The article in the Daily Record has a few more details I think - it’s good the Mail picked it up though to get the wider circulation.
Really hope that someone steps in soon to remind SPS that facilitating prisoners’ kinks is not, in fact, their responsibility. After all, if they agree to this how can they refuse to support prisoners in identifying as other ethnicities; as disabled when they’re not; as having eczema that requires silk underwear & their clothes being washed separately & specially; as being eligible to transfer to open prisons the instant they arrive in Cat A…? They already have issues with prisoners identifying as Orthodox Jews [at mealtimes only] to get better food, in a good example of “shocking revelation: dishonest people are dishonest; liars lie; & Bad People will exploit any & every opportunity that presents itself to them” 
Of course, maybe they’re actually hoping to stop the madness with this: having been made to do the one, what is the justification for declining the other? How/why can one be said to be real & “valid”; but not the other?
Prisoners holding hands with a prison officer is so SO wildly inappropriate I’m staggered that this individual didn’t get into trouble just for making the request. It can be counted as “use of force” if a Prison Officer use the “guiding hand technique” (Prison Officer puts a hand on inmate’s elbow to steer them) to direct an inmate to move in a certain direction/to a certain location. Holding hands while accompanying an inmate blurs into that as well as the more obvious i. it simply screams “inappropriate relationship” & ii. it sets prison officers up for accusations of passing contraband. Although it’s about the US system, this JAAPL Article on “Professional boundaries in Corrections” is highly relevant. In this instance it is the inmate who is trying to force a breakdown of boundaries - staff are apparently aware this individual is manipulative but they are still going along with their demands*.
- Perhaps being forced to by a disconnected & politically-motivated management who refuse to hear concerns? Certainly there seems to be a disconnect between “this person is dangerous & manipulative” and “we’ve provided them with a dummy & are working out how to fulfil their other arrogations”.