This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/09/yarls-wood-immigration-removal-centre-women-children
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Yarl's Wood holding vulnerable women for too long, say monitors | |
| (about 3 hours later) | |
| Yarl’s Wood immigration removal centre is holding vulnerable women for too long in conditions that are causing them serious distress and are not suitable for those with mental health problems, according to a damning independent report. | |
| The centre is officially an immigration removal centre, designed to hold people for a short period before they leave the UK. However, many stay much longer, even though two-thirds of detainees are eventually released rather than deported, the report said. It expressed grave worries about deteriorating physical and mental health services at the Bedfordshire facility, saying many detainees found medical staff “dismissive” and unwilling to take their concerns seriously. Families including young children were left distressed at being separated and the health service has “seriously deteriorated”, it says. | The centre is officially an immigration removal centre, designed to hold people for a short period before they leave the UK. However, many stay much longer, even though two-thirds of detainees are eventually released rather than deported, the report said. It expressed grave worries about deteriorating physical and mental health services at the Bedfordshire facility, saying many detainees found medical staff “dismissive” and unwilling to take their concerns seriously. Families including young children were left distressed at being separated and the health service has “seriously deteriorated”, it says. |
| The report was compiled by the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) for Yarl’s Wood, a group of Home Office-appointed local people charged with ensuring standards are maintained. While the IMB had praise for some areas of work, for example over religious diversity practices, its report noted claims of inappropriate conduct by male officers, such as entering detainees’ rooms without knocking. | The report was compiled by the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) for Yarl’s Wood, a group of Home Office-appointed local people charged with ensuring standards are maintained. While the IMB had praise for some areas of work, for example over religious diversity practices, its report noted claims of inappropriate conduct by male officers, such as entering detainees’ rooms without knocking. |
| It describes a “serious deterioration” in the centre’s healthcare service. While Yarl’s Wood is run by the contractor Serco, from September its health service has been provided by another private firm, G4S, on behalf of NHS England. While detainees had previously complained about the rude attitude of healthcare staff, the report says, during 2014 this reportedly worsened into “a failure to take detainees’ complex physical and mental needs seriously”. Specific incidents included one woman waiting almost three weeks for blood tests for a medical condition, and a family left without asthma and diabetes medication for a week. | It describes a “serious deterioration” in the centre’s healthcare service. While Yarl’s Wood is run by the contractor Serco, from September its health service has been provided by another private firm, G4S, on behalf of NHS England. While detainees had previously complained about the rude attitude of healthcare staff, the report says, during 2014 this reportedly worsened into “a failure to take detainees’ complex physical and mental needs seriously”. Specific incidents included one woman waiting almost three weeks for blood tests for a medical condition, and a family left without asthma and diabetes medication for a week. |
| The IMB notes that the detention of pregnant detainees, who often number more than 10 in Yarl’s Wood, not only contravenes Home Office guidelines but makes little sense, given that virtually none of them ended up being removed from the UK. | The IMB notes that the detention of pregnant detainees, who often number more than 10 in Yarl’s Wood, not only contravenes Home Office guidelines but makes little sense, given that virtually none of them ended up being removed from the UK. |
| The IMB’s annual report for 2014, which was delayed due to the election and published on the Home Office website on Tuesday, formally recommends that no one be held at Yarl’s Wood for more than six months. Last year 68 women remained there for longer, compared with 51 in 2013. It also calls for more use of community-based monitoring, especially for women with children. Detention, the report says, should only happen when removal from the UK is “inevitable and imminent”. | The IMB’s annual report for 2014, which was delayed due to the election and published on the Home Office website on Tuesday, formally recommends that no one be held at Yarl’s Wood for more than six months. Last year 68 women remained there for longer, compared with 51 in 2013. It also calls for more use of community-based monitoring, especially for women with children. Detention, the report says, should only happen when removal from the UK is “inevitable and imminent”. |
| The report details the particular stress and trauma caused to mothers held alone at Yarl’s Wood: “We have seen a detainee overwhelmed by trying to make arrangements for her grandchildren after her daughter’s death. We also saw a woman whose children were in care, and came to see her as visitors, causing distress to all when the children had to leave. Another detainee was on constant supervision because of her distress at being unable to locate her children.” | The report details the particular stress and trauma caused to mothers held alone at Yarl’s Wood: “We have seen a detainee overwhelmed by trying to make arrangements for her grandchildren after her daughter’s death. We also saw a woman whose children were in care, and came to see her as visitors, causing distress to all when the children had to leave. Another detainee was on constant supervision because of her distress at being unable to locate her children.” |
| There was also concern raised about detainees with serious mental health conditions, with the board noting that two detainees seemingly arrived at Yarl’s Wood “because there was nowhere else considered safe for these vulnerable women”. The report explained the problems this caused: “The women we refer to here were extremely disturbed, sometimes violent and destructive of property, sometimes a threat to other detainees, with the result that they spent significant periods of time in the separation unit.” | There was also concern raised about detainees with serious mental health conditions, with the board noting that two detainees seemingly arrived at Yarl’s Wood “because there was nowhere else considered safe for these vulnerable women”. The report explained the problems this caused: “The women we refer to here were extremely disturbed, sometimes violent and destructive of property, sometimes a threat to other detainees, with the result that they spent significant periods of time in the separation unit.” |
| The facility, which mainly holds failed asylum seekers who have not committed a crime, has long had a troubled reputation. This year, undercover footage provided to Channel 4 News showed dismissive and abusive attitudes and language by some staff towards detainees. | The facility, which mainly holds failed asylum seekers who have not committed a crime, has long had a troubled reputation. This year, undercover footage provided to Channel 4 News showed dismissive and abusive attitudes and language by some staff towards detainees. |
| Overall, the report questioned the need to keep so many people at Yarl’s Wood, saying this causes confusion and anguish to many there: “We regularly speak to distressed detainees who say they cannot understand why they could not be monitored in the community … We have observed a culture of disbelief, in which case officers appear to give more weight to reasons for continuing detention, rather than whether such detention is necessary. We consider that there should be an assumption not to detain, and the decision to detain should be a last resort.” | Overall, the report questioned the need to keep so many people at Yarl’s Wood, saying this causes confusion and anguish to many there: “We regularly speak to distressed detainees who say they cannot understand why they could not be monitored in the community … We have observed a culture of disbelief, in which case officers appear to give more weight to reasons for continuing detention, rather than whether such detention is necessary. We consider that there should be an assumption not to detain, and the decision to detain should be a last resort.” |
| Immigration minister James Brokenshire said: “We have received the IMB report and I have written to the Chair in response. | Immigration minister James Brokenshire said: “We have received the IMB report and I have written to the Chair in response. |
| “Detention and removal are essential elements of an effective immigration system. People who have no right to be in the UK should return to their home country. We will help those who wish to leave voluntarily but when they refuse to do so, we will take steps to enforce their removal. | “Detention and removal are essential elements of an effective immigration system. People who have no right to be in the UK should return to their home country. We will help those who wish to leave voluntarily but when they refuse to do so, we will take steps to enforce their removal. |
| “We want to protect the health and wellbeing of people at all time – including those whom we are detaining. That is why, earlier this year, the home secretary commissioned the former prisons ombudsman, Stephen Shaw, to conduct an independent review of welfare in detention which will conclude in the autumn. The home secretary will consider Mr Shaw’s findings and take action where appropriate.” | “We want to protect the health and wellbeing of people at all time – including those whom we are detaining. That is why, earlier this year, the home secretary commissioned the former prisons ombudsman, Stephen Shaw, to conduct an independent review of welfare in detention which will conclude in the autumn. The home secretary will consider Mr Shaw’s findings and take action where appropriate.” |