Criticism of Enough

Enough's existence exposes a system that is not working. Some of the organisations that run that system, or claim to speak for survivors within it, have responded by trying to discredit us rather than engage with the evidence.

This response is typical of any revolution or innovation: change can be uncomfortable. We have offered and continue to offer meetings for critics, so far they have refused. Our aim is to work with the system, and complement the police and SARC, always prioritising those as reporting channels.

There are two criticisms made against us. Neither holds up.

1. Is Enough admissible?
   
   Yes in principle it can be. Forensic evidence does not require a specific collection method to be admissible. Tampons and underwear have convicted rapists. Self-collected evidence is accepted by the same legal standard. Police forces are already accepting evidence from our kits in investigations. The gap between what critics say publicly and what police do operationally is itself a story.


2. Does Enough divert from Police/SARC?
   
   No. We encourage survivors to go to police or a SARC first. Enough exists for the 85% who do not. We are not competing with the existing system. We are reaching the people it does not.

The deeper point is this: the system is failing. 500,000 rapes a year, 1,600 convictions. If the organisations opposing us have a better answer, we would welcome the debate. So far, they have not offered one.

Should you meet us?

Meeting is a good opportunity to assess the facts and ask questions. We respect the criticism and constructive feedback that comes our way, but it is almost always caused by one of the misconceptions above. There is a rape emergency in the UK, we need new and radical ideas to address it. Enough is one of them. If not Enough, what instead?