). Consequently, exploitation can turn into criminalisation as authorities focus on offending over and above the victim status of the children involved (Windle et al., 2020). This session will present the findings of a doctoral study co-produced with three young people who have experience of the care-system and child criminal exploitation. We will discuss the challenges and benefits of carrying out research using participatory methods at a doctoral level as well as explain some of the findings of the study which explored the concepts of mattering, generativity and social harm.

KEYWORDS: Co-Production, Care-Experience, Exploitation, Mattering, Social Harm.