This piece was originally scheduled to be published in August. Due to correspondence received from Enough, its publication was delayed, and may not contain information on KCLSU’s recent guidance.
Maddox Wolfe examines the evidential value of Enough’s self-swab kits and the criticism they have attracted from expert bodies.
You may remember a couple of months back when Enough appeared on campus with the mission to “make rapists think twice”. You may remember watching societies or friends share that post in their story. You may have, as I did, reposted these posts to your stories because you thought it was a noble cause. And it is a noble cause, and nearly everyone involved is a good, well-intentioned person who just wanted to solve a horrendous problem within our society.
Sexual assault in the UK is a serious problem. A 2025 survey estimated that nearly a million people in England and Wales were victims of sexual assault (Office for National Statistics). Of the roughly 72,000 rape cases recorded by police in that same year, only 2.8% of them resulted in a charge, and around 47.5% of cases were closed due to evidential difficulties (Home Office). With such unacceptable results from the UK’s legal system, it made perfect sense why good-hearted people like those behind Enough felt a need to create new tools to deal with the crisis.
Enough is an anti-sexual assault NGO campaigning on campuses across the UK with a mission to “make rapists think twice”. To accomplish this goal, Enough has developed a self-swab DIY test kit, which allows victims to collect and store a perpetrator’s DNA sample after a rape has occurred for future use as evidence in a trial. Enough advertises these kits as providing more privacy and convenience for victims compared to police reports and sexual assault referral centres.
But unfortunately, as bright an idea the self-swab kit may have seemed, its effectiveness in dealing with the crisis is little to none. Such devices are rarely held as admissible evidence in court, and because of that, Enough’s self-swab kits have come under fire from nearly every governmental and non-governmental expert body (BBC).
“We had not seen any evidence that DNA evidence collected using Enough’s kits had ever been deemed admissible in a rape trial” (Advertising Standards Authority).
“Although they may seem like a good idea, self-swab rape kits are a new, untested and potentially problematic product. We don’t believe they can be relied upon to deliver justice to survivors of sexual violence and abuse” (Rape Crisis).
“We do not advocate the use of ‘self-swabbing’ kits because they do not provide the opportunity for holistic psychosocial, medical and forensic assessment of the individual; there is no evidence base that they are of benefit from a mental health perspective; the samples taken may not be admissible in any court process; they do not promote safeguarding of the vulnerable; there is no evidence base that the availability of such kits will act as a deterrent to sexual violence” (Royal College of Physicians of London).
“These kits can create false expectations, lead to re‑traumatisation and reduce trust in statutory services” (NPCC).
“Victims deserve clear, accurate information at an incredibly vulnerable time. Any suggestion that these kits can reliably secure justice risks giving false hope and may ultimately undermine investigations, safeguarding and wellbeing” (Victims’ Commissioner).
The risk of the kit
While it is true that Enough’s kits could hypothetically be held admissible, that doesn’t mean that they could reliably be held admissible. The lack of cases where the kits have been held as admissible, and the plethora of experts’ warnings all serve as evidence that a victim cannot count on the kits to do them any good in trial.
Self-swab kits may discourage survivors from specialist medical, forensic and emotional support, such as visiting a sexual assault referral centre (SARC). While Enough tries to position itself not as a replacement but rather as an “option C”, a survivor who would otherwise have visited a SARC may understandably reach for a kit they can use privately, at home, if they are misled into believing it offers some substantial benefit.
Some may argue that even if the product isn’t an effective means to collect evidence, it still creates deterrence. Enough itself points to a survey stating that 70% of students at the University of Bristol believe that the kits create deterrence (Enough). For this theory to work, however, survivors would have to be kept in the dark about the kits’ limitations because there would be no way to communicate en masse with potential victims without also communicating en masse to potential rapists. This opens survivors up to the risk of false hope, believing their case is secured, when in reality the kit is unlikely to be admitted into evidence.
Can Enough as an organisation still be useful?
Absolutely yes. While Enough’s well-intentioned product may not be fit for its purpose, the organisation certainly isn’t. Enough’s ability to mass-communicate messages by campaigning through student life pages and mobilising student volunteers is commendable and a useful asset in closing the awareness gap for sexual assault support services.
A 2025 report showed that only 27% of sexual assault victims can recall being pointed to support services, meaning nearly three quarters of survivors are left to find support on their own (Victims’ Commissioner), and a 2022 report stated that 72% of people are unaware of NHS sexual assault support centres (NHS). While “spreading awareness” may sound like an ineffective and somewhat generic goal, it’s actually a wildly underutilised area to put resources towards. A group like Enough is perfectly positioned to make students aware of SARCs: that they are safe, that they are operated by trained professionals, that they allow an opportunity to collect and store forensic evidence without a police report and that every step of the process happens with the victim’s consent.
Enough is not an ill-intentioned organisation and is a group that has genuine utility in dealing with the crisis. By refocusing campaigning resources away from their kits and instead on supporting awareness for study-backed, expert-approved support mechanisms, Enough very well could become the group that “makes rapists think twice” on our university campuses.
About the author
