Jonathon Swift / Jennifer Swift

[PersianCatLady]

I just saw in the DM (sorry) that at an inquest it was revealed that a transwoman, Jennifer Swift, committed suicide in prison because "she" wasn't allowed to go to a women's prison -
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5191879/Transgender-prisoner-entered-suicide-pact.html

When the crime that led to "her" being imprisoned was first reported, "she" was referred to as Jonathon Swift -
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/seaforth-suspect-could-face-murder-12345778

There will now be discussions about whether HMPS should have done more to protect "her" as she was in a men's prison.

Personally I think that more emphasis should be put on feeling sympathy for the family of the man "she" murdered.

However my main concern is that if the proposed changes to the GRA go ahead then transwomen like Jenny would have an automatic right to be sent to women's prisons to be housed alongside some of the most vulnerable women in society.

Am I wrong to feel like this??

Interesting article. A few thoughts

• Jonathan was on remand, not convicted, so innocent until proven guilty
• self-administering hormones by buying them online has got to be dangerous and should be stopped
• it's probably a safe assumption that Paris, the friend and Diversity Champion, quoted in the article is also a transwoman. And the "suicide pact" description suggests that there were two other transwomen there as well. So the jail seems to have been the right place for Jonathan to have been held: with other transwomen
• the devil would be in the detail of the legislation, whether transwomen would automatically be put in a women's prison: it would be possible to create an exemption for things such as prisons (which is something that I will be pushing for, if a draft bill is ever published)

Jonathan was on remand, not convicted, so innocent until proven guilty
Yes, you are right.

Where I put this in my OP -
"Personally I think that more emphasis should be put on feeling sympathy for the family of the man "she" murdered"

I should have said -
"Personally I think that more emphasis should be put on feeling sympathy for the family of the man "she" is alleged to have murdered"

I would argue that whether or not the individual in question is transgender is pretty irrelevant - this is the priblem:

Auditors said that self-harm incidents increased by 73% between 2012 and 2016 to 40,161, while the 120 self-inflicted deaths in prison in 2016 was the highest figure on record and almost double that for 2012

www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/29/suicide-and-self-harm-in-prisons-hit-worst-ever-levels

And, IMO males should not be placed in a woman's prison ever, no matter how they identify.

self-administering hormones by buying them online has got to be dangerous and should be stopped
Exactly.

If I smoke crack everyday and get sent to prison, my crack supply would officially stop.

Why would the illegal use of any drug, even hormones, be any different??

Another thing.

The local paper states this -
"In documentation used by the police, crown prosecution service and the coroners' court, Swift is referred to as Jonathan, which is her registered name. Her name had not been legally changed by the time she died"

The newspapers are all referring to "her" as Jennifer.

Why is this allowed when it is not "her" actual legal name??

There was a interesting segment on the BBC today about bodybuilders and the dangers of taking steroids, nary a mention of TIFs though...

www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/42391438/steroid-abuse-raising-health-risk-for-thousands

And, IMO males should not be placed in a woman's prison ever, no matter how they identify
Actually I am not sure if I 100% agree with you.

I have always been of the opinion that if a man has transitioned to a woman then I would consider them to be female.

By transition I mean (sorry for the bluntness) removing their penis and making a permanent change to being a woman.

It is not enough that a man can just say that they are a woman and retain their penis to become a woman.

I dont think violent offenders should be allowed to transition, or be placed in a womens prison.
Talking to people online, most of them think that 'transitioning' means 'being transsexual', as you have defined it. They are often shocked to discover that men dont actually have to do anything to legally transition.

As a "civilised" society we have a duty to protect the humans that we imprison, no matter what their sex/gender/identity, and no matter what crimes they have committed.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine's post makes clear we are currently failing at this, badly.

Of course the trans issue is a very real one in prisons (personally I'd suggest that trans women should be put in a specific wing away from other women unless or until they no longer have a penis although I'm open to other arguments) but we shouldn't forget that Jenny and other trans people are vulnerable too.

As for whether Jennifer is the legal name - ffs this person (who may or may not be a murderer - no one knows for sure) is DEAD. Give them and their family a fucking break.

As a "civilised" society we have a duty to protect the humans that we imprison, no matter what their sex/gender/identity, and no matter what crimes they have committed
Yes, we do.

That is why men with penises should not be housed in women's prisons.

I do believe that prison is the punishment and I have no time for people that think that because someone is a prisoner, they deserve any harm that comes to them. No, just no.

However, Jenny decided to take "her" own life because "she" couldn't get her own way and get moved to a women's prison.

How on Earth can HMPS protect people from themselves if they are determined to kill themselves?

There were 120 self-inflicted deaths in prisons in England and Wales in 2016.

Yet we barely hear about them, that is wrong.

How on Earth can HMPS protect people from themselves if they are determined to kill themselves? With more and better trained staff and better facilities. But that of course costs money, which the current government is loath to spend on the prison service.

Of course all prisoners should be protected - the rates of self-harm, attempted suicide and completed suicide are far too high in our prisons.

Crested - you are assuming that JS's family would be upset by the use of Jonathon, but for all we know they may have refused to use Jennifer themselves. But your point that there is a(nother) grieving family is well made

With more and better trained staff and better facilities. But that of course costs money, which the current government is loath to spend on the prison service
I expect that would make a great difference but it wouldn't prevent self-harm and suicide altogether.

Also, people shouldn't use the threat of self-harm or suicide to try and manipulate a situation to get their own way.

I have a feeling that HMPS are going to get put their the wringer on this and I am not sure that they could have done anything to prevent this suicide, short of transferring Jenny to a women's prison.

short of transferring Jenny to a women's prison

and giving JS hormones, even though JS was self-medicating, not taking prescribed drugs

apparently he was about to be given hormones when he killed himself. I don't really understand the timeframes tbh, he'd been there for maybe six weeks.

I'm sure people on the outside wouldn't get NHS hormones that quickly.

I'm sure people on the outside wouldn't get NHS hormones that quickly
I don't understand what is happening in the world any more.

There is an article in the news today about a 39 year old mother of five children who has just completed her training to become a fire-fighter.

Unfortunately she has been diagnosed with breast cancer and has been given just 12 weeks to live.

Immunotherapy is a new treatment which is being trialled on the NHS but not for breast cancer and although it probably won't save her, it would most likely give her a little bit more time with her children.

Only thing is it is £5,000 a treatment and she has to go to Germany to be treated.

The NHS can't help her so she is raising money on GoFundMe.

Ideally she wants to get better so she can start her dream job that she has just finished training for.

She came across as a lovely lady in the article, no "woe is me", no bitterness, just a lovely lady in a shit situation.

Why is it that Jenny was going to be given the hormones that "she" wanted (not needed) and Karen has to cyber beg to raise money for a treatment for her cancer??

I don't know how the world got so upside down.

I have always been of the opinion that if a man has transitioned to a woman then I would consider them to be female.

By transition I mean (sorry for the bluntness) removing their penis and making a permanent change to being a woman.

Can you explain what you mean by 'being a woman' and 'female'? Because you don't appear to be using these words' actual definitions.

My understanding of the GR process is that someone needs to attend several sessions at a gender clinic over a period of months before they can go onto a medical pathway (but I'm happy to be corrected)

Can you imagine a prisoner insisting that they have to have their barbituates (ordered off the internet, shipped from the US) in order to counter-act their insomnia and the prison doctor allowing them to keep taking the medicine, even though there is no way it would have been prescribed in the UK, for example? It just wouldn't happen

Can you explain what you mean by 'being a woman' and 'female'? Because you don't appear to be using these words' actual definitions
You are right, I am not.

Generally, someone born with a penis is a man and male and someone born with a vagina is a woman and female.

In a way, I wish that was the be all and end all of the debate but it isn't.

I am prepared to accept that if a man transitions by removing their penis, taking female hormones and by permanently living as a woman then as per current legislation, they are now a woman.

Also, I am prepared to accept that if a woman transitions by removing their breasts, taking male hormones and by permanently living as a man then as per current legislation, they are now a man.

What I disagree with is a man supposedly becoming a woman simply by declaring that he identifies as female and vice versa.

I'm sure people on the outside wouldn't get NHS hormones that quickly
I would have agreed before but apparently NHS England has decided that gender reassignment patients should receive the same services and rights as all other NHS patients and that they should be seen and treated as quickly as possible. Their objective is to reduce the waiting time for surgery to less than 18 weeks, in line with the national target for treatment to begin within 18 weeks of referral.

I found this information here -
www.imperial.nhs.uk/our-services/surgery/gender-surgery/patient-information

Does current legislation declare them to actually be a woman, though? Or does it simply facilitate their attempts to blend in by allowing them to change certain documents, etc. and aim to prevent them from being discriminated against in the event people see that they are not, in fact, a woman?

Genuinely curious.

It's 18 weeks from referral. Presumably to get to referral you have to go through various appointments at long intervals in between.