Abstract
Between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2014, 65 young adults and children died in prison, under the care of the state. Sixty two were young adults aged 18−24 years and three were children under 18 (two aged 17 and one 15 year-old). This report by Inquest, funded by the Barrow Cadbury Trust, analyses these deaths drawing from the evidence-based data accumulated through Inquest’s longstanding casework on the deaths of children and young adults in custody. Further information has been gained by working with bereaved families and associated policy work over 30 years. Throughout the report there are accounts of some of these young people’s lives, which emphasizes the tragedy attached to their deaths. An important statement made by Inquest is that all prisoners are vulnerable and the prison establishments can be places that create and exacerbate vulnerability. It further alludes to risk assessments, which can be beneficial, but tend to shift focus from the whole system to the nature of the individual, rather than recognize the impact of incarceration on the individual.
The report argues that to understand the deaths in prison the broader social, political and economic context requires analysing. However, to do so, the report supports the premise that deaths are high due to the overuse of prisons as the societal solution and because they are ‘dehumanising and violent’ (p. 4).
The analysis shows the highest number of deaths were of 23 year-olds, which Inquest suggest is due to either limited intervention or support for the ‘older’ young adult age groups, given ‘adult’ status. It further acknowledges that maturity differs with individuals and is a process that is long and complicated. Collated statistics show that 26 per cent of self-harming incidents are among women despite this group representing 5 per cent of the total prison population; 44 of the 65 prisoners who died were White UK born, although in 2014 there was a slight increase of deaths involving Black and minority ethnic groups. There are some common characteristics found among prisoners: 23 per cent have learning difficulties, 36 per cent have borderline learning difficulties, 52 per cent are permanently excluded from school and the 16−24 age group are more likely than any other group to become a victim of crime. Sadly, it highlights that despite only 1 per cent of all children in England being in care, looked-after children make up 33 per cent of boys and 61 per cent of girls in custody. The data further shows that there is a frequency of deaths in certain institutions, which includes HMYOI Glen Parva (6) followed by HMP Chelmsford (4), jointly followed by HMP Wandsworth, HMP Altcourse and HMP Swaleside (3). Reference is subsequently made to many of these prisons after receiving the most critical recent inspection reports, along with having the ‘most impoverished and limited regimes’ (p. 13).
The most alarming finding, although not overly shocking, is that young prisoners are being failed by poor care, treatment and rehabilitation that is widespread within the prison estates. The deterioration of the conditions and regime evidenced by overcrowding, poor prisoner−staff relationships and long lock-up hours (23 hours per day is not uncommon) were significant factors. It is denoted that by failing to divert this vulnerable group away from the criminal justice system and failure to offer protection whilst in custody demonstrates a repetition of failed social policies and an inappropriate use of prison. Reference is made to the fact that those who experience poverty, deprivation and social exclusion are more likely to be involved in behaviour defined as criminal. This discrimination is further impacted by race, gender and social class. The report illustrates the vulnerabilities children and young people can be exposed to, which include early life bereavement that has been traumatic and led to behavioural difficulties. However, it is mental health that is a key issue with poor provisions in the community and in custody.
The overriding argument the report makes is for a fundamental rethink about children and young adults being placed in custody. From a practice level, it seems that establishments have not made effective change following inquiries into previous deaths and what lessons have been learned. Subsequently too many deaths are a result of the same mistakes being made. The report subsequently questions the adequacy of the investigation, inspection and monitoring systems and the accountability of the prison establishments.
The report stresses the importance of recognizing the vulnerabilities identified above, which are underpinned by inequality and poverty. It recommends removing the ‘offending related needs’ label, which will help divert young adults away from the CJS and into a combination of early intervention with sufficient support services and therapeutic treatment. However, to adopt this strategy the punitive and generic approach being deployed needs to be identified, and there needs to be understanding as to how this is counterproductive to the neurological and psychological development of young adults.
The report suggests a significant amount of recommendations to accommodate the issues raised above: Prisons should only be used as a last resort; however, if it is deemed necessary, an investment in smaller and local prison units is required. These should be designed and designated for young adults with an emphasis on therapeutic environments and supportive interventions. Within these establishments, increased staffing is necessary, with people who are trained and want to work with young people. Grendon Underwood prison is identified as a positive example. Recognizing that young adults will grow out of crime if given opportunities and support and is a temporary stage in their life, thus highlighting the criminalizing effect of imprisonment. A reallocation of resources away from prison towards crime prevention and towards those areas which affect an individual’s life: social care, education, healthcare and housing. Community schemes to deal with low-risk to minor offences and those individuals with vulnerable characteristics diverted from the CJS and given access to treatment and rehabilitative support. A review of the ACCT scheme is needed and identifying vulnerabilities and difficulties in communicating emotional instability. This will require staff to be suitably trained to recognize factors associated with vulnerability. Consistent processes for monitoring and reviewing bullying are needed, with increased staff to support prisoner and staff relationships that includes a personal officer scheme and staff meetings to improve communication. A structured induction programme with a thorough screening of risk and access to an easy-to-understand support service will increase awareness and knowledge. Reference is made to probation in the report regarding pre-sentence reports and it is suggested there is a specific section on a young person’s maturity. Finally, it suggests using legal mechanisms to prosecute systemic failings through the Corporate Manslaughter and Homicide Act 2007, which has not been used, to hold institutions accountable and to learn from mistakes, not continually repeat them.
The subject of this report is thought-provoking with the tragic narratives of the vulnerable children and young people whose lives contributed to this analysis. It allows much reflection on the effects of the prison system and its use as a societal solution.