Women offenders: after the Corston Report - United Kingdom ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Ev 94Justice Committee: Evidence7.5 Intersectionality: The above characteristics are of course not an exhaustive list and other groups ofwomen, particularly those small in number, also suffer neglect in the system, for example pregnant women andolder women. Pregnant women, including those who give birth in prison, and their children have specificneeds. The future strategy should take an intersectional approach, in recognition of the multiple and overlappingways that different identity characteristics interact. The Government should regularly consult and work withspecialist VCS organisations to gather local intelligence and enrich its approach to meeting the diverse needsof women within the criminal justice system.September 2012
Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 95Written evidence from Action for Prisoners’ FamiliesAction for Prisoners’ Families (APF) is the national organisation for those concerned with the well-being ofprisoners’ and offenders’ families and has 1700 members. Sending women to prison damages family life andseparates children from their mothers, it is unknown how many children are affected annually. There is nosystematic collection of data on where the children of prisoners live or which services they are accessing. ThePrison Reform Trust estimates that in 2010 more than 17,240 children were separated from their mothers dueto imprisonment. Women in prison are more likely to be lone parents than women in the general population 25 .Maintaining Family Ties1. The closure of women’s prisons and the failure to introduce small custodial units (which have beenproposed by many academics, penal reform organisations and various reports over the years) has resulted inwomen custody being held a long way from home. This distance places a huge strain on family relationshipsand even short trips on public transport can become arduous for those bringing babies and small children tovisit their mothers in prison. Maintaining telephone contact is very expensive yet many women try and calltheir children every day in an effort to stay in touch.2. Problems for families visiting their relatives in prison are not new. These include difficulties bookingvisits, expensive travel costs, security restrictions and being able to get into the prison promptly for the startof the visit. However what particularly concerns women, is where their children are in local authority care orwith relatives who can’t or won’t bring them to visit. Unlike visiting a hospital, anyone under 18 years of agehas to be accompanied by an adult when visiting a prison. This means that even teenagers are unable to visittheir mothers or bring younger siblings in unless appropriately chaperoned. Looked after children are unlikelyto be brought frequently to visit their mothers, as children’s services do not have sufficient resources to facilitateweekly, fortnightly or even monthly visits.3. Black, minority ethnic and foreign national women are more likely to report that they had not had a visitwithin their first week in prison compared with white and British women 26 . In a recent MOJ report, 15% ofprisoners stated that they needed help concerning problems related to family or children with 8% requiring alot of help. Women (27%) were more likely than men (13%) to report being in need of support with a problemconcerning family or children. 274. It has been well documented, and accepted by NOMS policy makers, that the maintenance of familyrelationships is a factor in reducing re-offending. For women prisoners in particular, concern over their childrenis a great cause of angst, yet support for prisoners in dealing with any family problems they may have is verypatchy. Projects which support prisoners’ family relationships not only contribute to a reduction in re-offendingbut also improve the likelihood of better outcomes for their children.5. One model that has been piloted is the Integrated Family Support Service run by Pact and NEPACS, twovoluntary sector organisation, which was funded by the Department for Education. Family Support workersbased in prisons provided one-to-one interventions, advice, case work and family mediation for prisoners andtheir families. Their work helped to re-establish contact between families, increased family contact and resultedin a mother discovering the outcome of care proceedings which had resulted in adoption. Prisoners with lessfamilial worries resulted in a reduction of self-harm and a calmer prison. The project also piloted IntegratedFamily Support Advocates in the community to support the children and families of offenders. They workedwith local authorities and partnerships such as Integrated Offender Management Units and Troubled Familyteams and sought to facilitate greater inter-agency co-operation 28 .Mother and Baby Units6. A recent report published by Sheffield Hallam University and the University of York 29 highlights someof the issues for pregnant and post-partum women in custody. Importantly there are no figures on the numbersof these women in prison making it difficult to ensure there are sufficient services available to them. The reportalso states that women resident on Mother and Baby Units are expected to leave their babies when they areaged between 6 and 8 weeks old so they can take part in the normal regime. This is in stark contrast to mothersworking in the community who are subject to statutory maternity leave provisions.7. APF is also concerned about women who have been separated from their babies either because theyhaven’t applied for a place on a MBU or because they were not able to get one. It is unclear what servicesthese women are offered or even if prison staff are aware of these women’s familial circumstances.25Social Exclusion Unit (2002) Reducing reoffending by ex-prisoners, London: Social Exclusion Unit26 HM Chief Inspector of Prisons (2009) Race Relations in Prisons: responding to adult women from black and minority ethnicbackgrounds, London: The Stationery Office27Ministry of Justice (2012) Prisoners’ childhood and Family backgrounds, London: Ministry of Justice28 Integrated Family Support Service Evaluation Report (2012) Pact and Nepacs www.prisonadvice.org.uk29 Alberton, K et al (2012). Tackling health inequalities through developing evidence-based policy and practice with childbearingwomen in prison: A consultation
Page 8 and 9:
Women offenders: after the Corston
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 21 and 22:
18 Women offenders: after the Corst
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 1Ora
Page 101 and 102:
Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 318
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 9Exa
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 15Tu
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 435
Page 163 and 164: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 65Wr
Page 165 and 166: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 672.
Page 167 and 168: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 69fo
Page 171 and 172: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 73th
Page 175 and 176: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 77Wh
Page 179 and 180: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 81Ov
Page 181 and 182: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 83ar
Page 185 and 186: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 87Af
Page 187 and 188: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 89re
Page 189 and 190: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 91he
Page 191: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 93di
Page 197 and 198: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 99on
Page 199 and 200: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 101T
Page 201 and 202: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 103S
Page 203 and 204: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 105E
Page 205 and 206: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 107i
Page 207 and 208: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 109i
Page 209 and 210: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 111U
Page 213 and 214: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 115b
Page 215 and 216: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 117R
Page 221 and 222: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 123w
Page 223 and 224: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 125r
Page 225 and 226: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 127I
Page 229: Justice Committee: Evidence Ev 131(
show all

Women offenders: after the Corston Report - United Kingdom ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?