Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:33 am
Time: 11:33 am
Results for pregnant inmates (u.k.)
1 results foundAuthor: Medical Justice Title: Expecting Change: The case for ending the detention of pregnant women Summary: This report presents an analysis of the immigration detention of pregnant women. The results show that the current policy of detaining pregnant women is ineffective, unworkable and damaging. The Home Offce does not know how many pregnant women are detained. Without knowing or recording how many are detained, it is diffcult to see how the Home Offce is able to implement its own policy of detaining pregnant women in only very exceptional circumstances. The primary purpose of detention is removal, yet this research and a previous Medical Justice audit show that only around 5% of pregnant women were successfully removed. This is because in the majority of cases, there is no medically safe way to return them. Following the case of Chen earlier this year, the Home Offce is now unable to use force on pregnant women, save to prevent harm to the woman herself. Given that the use of force, which the Home O"ce had deemed essential, is now unlawful, pregnant women should no longer be detained as there is now an even smaller prospect of removal. Experts agree that travel to malarious areas should be avoided because pregnant women have an increased risk of developing severe malaria and a higher risk of fatality compared to non-pregnant women. Home O"ce policy outlines that women should be o!ered malaria prophylaxis prior to their removal. In all the cases where anti-malarials were o!ered, Yarl’s Wood healthcare team failed to follow the relevant medical guidance. The data results show that the healthcare pregnant women receive is inadequate. There is evidence that the level of care falls short of NHS equivalence and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) standards. Immigration detention introduces discontinuity in women’s care and the stress of detention can impact on their mental health and their pregnancy. Asylum seeking women have poorer maternity outcomes than the general population. Many women in the sample were victims of rape, torture and tra"cking. However, there appeared to be no appreciation by Yarl’s Wood healthcare sta! that even without complications, this is a group of vulnerable women who need to be managed as complex cases. People can be held in immigration detention inde#nitely and the decision to detain is not subject to automatic judicial oversight. Self-harm, hunger strikes and reports of assault and racism are common. In four separate cases in the past two years, the High Court has ruled that the care of four detainees amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment. Detention is no place for a pregnant woman. According to the Independent Monitoring Board, 93 pregnant women were held in Yarl’s Wood in 2011. With limited prospects of removal, it is our recommendation that the government should stop detaining them. Detention is not serving any purpose: the costs are great and the damage to women’s health can be dramatic. This recommendation is in line with Asylum Aid’s Charter of Rights of Women Seeking Asylum that is supported by 337 organisations, including the Royal College of Midwives. Details: London: Medical Justice, 2013. 88p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 18, 2013 at: http://www.medicaljustice.org.uk/images/stories/reports/expectingchange.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.medicaljustice.org.uk/images/stories/reports/expectingchange.pdf Shelf Number: 129031 Keywords: Female InmatesFemale PrisonersImmigrant DetentionPregnant Inmates (U.K.) |