Some good news for your mid-week: The Bureau of Prisons recently announced it has changed its policy and now bans the shackling of pregnant women during transportation, labor and delivery.
Maria Jones, who was incarcerated for violating drug laws, tells the story of having labor induced two weeks prior to her due date, but being "kept in shackles, leaving 18 inches between her ankles, and told to pace the hallway for several hours. 'It was so humiliating. My ankles were raw,' she said. 'I had shackles on up until the baby was coming out and then they took them off for me to push...It was unbelievable. Like I was going to go anywhere.'"[...]The new policy represents a huge victory for the thousands of women incarcerated in federal prisons throughout the country -- a victory hard won by groups like The Rebecca Project for Human Rights and other organizations that have advocated for this change.
But this is only the beginning. In 47 states there is no legislation to restrict the practice of shackling pregnant women; state and local prisons are not subject to the new federal policy. And the U.S. Immigrant and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which increasingly detains immigrant women who have never committed a crime, has refused to specifically end the use of restraints on pregnant women.
So basically, it's a good start, but we need to keep advocating that state and local prisons, as well as ICE, also ban the practice of shackling pregnant women. As the ACLU notes, women are the fastest-growing segment of the prison population. This issue is not going away anytime soon.
Amnesty International has info on the situation at the state-level.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Bureau of Prisons bans shackling pregnant inmates.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/9991
How did this practice even start? It seems obviously unnecessary.
About time.
Cate, it is. Check out Rickie Solinger's book, Pregnancy and Power or this Amnesty International report for more on the bullshit justifications for this policy.
Should leg restraints have been taken off of the women in the examples on the ACLU article? Possibly. I am certain that not all of the necessary information about the offenders is in the article. Are any of those women listed as escape threats? Have any of them attempted escape in the past?
The responsibility for the use of leg restraints and all other restraints during a medical trip is always left to the security supervior that is on duty. We pay these people to make these decisions based upon all information contained in the offender's file and the circumstances at the time. A blanket policy removes the ability to make an informed decision.
"Like I was going to go anywhere."
Sorry, but I just can't take a convicted felon's word on that.
Yes, WIDave, I'm sure she was actually going to stage a daring escape while in labor, surrounded by guards and medical personnel, apparently right up to the point where the baby was crowning (I guess she was just going to cross her legs tightly to try to hold it in while she hobbled away?) and then go on to have her baby in a ditch somewhere before beginning her glamorous new life on the lam. Give me a break.
Well, for the sake of discussion: just how pregnant are we talking about here, because there is a huge difference between a 3 months pregnant woman and one who is 8 1/2 months along. Saying 'no shackling for all pregnant women' is too broad. Pregnancy isn't a license to do whatever you want without restriction or consequence.
California does not allow leg shackles or waist chains in the third trimester or during labor (yes, I just read the report after this was posted), which is reasonable.
It's interesting that "Dave" and now "WIDave" have both made comments on posts about WOMEN IN LABOR being shackled to the effect that "we can't trust inmates..." to justify this.
I'm wondering if this will change the policies of female inmates being shackled during an abortion?
Mags, when the properly trained people are handling the situation, then they will know the correct time to remove the leg restraints. When labor starts may not be the correct time. I have heard of labor taking more than 24 hours for some women. If the officers on scene screwed up, then the blame is on them. I don't see a reason to make this policy.
Happyhappygirl, there is no subterfuge going on here. I used to comment under the name "Dave" here. When this website changed the method of signing in, it told me that the name "Dave" was already taken so I assumed a new sign-in name.
It is quite common for me to comment on these types of issues since I work for the Department of Corrections in Wisconsin.
WIDave, wouldn't it make more sense to shackle the arms/hands of the laboring woman and have her room a little more guarded? Or maybe use an ankle bracelet so she could be easily traced if she did attempt an escape? I mean, I don't think they should be free from all restraints throughout all pregnancy, but anytime in the third trimester and ESPECIALLY in labor restraints could impact the woman's health. Surely there are better, safer options to restrict a heavily pregnant or laboring woman from escaping during medical trips rather than using shackles on the ankles.
I agree that many inmates are in there for a reason, and may not be able to be trusted. At the same time, you can't endanger a woman's health over it when there are other options.
Under the right circumstances, it makes perfect sense to restrain just the hands. Inmates that are maximum and medium security require full (hands, waist and legs) restraints unless circumstances warrant otherwise and with the approval of the supervisor. There have probably been plenty of occurances where prison inmates have had very little in terms of restraints on them while giving birth.
It should all depend upon the circumstances.
WIDave, what about in circumstances of corrupt or uncaring guards? Your statements that the person in charge should decide seem to ignore that aspect of this.
Also, under what circumstances do you think that a woman-in-labor's legs should be shackled? Have you attended many labors? I'm not asking rhetorically; I really do think these are important things to know in an argument like this.
WIDave, since you work in corrections, I can understand why you would be leery of prisoners. You have learned not to trust the people in prison. You have been trained not to, and that training could in fact save your life some day.
However, women in labor must have absolutely as little restraint as possible, no matter how long labor takes. Women labor at different rates. Some women are quick, some take many hours or days.
The circumstances of labor are as follows: the woman has contractions that can make it difficult for her to move, think, even cope, each coming within minutes of the last, which get stronger and closer together as labor progresses. Walking and shifting position help cope as well as quicken labor, something that cannot be done while shackled.
The woman's very position can in fact cause distress in the baby, as the umbilical cord can be compressed. Sometimes merely standing up or rolling over can change this. Having a shackle around the waist can impede contractions, causing labor to be both slower and much more painful.
Women cannot move to an effective birthing position if they are shackled to a hospital bed, and may even be impeded from opening their legs wide enough for the baby to be born. The Amnesty International reports detail a woman who was crowning, but the guard with the keys to unshackle her was down the hall chatting up a nurse. They had to find him before she could move from the excruciating position she'd been left in.
Supervision is essential, but it is the height of cruelty to use waist or leg shackles during labor, and to prevent a laboring woman from moving.
I work for the Dept. of Juvenile Justice in my state and this is the first time I've heard of the Bureau of Prisons. Our facilities receive accreditation from the American Correctional Association (ACA). Unfortunately, our pregnant mothers continue to be shackled and handcuffed to, from, and during the hospital stay.
Wax Ghost, it would not matter to corrupt or uncaring guards if there was such a policy in place. Those kind of people have no place as officers and in the department in general. I have seen such people with my own eyes and they disgust me.
"Also, under what circumstances do you think that a woman-in-labor's legs should be shackled?"
If I was the officer on the scene, I would ask the opinions of the doctors and nurses that were attending the patient and use my own judgment. Then I would call the on-duty supervisor if time permitted.
"... since you work in corrections, I can understand why you would be leery of prisoners."
Happyhappygirl, I appreciate that. Very few people outside of the department understand the games that prisoners play.
I would never knowingly put a prisoner's or her baby's life at risk. Not because of the risk of lawsuit, but because it is the right thing to do. I have a limited understanding of the birthing procedure, this is why I would rely heavily upon the advice of the attending doctors and nurses. I would even go out of my way to ask them what I should anticipate in the near future.
As to the guard that was down the hall, he was acting very unprofessionally and probably breaking policy as it was. An officer should always keep eyes on an inmate whenever escorting that inmate on a medical trip. NO MATTER WHAT. You need to go to the bathroom? Get another officer to watch the inmate for you while you relieve yourself or you hold it. You want to flirt with a nurse? Do it on your own time.