Home Detention for Mothers: Analysis of Judgment no. 563000 of 2022

The issue of home detention for mothers with minor children is a sensitive and complex topic, touching upon legal and social aspects. The recent judgment of the Supervisory Court of Taranto, no. 563000 of June 22, 2022, offers important food for thought regarding the granting of alternative measures to detention, especially concerning the risk of recidivism.

Legal Context

According to Article 47 of Law no. 354 of 26/07/1975, home detention can be granted to mothers with children under ten years of age, provided that it can be demonstrated that this measure can contain the risk of recidivism. The judgment in question specified that the assessment must take into account the executive modalities of the measure and the subject's behavior during previous periods of placement with social services.

President: TARDIO ANGELA. Rapporteur: CAPPUCCIO DANIELE. Rapporteur: CAPPUCCIO DANIELE. Defendant: MAIORANO ISABELLA. (Conf.) Declares inadmissible, SUPERVISORY COURT OF TARANTO, 22/06/2022 563000 INSTITUTIONS FOR PREVENTION AND PENAL MEASURES (PENAL SYSTEM) - Alternative measures to detention - Home detention - Mother of a child under ten years of age - Prerequisites - Case law. Home detention for mothers with children under ten years of age may be ordered if it is suitable for containing the risk of recidivism, also taking into account the concrete executive modalities of the measure. (In this case, the supervisory court deemed that there was a persistent high risk of re-offending due to the absence of repentance and the commission of numerous property crimes by the convicted person during a previous placement with social services).

Analysis of the Decision

The Court declared the request for home detention filed by I. M. inadmissible, emphasizing the persistent high risk of recidivism. This aspect is fundamental, as it highlights how the granting of alternative measures cannot be automatic but must be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The decision was influenced by the absence of signs of repentance from the convicted person and the commission of property crimes during a previous placement with social services. These elements led the Court to consider the requested measure unsuitable.

• Risk of recidivism: a crucial assessment in granting the measure.
• Behavior of the convicted person: absence of repentance and previous offenses.
• Executive modalities of the measure: the need for a concrete analysis.

Conclusions

Judgment no. 563000 of 2022 represents an important reflection on the limits and possibilities offered by home detention for mothers with minor children. It is essential that decisions regarding alternative measures to detention are always supported by a careful and rigorous assessment, capable of ensuring both the protection of the mother and the safety of the community. Case law continues to evolve, and cases like this remind us of the importance of balancing individual rights with public order considerations.