Written evidence submitted by Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor Kathleen Stock and Professor

Alice Sullivan [GRA2021]

Evidence and Data on Trans Women’s Offending Rates

Submitted by Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor Kathleen Stock, and Professor Alice
Sullivan

This evidence is submitted to the WEC as requested of Professor Rosa Freedman by Nicola
Richards MP during the 9th December Oral Evidence Session. The submission is divided into
the following sections: (1) a summary of the Swedish study referred to in the session, and a
response to some attempt to rebut that study; (2) data from the Ministry of Justice; and (3)
analysis of that data from a May 2020 academic paper on transgender prisoners in England
and Wales.

1. The Swedish Study

Cecilia Dhejne, Paul Lichtenstein, Marcus Boman, Anna L. V. Johansson, Niklas

Långström, Mikael Landén (2011) Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons
Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

Summary of findings
This Swedish cohort study by Dhejne et al. (2011) followed a population of individuals who
had undergone surgical and legal sex reassignment involving hormonal and surgical
treatment between 1973 and 2003 (324 in total) and compared them to a matched control
group of their birth sex. It is crucial to emphasise that this study looks only at those who
have undergone hormonal and surgical transition, which is a much tighter group than
individuals who self- identify as transgender.

The primary purpose of the study was to consider whether medical transition helps
patients (leads to better social and health outcomes) and to inform what support they
might need post transition. It is methodologically robust, peer reviewed, large scale
comparative source on offending rates comparing transwomen and women. It compared
the likelihood of a person having one or more criminal convictions, and convictions for
violent crime (defined as “homicide and attempted homicide, aggravated assault and
assault, robbery, threatening behaviour, harassment, arson, or any sexual offense”).

The study can be divided into two cohorts 1973-1988 and 1989-2003 with the difference
being that the latter cohort received adequate mental health provision. The findings show
that transsexual individuals were more likely to be criminal than non-transsexuals of the
same birth sex in the first cohort (1973-1988), and no different from their birth sex in the
second group (1989-2003).

The researchers state:

‘male-to-females . . . retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was
true regarding violent crime.’

MtF transitioners were over 6 times more likely to be convicted of an offence than female
comparators and 18 times more likely to be convicted of a violent offence. The group had
no statistically significant differences from other natal males, for convictions in general or
for violent offending. The group examined were those who committed to surgery, and so
were more tightly defined than a population based solely on self-declaration.
Written evidence submitted by Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor Kathleen Stock and Professor
Alice Sullivan [GRA2021]

The study provides strong evidence that policy makers cannot safely assume (a)
that transwomen’s offending patterns, including violent offending, will be
significantly different than those of the general male population or (b) that they will
be similar to those of the general female population.

Has it been discredited?

Some on-line discussion of this piece describe its findings on offending as discredited.1 Policy
analysts Murray Blackburn MacKenzie conducted a search of the academic literature and were
unable to find any academic rebuttal of these specific findings, or any equivalent study which
shows the opposite effect to Dhejne et al’s result.

The ‘debunking’ of this study appears to be based solely on brief statements made by the lead
author in an interview some years later about how the data had been interpreted. Murray
BlackBurn MacKenzie2 provide an analysis of these claims:3 There is also key data contained
in Appendix 2 of that document, which we have attached to the submission.

Author quote: ‘The individual in the image who is making claims about trans
criminality, specifically rape likelihood, is misrepresenting the study findings.’
The findings do not include specific results for any form of sexual assault, therefore it is true
that claims specifically about rape rather than violent crime in general cannot be made.

Author quote: ‘The study as a whole covers the period between 1973 and 2003. If one
divides the cohort into two groups, 1973 to 1988 and 1989 to 2003, one observes that for
the latter group (1989 – 2003), differences in mortality, suicide attempts, and crime
disappear.’
This is true for the transitioned population as a whole - it does not relate to the question of
whether MtF transsexuals retain male patterns of violence and offending. This finding
combines both FtM and MtF populations split by time. The comment accurately reports that
in the later period 1989 to 2003, the transitioning group as a whole had no statistically
significant difference from the population.

Author quote: ‘This means that for the 1989 to 2003 group, we did not find a male pattern
of criminality.’ The statement is only true in the trivial sense that patterns of criminality
were simply not examined separately by sex for each period and so no such finding could
be made.

Author quote: ‘What we were saying was that for the 1973 to 1988 cohort group and the
cisgender male group, both experienced similar rates of convictions. As I said, this pattern
is not observed in the 1989 to 2003 cohort group.’
This comment is not entirely clear, but seems to be intended to convey that the MtF group
ceased to have a male pattern of convictions in the later period. This is not what the
published data show and it requires extraordinary (implausible) assumptions about the
nature of any unpublished figures to infer this from what has been published.

Author quote: ‘The study as a whole covers the period between 1973 and 2003. If one
divides the cohort into two groups, 1973 to 1988 and 1989 to 2003, one observes that for
the latter group (1989 – 2003), differences

1 https://www.transadvocate.com/fact-check-study-shows-transition-makes-trans-people-

suicidal_n_15483.htm
2 https://murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/
3 https://mbmpolicy.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/murrayblackburnmackenzie-gra-consulation-

responsefinal-copy-16-3-2020-2.pdf (Appendix 2)
Written evidence submitted by Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor Kathleen Stock and Professor
Alice Sullivan [GRA2021]

in mortality, suicide attempts, and crime disappear.’

This is true for the transitioned population as a whole (compared to non transitioners of the
same birth sex) - it does not relate to the question of whether MtF transsexuals retain male
patterns of violence and offending. This finding combines both FtM and MtF populations
split by time. The comment accurately reports that in the later period 1989 to 2003, the
transitioning group had no statistically significant difference from the population of people
of the same birth sex.
Author quote: ‘This means that for the 1989 to 2003 group, we did not find a male pattern
of criminality.’ The statement is only true in the trivial sense that patterns of criminality
were simply not examined separately by sex for each period and so no such finding could
be made.It is misleading as a reading of the paper of as a whole which found that males
(including "MtF" transitioners) in the 1989 to 2003 group had male patterns of criminality
and females (including FtM transtioners had female patterns).
They conclude: In the absence of any new peer-reviewed publication based on the original
data which provides further results split both over time and by sex, the original published
results remains the best available large scale quantitative comparative study of conviction
rates by sex and transitioner type.

2. Ministry of Justice 2020 Data

The question of whether transwomen match male or female patterns of criminality is

specifically addressed by the 2020 FOI referenced by Fair Play For Women (who have
submitted evidence to the Committee). This is first time there has been official data to
compare the rate of sex offending in 3 different groups. Men vs women vs transwomen. The
hyperlinks below link to the FOI spreadsheet.

MOJ stats show 76 of the 129 male-born prisoners identifying as transgender (not counting
any with GRCs) have at least 1 conviction of sexual offence. This includes 36 convictions for
rape and 10 for attempted rape. These are clearly male type crimes (rape is defined as
penetration with a penis).

Here is the number compared with figures for sex offending rates in men and women over
the same period.

Comparisons of official MOJ statistics from March / April 2019 (most recent
official count of transgender prisoners):

76 sex offenders out of 129 transwomen = 58.9%

125 sex offenders out of 3812 women in prison = 3.3%

13234 sex offenders out of 78781 men in prison =

16.8%
Written evidence submitted by Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor Kathleen Stock and Professor
Alice Sullivan [GRA2021]

3. Michael Biggs, ‘The Transition from Sex to Gender in English Prisons: Human
Rights and Queer Theory’, SocArXiv, 17 May 20204

On pages 10 and 11 Biggs reference the MOJ and Fair Play for Women statistics. On
pager 11 he states:
‘Of the 125 transgender prisoners counted by the prison service in 2017, 60 had
been convicted of sexual offenses, including 27 convicted of rape (BBC News
2018). In the overall prison population, by comparison, 19% of males had been
convicted of sexual crimes and only 4% of females (Ministry of Justice 2018b).’

On page 10 Biggs provides a breakdown of what is known of most recent numbers

regarding transgender prisoners in England and Wales. These do not include those who
have GRC (including Karen White) because the prison service does not collect this data,
which can be found in the middle paragraph of that page:

‘The number of transgender prisoners increased following the new regulations. The
first statistics were collected in the beginning of April 2016. There were 70
transgender prisoners, defined as ‘currently living in, or are presenting in, a gender
different to their sex assigned at birth’ and as having had a case conference under the
2011 regulations (Ministry of Justice 2016, p. 2). This number excluded prisoners
with a gender recognition certificate, like Karen Jones. The new regulations came into
force in January 2017. Three months later the number of transgender prisoners had
almost doubled to 125 (Ministry of Justice 2017, p. 13). The growth might have
reflected the new dispensation which incentivized prisoners to declare a gender
identity. The number of males in the women’s estate was not recorded. A dissident
feminist organization, Fair Play for Women, estimated this figure by combing through
the reports of individual prisons, predominantly from 2017 and 2016. They found
reference to 13 males in women’s prisons; the total was likely to be higher (Fair Play
2017). One of them was Jessica Winfield, moved to a women’s prison, HMP
Bronzefield, in March 2017 (EleftheriouSmith 2017). As Martin Ponting, he had been
sentenced to life in 1995 for raping two girls. Around the same time, five males were
transferred to another women’s prison, HMP New Hall (Hamilton 2017). The first
official figures distinguishing between the men’s and women’s estates were provided
for the beginning of April 2018. The total number of transgender prisoners had
increased modestly from 125 to 139. There were 42 transgender prisoners in the
women’s estate: 22 of them identified as female, 17 as male, and 3 gave no response
(Ministry of Justice 2018a, p. 17). It seems implausible that there were as many as 17
females identifying as transmen in women’s prisons; one suspects that these figures
reflect confusion over classification among inmates or officials. 9 Prisoners with a
gender recognition certificate were not counted as transgender, moreover, and so the
figure of 22 will underestimate the total number of males in women’s prisons.’

https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F1.800.gay%3A443%2Fhttps%2Fosf.io%2Fpreprints%2Fsocarx
i
v%2F43f2t%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cr.a.freedman%40reading.ac.uk%7C5876fdd1ca8c4f281a2
408d
89c68c8ae%7C4ffa3bc4ecfc48c09080f5e43ff90e5f%7C0%7C0%7C637431321267458786%7CUnk
nown
%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6
Mn0
%3D%7C1000&sdata=fXx7lQeWZnjFqVN%2FC1%2BPH%2BbrlIr9OU0cbUSahILl2zI%3D&
am p;reserved=0
Written evidence submitted by Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor Kathleen Stock and Professor
Alice Sullivan [GRA2021]

At page 5 Biggs states that no assessment is made of the dangers posed to women prisoners
by trans women housed in the female estate, despite the warnings of Gender Identity
Specialists. Of interest in this regard is Dr. James Barrett President, British Association of
Gender Identity Specialists, 20 August 2015 ‘Written evidence submitted by British
Association of Gender Identity Specialists to the Transgender Equality Inquiry’ (2015),5 and
in particular this section:

‘The converse is the ever-increasing tide of referrals of patients in prison serving long
or indeterminate sentences for serious sexual offences. These vastly outnumber the
number of prisoners incarcerated for more ordinary, non-sexual, offences. It has been
rather naïvely suggested that nobody would seek to pretend transsexual status in
prison if this were not actually the case. There are, to those of us who actually
interview the prisoners, in fact very many reasons why people might pretend this.
These vary from the opportunity to have trips out of prison through to a desire for a
transfer to the female estate (to the same prison as a co-defendant) through to the idea
that a parole board will perceive somebody who is female as being less dangerous
through to a [false] belief that hormone treatment will actually render one less
dangerous through to wanting a special or protected status within the prison system
and even (in one very well evidenced case that a highly concerned Prison Governor
brought particularly to my attention) a plethora of prison intelligence information
suggesting that the driving force was a desire to make subsequent sexual offending
very much easier, females being generally perceived as low risk in this regard. I am
sure that the Governor concerned would be happy to talk about this.’

November 2020

https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F1.800.gay%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fdata.parliament.uk%2FWritten
E
vidence%2FCommitteeEvidence.svc%2FEvidenceDocument%2FWomen%2520and%2520Equalities
%2
FTransgender%2520Equality%2Fwritten%2F19532.html&data=04%7C01%7Cr.a.freedman%4
0rea
ding.ac.uk%7C5876fdd1ca8c4f281a2408d89c68c8ae%7C4ffa3bc4ecfc48c09080f5e43ff90e5f%7C0
%7C0
Written evidence submitted by Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor Kathleen Stock and Professor
Alice Sullivan [GRA2021]

%7C637431321267458786%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjo
iV2l
uMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=SmBbgfyph3Ol9hK6qQXWe
CZc ckvkY2DdwTNcULsFdwc%3D&reserved=0