Guest post: "Detention is no place for pregnant women"

[MumsnetGuestPosts]

Lucy* was 23 when she fell pregnant as a result of brutal sexual violence. Her mother bought her a plane ticket to the UK, thinking she and her baby would be safe here - but she was detained straight from the airport. She arrived frightened, alone and pregnant, and was locked up.

Lucy spent four weeks in Yarl's Wood between months five and six of her pregnancy. She told me that she couldn't believe places like this existed in the UK.

Her pregnancy had been painful, Lucy said. At one point, things got so bad that her solicitor had to intervene to ensure she was taken to the nearby hospital for medical attention. The staff at Yarl's Wood were dismissive of her complaints; there's a prevalent culture of disbelief, and women are often accused of pretending to be ill to strengthen their asylum case. Concerns have repeatedly been raised about the quality of the healthcare provision at Yarl's Wood, and Lucy had no idea what was going to happen to her or her baby.

About a month after she was detained, Lucy was released. She had nowhere to go, and had to rely on the kindness of strangers until her baby boy was born. Her son is now three months old and they are living in the community, but their asylum status is still in limbo.

About a month after I first met Lucy, I also met Priya* in Yarl's Wood, where she'd been for about six weeks. She was 25, and around five months pregnant; her story is also told in .

I visit Yarl's Wood about once a month, and always take small gifts for the women I'm visiting – usually nice smellies, body lotions and shampoos. When I asked Priya what she wanted me to bring, she asked for a photo of a baby girl to look at, and I felt so saddened by the simplicity of her request. During her time in Yarl's Wood, she'd been taken to Bedford hospital for her 20 week scan, so she knew she was having a girl and desperately wanted to imagine what she might be like.

Priya had been taken late for her appointment, escorted by Yarl's Wood officers, and hadn't had time to speak to the midwife afterwards. She was clearly frustrated, anxious, and uncertain about what to expect. "I used to worry about myself, but now I only worry about what will happen to my daughter," she told me.

She also felt very alone. She has no family, either in the UK or her home country, and her partner, like her, is an asylum seeker. Although they spoke on the phone every day, he lived in asylum support accommodation at the other end of the country, and couldn't afford to visit. At the time, I was the only 'social' visitor she'd had. I couldn't believe how tiny and fragile she looked when we first met, but she told me she felt weak and sick all the time.

She struggled to eat the food that was provided, and had been unable to access proper support for her depression, low blood pressure, and problems sleeping. The experience of detention is immensely distressing, and over half the women we surveyed in detention said they thought about killing themselves. For Priya, pregnancy and the separation from her partner also made her more emotionally vulnerable, but staff were again dismissive and unkind when she sought help for her mental health problems.

Lucy and Priya's stories are heartbreaking, but sadly they are not alone in their experiences. Over the course of 2014, 99 pregnant women were detained in Yarl's Wood – despite the Home Office's own policy that pregnant women should only be detained under 'exceptional circumstances'.

At Women for Refugee Women we know, from the stories of women like Lucy and Priya, that detention is no place for pregnant women. And it's not just our opinion – two recent independent reviews, by HM Prisons Inspectorate and Stephen Shaw, as well as medical and legal experts, have expressed similar concerns about pregnant women being detained. Join our Set Her Free campaign to ensure all women who seek asylum in the UK are treated with dignity and respect - sign the petition here.

*Names have been changed

And I've also outlined them in my posts.

But... one problem with all hostel provision, for ex cons

I know a hostel for ex cons, and the landlord gets lots of ££ for providing it but the living conditions are dire. Loo water running down wall, vile, dirty ect. Its listed as an HMO and should have certain standards but its very easy to pull wool over councils eyes, as they dont vigorously push to prosecute any dodgy landlords.

I think at the very least a standard of accmd should be set across the board, ie no mould, no leaking water, etc.

Wouldn't disagree with that, AMouse. There are some shocking HMOs out there. I get to see them in my day job to

Woman I meant, this is a discussion forum. Being pointed elsewhere for information can never be quite the same as having a direct exchange of views and information, being able to read thoughts, comments, question and answer all on the same page. That's all, really.

As others have asked: what do you think? Not what have others said?

Surely the risk of a pregnant asylum seeker absconding is fairly minimal? How do you think she will feed and clothe herself and access medical care, while on the run?

I agree with those who say that asylum seekers shouldn't be locked up, except perhaps in very exceptional circumstances. Everyone deserves to be treated humanely, wherever in the world they were born. And I don't think being locked up indefinitely is humane.

In the case of pregnant women (and any other vulnerable group) this becomes even more important. I think the fact of being pregnant means that you are much less likely to have come to the UK for non genuine reasons - can you imagine being pregnant and deciding it would be a good idea to take a dangerous journey to go on a long working holiday just for the hell of it? I think you would only leave your home, family and everything you knew if you really had no other option.

AMouse They don't because they can't afford to - literally as well as figuratively. Very few people will take such challenging high maintenance tenants, even for £££££, often because their mortgage companies won't allow it, sometimes just because it's too much like hard work.

Certain categories of tenant often abuse and trash the place so landlords perhaps understandably are reluctant to provide anything more than the bare minimum in home comforts. Of course it should be habitable and not a health risk in the first place and many councils do offer grants for landlords to bring licensed HMOs up to standard on the understanding that they will comment to housing vulnerable and/or troublesome tenants for a fixed period of time to reflect the council's investment, but the trouble is, at the moment they just can't find enough suitably minded landlords quickly enough. So they have little choice but to turn a blind eye to the 'landlords from hell' and to the substandard housing they supply. It's literally that or the street.

But that's what happens when you sell off all your social housing stock, don't build many to replace them, keep whole generation of people on an artificially suppressed wage topped up by benefits so they can't be financially independent enough to fund their own housing, and then allow millions more low income, high fertility rate immigrants into the country in the space of 15 years.

That isn't going to play well, is it?

I don't have to supply workable alternatives in order to know that we should be upholding human rights and to support the campaign

What! Of course you do, otherwise your stance is not very meaningful and just looks like petulant kicking.

Icompletelyunderstand Wed 09-Mar-16 15:45:59

This landlord owns many similar properties and is very very wealthy.

The homes do not have any home comforts at all. As I said one lad had water leaking from the loo down his bedroom wall below.
But yes, the tennants are tricky, herion addict, ex cons etc.

So they have little choice but to turn a blind eye to the 'landlords from hell' and to the substandard housing they supply. It's literally that or the street Good point.

But that's what happens when you sell off all your social housing stock, don't build many to replace them, keep whole generation of people on an artificially suppressed wage topped up by benefits so they can't be financially independent enough to fund their own housing, and then allow millions more low income, high fertility rate immigrants into the country in the space of 15 years

Very good point.

I must say its great to hear views from people who are on the ground and in the field.

AMouse - did you read that last line?

Just wondered...

Surely the risk of a pregnant asylum seeker absconding is fairly minimal? How do you think she will feed and clothe herself and access medical care, while on the run?

I suppose that really depends on why she comes here, where she's come from, what her chances of being successful in her application for asylum is, and whether or not she already has a network of contacts from her home country here.

There are women here living in forced domestic servitude from Africa and Pakistan for example, who are completely under the radar of the authorities for years on end and no-one but the people holding them know they exist.

A slightly far fetched but altogether possible scenario is that someone from WHEREVER sends a message 'home' for a PG girl to come to the UK for a job. No visa necessary, here's her plane ticket, we will pick her up once she's been taken pity on and let loose into the community, we'll 'employ' her by 'paying' with bed and board and claim we are suddenly the guardians of her child who is related to us from back home. Oh and by the way, can we have some benefits for that please, CTCs extra HB, CB, a la Victoria Climbe, except that we haven't just got Victoria, we've got her mother Cinderella sleeping in the cupboard under the stairs as well, but we aren't telling anyone about that.

Or it could be much more mundane than that. It could literally be a woman from anywhere outside the EU who just fancies living here because she has friends and family who do. It is so easy to get fake passports, she could be from Egypt for example, but get here, go underground and then re-emerge a few months later clutching her fake passport and claiming to be from Romania. And a self employed 'business owner' selling lolly sticks with glitter stuck to them on a Facebook page so she can get working tax credits. Bingo. Job done.

Random plucking of countries there, but you get my point.

which line Blanche, I am some what distracted.

The multiple millions of low income, extra fertile immigrants...

I agree with the angry sentiment of the whole post, the context of it, if not the actuality of the last line... it did make me smile when I read it... hence my original response to it...

allow millions more low income, high fertility rate immigrants into the country in the space of 15 years

I suppose that really depends on why she comes here, where she's come from, what her chances of being successful in her application for asylum is

Which is why I and a few others asked which countries these two women came from.

Personally, I think it is important.

Was the 'brutal sexual violence' perpetrated on Lucy as part of a persecution due to her race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group?

I understand Lucy's mother bought her ticket to the UK - was this because she was unable or unwilling to seek protection from the authorities in her own country?

I'm also interested in the pressure that can be brought to bear on other governments to sign up to European or other asylum and human rights directives. ors anyone have any (brief) links that they can share?

Clearly the system is flawed/creaking/oversubscribed if things are moving so slowly that pregnant women are at risk during the processing and acceptance of their asylum claims.

Shouldn't we also be insisting that other countries share the care for vulnerable people to ensure that the system of asylum becomes less overburdened?

allow millions more low income

yes true.

high fertility rate immigrants

Umm, I know birth rates went through the roof in the 2006.2007 etc but not sure if high fertility rate is match statement to that, but its a fact certainly that maternity wards were overcome at that time.

in the space of 15 years

this is true also isn't it.

everyone knows it and even the labour party admit it now.

without a doubt, a number of factors, including blair's infamous immigrant decision has led to mass housing problems, shortage of school places, and problems in all sorts of areas.

When I say high fertility rate, it's a term that tends to be used to describe people who culturally or religiously choose to have lots of children. I seriously doubt they are necessarily any more fertile than people with fewer children, but that's just the term that tends to get used.

I really did understand it, completely I just expected someone to leap down your throat for saying it. That being what normally happens, which is why I posted my initial response with a smile

My apologies. I seem to have overthought it

My friend, Inderjit, is Sikh and she was told off by her GP for not producing more than 2 children.

I love this line:

"As others have asked: what do you think? Not what have others said?"

Icompletely I suppose those scenarios are possible, if unlikely. However there are many women like Lucy who have been the victim of rape, sexual assault and whose governments are unable or unwilling to protect them, and who have come to the UK seeking protection. Until their asylum claims are considered, we don't know which is which. I suppose the question is which worries you more, the possibility of a non genuine asylum seeker absconding and getting to stay in the country, or the likelihood that women who have been raped are further traumatised by being detained for months on end?

Sorry, Sarah the petitioner, but I think this petition is bogus. I know a woman who spent 2 or 3 weeks in Yarl's Wood over Christmas. She had access to a lawyer, in fact a barrister. This is just another way to have people circumvent eligibiiity to remain here. Lucy's mother sent her to the UK instead of to relatives or an adjoining country.

What I also find offensive if the language used in the petition, clearly to manipulate us but it is so badly worded that it comes across as puerile (and untrue). A bit like a backstory from 'Jackie'.

I suppose the question is which worries you more, the possibility of a non genuine asylum seeker absconding and getting to stay in the country, or the likelihood that women who have been raped are further traumatised by being detained for months on end?

It's an odd question, isn't it?

In these times, I think national security needs to be a priority. So any non-genuine asylum seeker absconding is concerning and to pretend otherwise is naive.

If someone is traumatised, 'absconding' onto the streets of a strange country, where they have no family, support, legal access to housing, food or protection, may well not know the language and be totally outside the healthcare and legal systems by virtue of being therefore illegally in the country can only end very badly for that person.

If they are pregnant, it is highly irresponsible and dangerous for the unborn child for a mother to deliberately put herself outside a system where the authorities know she exisst and are providing medical aid, shelter and food as well as legal assistance.

No question, really.

'she felt very alone... She has no family, either in the UK or her home country, and her partner, like her, is an asylum seeker...She struggled to eat the food that was provided, and had been unable to access proper support for her depression, low blood pressure, and problems sleeping. The experience of detention is immensely distressing.'

These symptoms seem a normal response and what you would expect after being flown to another country in a pregnant state, having been sexually assaulted in your own country.

I don't think the detention itself can be blamed for her depression and for re-traumatising her. There seems to be an awful lot of expectation on the UK to be all things and be able to provide for EVERY need. This doesn't seem realistic.

She is safe and warm and provided with food clothes and essential medical aid. Is that not enough?

Apparently not Inkanta

Sorry I have RTFT and can't see that anyone has mentioned this and might be (must be?) wrong or missing something but I think this is misleading - the petition is actually Close Yarl's Wood and end the detention of women who seek asylum
The whole guest post is about pregnant women but the petition is saying NO woman should be kept in a detention centre (and Yarls wood also serves 'adult family groups')...
So women asylum seekers who come here are let loose in the community ...hopefully with some kind of other support? That would have to be pretty solid support.
Not only if they have a dodgy claim is there the risk of them absconding or disappearing for other reasons and they could end up god knows where - surely that would lead to an increase risk of them being sexually exploited?

Ah, yes. I've just clicked on the petition in the first post. You are right. The petition does actually say that. Wow. That's quite a different matter..