| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington): Labour happens after nine months.
Madam Speaker: Order. The Minister is making a statement. If the hon. Member for Workington
(Mr. Campbell-Savours) has a question, I shall try to call him at the appropriate time. Until then, he must listen to the statement.
Miss Widdecombe: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I can understand why the hon. Gentleman does not want to listen--he does not want to know the truth. The lady to whom I was referring jumped from a first floor window during an antenatal appointment. In another incident, a woman prisoner who was in hospital to give birth was allowed privacy with a visitor and obtained drugs. In a further incident, a male prisoner who was diagnosed as completely paralysed jumped up and ran away as soon as his bed watch was withdrawn.
The Prison Service has a duty of care to the mother, but that must be balanced against the needs of the service to keep all prisoners--including pregnant women prisoners--in secure custody. I am satisfied that the policy is right and is consistent with the views of the House.
Mr. Straw:
Is the Minister aware that the statement that she has just made is completely unacceptable, and that in a civilised society it is inhuman, degrading and unnecessary for a prisoner to be shackled at any stage of labour? Will the Minister confirm--as she finally had to admit on television last Friday--that no woman prisoner in labour has ever escaped? Does she appreciate that labour may go on for many hours, during which many women find it necessary to walk around?
With regard to the case of the prisoner shown on Channel 4 last Friday, does the Minister accept that the woman was in labour when she was in hospital? How is the fact that the woman was manacled on a number of occasions while going to the lavatory and into the corridors consistent with the categorical undertaking given to my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley, North (Mr. Howarth) by Mr. Richard Tilt--the acting Director General of the Prison Service--that
Was not the action taken to manacle this prisoner in the clearest breach of that undertaking?
The Minister stated that there had been no complaints from Whittington hospital. Is she aware--as I am, following conversations this morning with the chairman of the Whittington hospital trust--that that hospital is profoundly concerned about the practice of manacling prisoners who are in labour and, indeed, prisoners who are pregnant? Why has the Prison Service been so dilatory in responding to the offer made by the Whittington to take its community midwifery service into Holloway prison itself, thus ending the need for pregnant prisoners to travel to hospital except once labour has been established?
Is the Minister aware that staff at all levels in the Prison Service now feel so intimidated by the climate created by Ministers that they are being forced to make decisions that defy both common sense and common decency? Does not the Minister understand that that climate of intimidation led to the grotesque situation shown on Channel 4 last Friday, when the security measures taken were wholly disproportionate to the risk? Was not the president of the Royal College of Midwives entirely right when she said that the distress of handcuffing a woman in labour inevitably puts the health of the mother and the baby at risk, and is barbaric and a fundamental violation of a woman's dignity?
Miss Widdecombe:
All the hon. Gentleman's questions were answered by my statement, but I shall spell out my reply so that even he will understand. The lady was not in labour when she was secured.
Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham):
Does my hon. Friend realise that my constituents expect criminals who are sent to gaol to stay there and that we expect everything to be done to ensure that escapes do not happen or that there are fewer and fewer of them? What progress is being made to reduce the number of escapes from Her Majesty's prisons?
Miss Widdecombe:
Considerable progress has already been made, as my hon. Friend will be aware. Since the Prison Service became an agency in 1993, escapes have been cut by 77 per cent. There was, however, still a disproportionately high level, in percentage terms, of escapes among female prisoners vis-o-vis male prisoners. When we looked into that, we found that the only difference was that, whereas restraints were routinely used on male prisoners under escort, they were not used on female prisoners. We therefore changed our policy in April, with the result that escapes among female prisoners have dramatically fallen. I hope that that satisfies my hon. Friend as to the progress that we are making.
Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed):
Why does not the Minister show some understanding of the anger and revulsion felt by many responsible people as a result of the revelations? Can she confirm that the use of chains in these circumstances has increased, that it has increased as a direct result of Ministers' insistence on certain security measures and that there are alternatives, such as the creation of greater security in the places used and having more staff attending escort duties?
Miss Widdecombe:
I can only state again that we remove restraints when treatment has commenced or, in the case of pregnant women, when labour is confirmed. We regard that as striking the right balance between the need to maintain security and the need to recognise the mother's situation. The film on Channel 4 showed clearly the lady concerned moving freely around the side ward, even after childbirth, when she was unsecured and looking after her baby. She was secured only when she entered the public areas of the hospital when she was not in labour.
Lady Olga Maitland (Sutton and Cheam):
Although the issue of handcuffing prisoners is undoubtedly controversial, does my hon. Friend agree that it somewhat masks the real progress that has been made in prison conditions? The vast majority of inmates now live on their own in cells with internal sanitation.
Miss Widdecombe:
My hon. Friend is right. Now, 96 per cent. of prisoners have access to sanitation 24 hours a day. We have completely eliminated trebling in cells, we have reduced the number of prisoners sharing two to cells designed for one and we have completely eliminated the use of police cells. That is a major achievement by the Prison Service, and I am sorry that Opposition Members will not join in praising the management and staff concerned.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich):
Despite the fact that the Minister seems to show a frightening inability to understand the difference between a woman who is four and a half months pregnant and a
Miss Widdecombe:
For accurate information, we rely on the experts, who are the medical staff. There is a clear procedure for establishing when a woman is in labour. That is established not by the prison staff, but by the medical staff. A form is filled in, which establishes that fact--[Interruption.] Yes. That means that we have a written record, much to the discomfort of Opposition Members, of when labour started in this case. There is a clear procedure and a clear record is kept. With the exception of one incident for which we apologised fully at the time--the case of Ms Edwards--there has been no record of any woman being secured while in labour, according to medical staff and medical definition.
Mr. Michael Stephen (Shoreham):
Will my hon. Friend confirm that, in October last year, an additional
£326,000 was allocated to Holloway, which enabled the prison to employ an additional 25 members of staff? Can she give the House an assurance that when a female prisoner attends for medical care, especially for maternity care, she will be escorted by female prison warders?
Miss Widdecombe:
I share the concerns that have been expressed about decency and delicacy and the use of male officers in these circumstances, and about females being secured to male officers while undergoing intimate treatment. I understand that. The Prison Service has also taken those concerns on board. We hope to be able to move to a position in which, as far as possible, women in this situation are attended by female prison officers.
Ms Glenda Jackson (Hampstead and Highgate):
If the Minister listens to expert medical opinion, why has she ignored what the Royal College of Midwives has said: that the sort of treatment that we saw on our television screens, and about which we have heard in the past, being given to women prisoners while giving birth is totally unacceptable? It can cause grave trauma in the mother and there is sufficient evidence to give concern that it can traumatise the baby. Surely it is time that a direct order was given that no such barbaric practice will ever occur again.
Miss Widdecombe:
We have made it clear that women in labour will not be secured and that it has never been our policy for them to be so secured. The opinion of the medical staff who were involved in the actual incident in the hospital is that our policy was not violated. I can quite believe that anybody merely watching the film and the discussions surrounding it may well have come to a different view, but on the facts as presented, and as logged by Holloway staff and by hospital staff, there was no violation of our policy, there was no barbaric treatment and the usual procedures were fully carried out.
"cuffs have . . . to be removed from women in labour"?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |