Targeted consultations with populations in marginalized positions are acknowledged as a method for gathering knowledge in regulatory policy-making. However, their usefulness remains largely unexplored. This study examines the epistemic value of such consultations by exploring how the experiential expertise of imprisoned people contributed to reforming the Finnish Imprisonment Act, specifically regarding the use of communication tools, including the Internet, email, phone calls, and video meetings. The research focuses on three key questions: What is the nature of imprisoned people's experiential knowledge? How was this knowledge utilized in the legislative process? What are the criteria for its generalizability? The theoretical framework draws from literature on experiential expertise and reasoning. The data include a pre-regulatory memorandum, consultation memoranda, and the draft bill on the matter, all publicly available documents produced by the Ministry of Justice. A thematic analysis of the consultation documents revealed two primary functions of the communication tools: preparation for release from imprisonment and maintaining close personal relationships. Narratives were constructed around these themes, based on reasoning between the problematic current state and the targeted state of improvement. Next, we examined how these observations related to what was known before the consultations and how they informed the formulation of the bill. The analysis reveals that experiential knowledge played a dual role: it confirmed previously known information and made it more concrete and understandable, while also offering new insights that enhanced comprehensive problem-solving. The generalizability of the outcomes from the consultations is grounded in their relevance to principles applicable to all imprisoned people, such as normalization, the best interest of the child, and fundamental rights, as well as in the contextually grounded impact chains derived from reasoning. Ultimately, the epistemic value of the consultations lies in their contribution to the justifications for the proposals and impact assessments.
