Written evidence from Professor Phil Scraton,
Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Queen's University,
Belfast
What follows is a personal submission made in
my capacity as an independent academic who has carried out extensive
primary research for Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission
(NIHRC) and Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young
People (NICCY). While the findings of the published research have
received the endorsement of the Commissions any views expressed
here are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Commissions.
GENERIC
Although I have yet to carry out research at
Magilligan or Maghaberry I am familiar with the contents of the
Inspectorates' most recent reports and with secondary material
concerning the regimes and their operation, the contents of reviews
and NIPS' policy statements and responses. As stated above, my
primary research has focused on the imprisonment of women and
girls. I consider that following generic issues require urgent
consideration at strategic, policy and practice levels. They have
been well-known and publicised for a considerable period and despite
reassurances to the contrary they have not been appropriately
or adequately addressed.
— The prison estate is not "fit
for purpose". While this is particularly the case regarding
Magilligan it extends to Maghaberry where there has been major
investment in separation and little consideration given to the
conditions under which "ordinary" prisoners are held.
It is clear that for many male prisoners the regime that they
experience is more secure and restrictive that their assessed
"risk" or category status. In terms of international
human rights standards the holding of women in a male young offenders'
centre is indefensible. While the regime at Mourne House had all
but collapsed and was unacceptable, the move to a lower security
facility within a male physical environment failed to address
and has worsened a major criticism raised by the NIHRC research
and the Inspectorates: undue restrictions on women, less than
equal treatment and a regime encumbered by risk assessments made
on the basis of site sharing.
— Management and staff are not "trained
for purpose". A legacy of the conflict and the release of
prisoners under the Good Friday Agreement is that since the early
1990s there has been virtually no recruitment of prison officers
other than those on night guard duty. For many prison officers
and managers adapting has been difficult and it is clear from
our research and from the observations of others that a strong
staff culture based around a difficult and quite different social
and political context has obtained. Without doubt there are examples
of staff meeting new challenges but these are the exception. Lack
of recruitment over the last decade has made it impossible to
effect change through basic and developmental training of new
staff. Certainly in Scotland this played a major part in the 1990s
reforms within the Scottish Prison Service. Further, what currently
passes as in-service training on new policies and directions is
little more than familiarisation given the restrictions on time
and resources.
— Reaction rather than pro-action.
Perhaps it is to be expected that the serious criticisms levelled
against NIPS' policies and operations has led to a reactive rather
than proactive approach to dealing with complex and often conflicting
demands. However it is now my experience of NIPS during this difficult
period that critique is always met with reassurance that "matters
are in hand", "policies are under review" or "criticisms
are out-of-date". This was particularly evident in evidence
given by managers at Roseanne Irvine's inquest. While statements
of intent or actual policy developments have a paper presence
the reality at an operational, practice level often fails to meet
the promise. This is particularly evident in our most recent research
into women in prison. NIPS reassures that most of the recommendations
made by the Inspectorates' unannounced inspection of Ash House
have been met. Our research examines policies up to February 2007
and demonstrates that such reassurances are not met in practice.
— Mental healthcare. This is a key
issue across all prison services, not least Northern Ireland.
There is one additional dimension in Northern Ireland: the legacy
of conflict and the persistence of untreated, often trans-generational
trauma for all prisoners. The issue of such "special circumstances",
when coupled with concentrations of material deprivation, the
expansion of the illicit drugs economy and community threats and
punishments brings a very significant and exceptional dynamic
to responding to people in conflict with the law. It is regrettable
that mental health services are seriously deficient in the very
jurisdiction that most requires therapeutic intervention. While
one tragic consequence, particularly among children and young
people is "violence inwards" including self harm and
the taking of their own lives, another is "violence outwards"
directed towards others, leading to punishment in its diverse
forms. There is no question that the institutional deficit in
diagnosing and treating as a priority mental ill-health has led
to the imprisonment of men, women and children who should be treated
in therapeutic communities. Prisons should not be the "dumping
ground" for those not receiving appropriate treatment in
community-based facilities. Further, however, the prisons have
neither the operational capacity nor skills to accommodate those
with complex mental health needs. It is questionable whether a
"therapeutic community" or culture can be achieved within
a prison where the priority is security and containment. It was
my experience throughout the research that despite recent reform
of procedures and practices mental health care in prison remains
seriously deficient. Worse still, the environment in which women
are held increases the likelihood of mental ill-health. The practice
of locking up the most vulnerable prisoners who pose a management
problem through their self harming or parasuicidal behaviour remains
unacceptable. Those most in need of treatment often endure the
most punitive responses.
— Out-of cell time, constructive activities.
The principal concern here across prison establishments is the
amount of time prisoners spend alone in their cells in what amounts
to solitary confinement. At present most prisoners will spend
approximately two-thirds of their sentence locked in their cells.
Staff shortages, "rolling unlocks" and security lockdowns
add to this problem. Further, the practice of locking up those
not assigned work in situations where there is insufficient opportunity
for work is unacceptable. There remains not only a serious lack
of work opportunities but also a lack of constructive activities
within the regimes. This is particularly the case for those accommodated
on "vulnerables" landings—those most in need of
constant interaction and occupational therapy—and those
on very short sentences.
— Visits, contact with families. More
is required in facilitating longer and more regular visits, particularly
family visits when required. Telephone contact, particularly between
parents and children is a vital element in ensuring a solid foundation
for release. The current contract in terms of cost is prohibitive
and a major cause of anxiety for all prisoners. It is unacceptable
that those most in need of regular contact pay among the highest
charges for telephone use.
SPECIFIC
Given that the Committee will be receiving an
embargoed copy of the NIHRC report that I co-authored, The
Prison Within, I will not repeat the detail of our findings.
The report challenges NIPS' claims for across the board progress
on our previous recommendations and those of the Inspectorates.
It also makes extensive recommendations. I take the opportunity
to draw to the Committee's attention the final chapter of that
report. However, I emphasise the following:
— A Northern Ireland Prison Service
strategy for women and girls is essential. The reluctance to proceed
with this in full consultation with all interested parties is
inexplicable.
— Separate site provision with discrete
healthcare, work, recreation, education, staffing and resettlement
is an essential prerequisite for further developing appropriate
accommodation and treatment for women in prison.
— Introduction of gender-specific policies.
Our most recent report demonstrates that an examination of current
policies reveals them to be deficient in meeting the particular
needs of women in prison.
— Appointment of managers and staff
fully and appropriately trained to work with the complex needs
of a small but diverse number of women prisoners.
— Accommodation on landings and with
other prisoners suited to the diversity of prisoners and their
needs.
— Creation of a long-term prisoner
environment with enhanced out-of-cell time and opportunities to
take personal responsibility.
— Integration of therapeutic mental
healthcare for women diagnosed as personality or behaviour disordered.
One hour per week Cognitive Behaviour Therapy is not only insufficient
but carries the risk of raising serious problems for prisoners
in a location where there is no immediate follow-up and hours
of contemplative isolation.
— Ensuring that women with mental health
needs are not imprisoned but are accommodated in therapeutic facilities,
including day-care, in the community.
— Using the opportunity of the current
shift in responsibility for healthcare to introduce "best
practice" provision particularly for those suffering from
mental ill-health. Reprioritising provision so that the identified
needs of the prisoner take precedence over the assumed requirements
of the prison: resolving the custody versus care issue.
— Provision of full educational programme
that operates to schedule and provides a range of training and
educational opportunities.
— Time out of cell must be enhanced
and the use of lock-up significantly reduced.
— The use of punishment cells to be
ended and their replacement with appropriately designed, therapeutic
"time-out" accommodation.
— Ending of strip searching on reception
and at random unless "reasonable suspicion" can be demonstrated.
— Provision of cheaper telephone contact
and longer, more frequent visits to enhance the quality of prisoners'
family lives.
— Initiation of a fully active, creative
and constructive regime to occupy women and develop their skills.
— Introduction of sentence planning
supported by a personal officer scheme geared to meeting the needs
of individual women from their moment of reception through to
their release.
— Integration of sentence planning
into resettlement and post-release provision.
— End to using prisons for those unable
or refusing to pay fines.
— The use of prison as "last resort"
for all prisoners but particularl children, young people and women
— End to the use of adult environments
for the holding of children (17 and under within international
standards and the CRC).
Although refused access to conduct primary research
into Hydebank Wood YOC on behalf of NICCY the following issues
were raised in the final NICCY report, Children's Rights in
Northern Ireland:
— Detention as a measure of last resort
and for the shortest possible time: length and use of remands;
also the practice of remands via video link.
— Requiring the incorporation of the
"best interests" principle into all custodial policies,
programmes and practices.
— Securing child protection procedures,
confidential complaints mechanisms and effective anti-bullying
policies.
— Provision of gender-specific regimes
and programmes for all children in custody.
— Ending the holding of children under
18 in HWYOC and in the adult women's prison unit.
— Children and young adults to be located
in separate and discrete accommodation and the provision of age-appropriate
regimes and programmes.
— The implementation and effectiveness
of the child protection policy, PECS vetting, child protection
awareness training and children's rights training.
— Lack of appropriate healthcare provision
and secure facilities for working with children with mental health
problems.
— Ending isolation within Special Supervision
Units (punishment blocks) for managing children self-harming or
at risk of suicide or as discipline.
— Development of therapeutic regimes
and counselling; remedying inadequate staff training for those
dealing with distressed and disturbed children.
— Development of gender specific regimes
particularly regarding the identification of and provision for
appropriate healthcare needs including sexual health.
— Provision of an education curriculum
appropriate to the assessed needs, attainment record and school
background of each child.
— Introduction of child-friendly information
and independent advocacy.
— Ending lengthy lock-up and the long
hours spent routinely in cell in isolation.
— Need for guidance, regulation, training
and monitoring in the use of all forms of restraint.
— Ensuring privacy and confidentiality
at all times without compromising the safety of children and young
people held in custody.
— Over-representation of children with
special education needs and the lack of access within HWYOC to
their statements.
— Geographical location of the HWYOC
and the difficulties experienced by families in visiting children.
COMMENT
The combination of a low age of criminal responsibility
and processes that net widen into criminalisation rather than
divert children means that while Northern Ireland uses custody
proportionately less than Scotland, England and Wales, there is
evidence that it is not always used as a "last resort".
The UN Committee has expressed concerns on these issues alongside
criticisms of the holding of under 18s in young offenders' settings
and the use of solitary confinement for children. The research
found disturbing evidence of both issues. Not only does the State,
through its institutional regimes and practices, breach the CRC,
particularly with reference to Article 40, the seriousness of
the evidence gathered suggests that children were, and continue
to be, put at risk of harm and possibly death. This situation
is not solely the responsibility of the Prison Service, and there
is evidence that managers have attempted to improve the situation
in often difficult circumstances. What is required is an alternative
disposal for children suffering from serious mental health problems.
It is inappropriate that some of the most vulnerable children,
in need of therapeutic mental health support services, are placed
in custodial settings where they are often managed in punishment
cells.
Professor Phil Scraton
Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Queen's
University, Belfast
27 April 2007
|
