Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

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

306 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 07/03/2016 17:40

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

OP posts:
WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 12:57

Is their nationality relevant to their poor treatment in the asylum centre, Icompletely?

The question of where the woman came from had been raised more than once, hasn't it?

But her country of origin only matters if you think that it would be permissible to ignore someone's human rights if they came from certain countries.

I don't. I think all humans are entitled to human rights regardless of country of origin. So where she came from is irrelevant to me, and should be irrelevant to any decent person.

AMouseLivedinaWindMill · 09/03/2016 12:58

I don't think the agenda of Isis can be described as an 'interpretation' of Islam

www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam

Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, “the Prophetic methodology,” which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious, millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be combatted, has already led the United States to underestimate it and back foolish schemes to counter it

AMouseLivedinaWindMill · 09/03/2016 13:01

You only have to look at christian fundamentalism in the US bible belt to see that there is more than one interpretation of Christianity, and at least some of them are misogynist
I think a big difference between christiany and islam, no matter what is in the bible is that we - everyone is FREE to talk about it.

we can discuss the bible and its good points and all its bad points in total freedom.

we can become christian, become lapsed christian, or leave Christianity FREELY. The same cannot be said of Islam.

Thats a huge issue.

Icompletelyunderstand · 09/03/2016 13:02

I don't think it's okay to ignore their human rights but I do think it's okay to keep them in detention unless and until it can be proven that their claim for asylum is genuine.

I suppose the question is, do you think holding them in detention temporarily is in itself an abuse of their human rights? I don't believe that it is, providing of course that it's done legally and for the right reasons, and providing they are not subjected to abuse while they are there.

LumelaMme · 09/03/2016 13:05

How does Islam demand severe punishment or death, West?
Are you deliberately trying to waste our time?
Here's a Muslim site arguing that cutting off a thief's hand is acceptable if the correct conditions are fulfilled

I don't think the agenda of Isis can be described as an 'interpretation' of Islam.
Funny, that, coz they think are. Here is some suggested reading
There is also the little issue of Iran. And Saudi Arabia. And I am very aware that not all Muslims think like that, because I know some.

You only have to look at christian fundamentalism in the US bible belt to see that there is more than one interpretation of Christianity, and at least some of them are misogynist.
Agreed. But the Bible doesn't mandate a whole governmental system.

Icompletelyunderstand · 09/03/2016 13:06

Which part of the human rights act specifically do you think has been breached by holding them temporarily in an asylum detention centre?

emilybohemia · 09/03/2016 13:06

Isis have perverted and distorted Islam, not interpreted it.

'we can become christian, become lapsed christian, or leave Christianity FREELY. The same cannot be said of Islam'.

Bit of an unsubstantiated claim to say the least.

WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 13:10

Indefinite detention is an acknowledged violation of human rights. So is denying those detained access to medical treatment.

Icompletelyunderstand · 09/03/2016 13:11

Actually let me retract the phrase 'their claim for asylum is proven to be genuine.' I recognise that the asylum seekers themselves will often believe they have a genuine claim - they are not necessarily liars or fraudsters, but those claims may not necessarily be upheld because they don't fit certain very strict criteria.

So let's just say I don't think it's a breach of anyone's human rights to be kept in Yarls Wood while the authorities make a decision on whether the claim is likely to be upheld.

WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 13:13

It may surprise you, but the UKs detention practices are not generally viewed as progressive or in accordance with human rights.

The UK is, I believe, currently the only country that detains migrants indefinitely. Some have been detained for years. For comparison, the maximum detention period in France is 45 days.

emilybohemia · 09/03/2016 13:14

'Which part of the human rights act specifically do you think has been breached by holding them temporarily in an asylum detention centre?'

Limiting access to medical treatment.

'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'.

Detaining for an extended period.

'Under Schedule 2 of the 1971 Immigration Act, the Home Secretary has the power to detain for a limited period foreign nationals seeking to enter the UK'.

sportinguista · 09/03/2016 13:15

WomanWithAltitude do you think what I suggested might be better, you know a dedicated team and area for these ladies? You could have tailored counselling etc in there. It would still be detention but much more humane and with access to the relevant services etc.

WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 13:19

Icompletely - All I can say is thank goodness it isn't you that assesses whether practices are in accordance with the European human rights convention.

We detain more asylum seekers, for longer, and in worse conditions, than other European nations. As a country, we should be ashamed of this stain on our human rights record.

It's not just my view - a cross party group of MPS said the same last year. There have been numerous reports condemning what we currently do.

LumelaMme · 09/03/2016 13:19

Isis have perverted and distorted Islam, not interpreted it.
That's not what they think.
And what about Iran? and Saudi?

we can become christian, become lapsed christian, or leave Christianity FREELY. The same cannot be said of Islam
You want substantiation?
'More than 20 Muslim nations have laws that declare apostasy by Muslims to be a crime, many prescribing the death penalty for apostates.' (on wiki, sourced to a Library of Congress publication).
'Brunei is the latest Muslim country to enact a law that makes apostasy a crime punishable with death'.
Iran sentences people to death for apostasy.
Do you recall the fatwa on Salman Rushdie?
Etc.

Interestingly, it looks as if older interpretations of Islam went much more with the 'no compulsion' argument, and did not mandate death for apostasy.

WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 13:20

A dedicated team would be better, and i would support that.

But the practice of indefinitely detaining asylum seekers is a human rights abuse on its own, even if they received excellent care while they were detained. Indefinitely locking people who have committed no crime is shameful.

sportinguista · 09/03/2016 13:21

I'll just toddle off then if I'm going to be ignored? I could do with a cup of tea and a sponge finger!

emilybohemia · 09/03/2016 13:24

'we can become christian, become lapsed christian, or leave Christianity FREELY. The same cannot be said of Islam'

I took the term 'we' to mean in the UK and to be talking about what is permissible there. Do you judge your freedom to leave a religion if you choose to on those of all countries around the world?

WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 13:25

Have a read of the recommendation made by the cross party group of MPs last year. They include not detaining pregnant women, not detaining victims of sexual violence etc.

The view that the UKs detention practices are morally wrong and contrary to human rights isn't just a left wing one - it is held by decent people and human rights advocates of all political stripes.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/03/mps-call-end-indefinite-detention-migrants

sportinguista · 09/03/2016 13:26

Thing is Lucy if I'm reading this right is no longer detained but out in the community whilst I'm guessing awaiting the decision. It seems that there wasn't any intervention to find her acommodation, does anyone know why that might happen?

WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 13:27

The fact that MN is more anti-asylum seeker, pro-detention, and anti-human rights than many conservatives is saddening. I thought better of MNers tbh.

LumelaMme · 09/03/2016 13:32

Do you judge your freedom to leave a religion if you choose to on those of all countries around the world?
Salman Rushdie was living in the UK, a British citizen. He had to have an armed guard.

Indigofactory · 09/03/2016 13:32

The fact that MN is more anti-asylum seeker, pro-detention, and anti-human rights than many conservatives is saddening. I thought better of MNers tbh.

That's kind of the problem - if you make an assumption about a group of people based on how you think they ought to think/behave/speak rather than listen to what's actually happening/being said/prevailing thought, then disappointment is the best outcome you can hope for.

In other cases, such prejudiced assumptions can be downright dangerous.

Hence the need for continuing debate, so that nobody feels sad at the revelation other people may hold different viewpoints.

WomanWithAltitude · 09/03/2016 13:33

The key quote from that article is this, for those who can't be arsed to read it:

"What is unusual about the panel is that it brings together people who do not agree on all aspects of reform of the immigration system - some are more hawkish, some are more liberal - but we are all united in thinking that the current system is ineffective and inhumane."

The panel included MPs and law lords from across the political spectrum, including the former chief inspector of prisons (who you might expect to know a bit about the issue).

Icompletelyunderstand · 09/03/2016 13:35

But Woman surely it's only indefinite detention if you are imprisoned for a crime and left hanging for an unreasonable length of time without a date for trial?

This isn't 'imprisonment' in the same sense, is it? There is a voluntary element to it. By claiming asylum they have all opted to be there by default. Presumably by coming into the country and immediately asking for asylum they acknowledge that they have no other right (ie., no citizenship and no visitor's visa) to walk though border control and to disappear into the UK for as long as their current status allows.

They know this, which is why they claim asylum. Part of the asylum process is that they will be detained or coralled in one form or another while they are assessed. Sometimes it's a quick and straightforward job, and sometimes it isn't, but it's the same all across Europe and most of the world, not just the UK. You make it sound as though they have absolutely no other choice but to be detained against their will, but presumably they can opt to leave the UK and therefore leave the detention centre?

They just don't have the right to freedom of movement within the UK until they have been properly assessed and granted permission to leave the detention centre. Even if they arrived in a complete state of naivety about that it is the law and it has to be borne.

Icompletelyunderstand · 09/03/2016 13:37

'Under Schedule 2 of the 1971 Immigration Act, the Home Secretary has the power to detain for a limited period foreign nationals seeking to enter the UK'.

Do we know what that 'limited period' is?