Cassandra Brawley went into labor two and a half years ago
at the Washington State Corrections Center for Women on a Friday the 13th.
Though she was experiencing distress – her water broke and she was leaking
bloody discharge – and she repeatedly expressed to prison officials that
“something was wrong”, still her pleas went largely ignored. After three days
of labor pain and obvious suffering, Cassandra was shackled for transport to
the hospital where she would eventually undergo an emergency cesarean section.
“The belly chain was wrapped around me until they admitted
me into the hospital. And then they shackled my foot to the bed while I was
having labor contractions,” Brawley told me.
As a medium security prisoner, convicted of second-degree
theft, Brawley was not considered a threat to herself or others. She had never
been convicted of a violent crime and was an exemplary prisoner. Still, Brawley
was kept chained and shackled to the bed for hours during painful labor
contractions and while she was given an epidural.
According to a complaint filed
in court by the women’s rights advocacy organization Legal Voice against the
Washington State Department of Corrections, on Brawley’s behalf, “A physician
attempted to induce labor by breaking the amniotic sac, but found the sac
empty.” Brawley was immediately wheeled down to surgery to undergo an emergency
c-section – still in ankle chains. It was only at the command of the physician
performing the surgery that she was unshackled – and then only until the
surgery was complete.
“They shackled my foot to the bed right after the c-section
was over. It was awful. And 18 hours after I gave birth to my son, you know how
you have to get up and walk around so you don’t get blood clots? The first time
I stood up and tried to walk, they shackled my feet together,” said Brawley.
In fact, Brawley was kept shackled to the bed throughout her
entire 3 days in the hospital.
Legal Voice claims that the Washington State Department of
Corrections (DOC) violated Ms. Brawley’s constitutional rights when they
shackled Brawley during labor, in opposition to its own policy and are bringing
her case to court.
Currently, the Washington state DOC policy allows shackling
of pregnant women in the third trimester only and not during labor and delivery
but Sara Ainsworth, the lawyer spearheading Brawley’s case, is also involved in
a legislative effort to ensure a complete prohibition on shackling of pregnant
women in Washington state.
“It defies common sense to risk a pregnant woman’s health,
safety and dignity by shackling her while she’s in the process of giving
birth,” says Ainsworth.
The Senate version of HB 2747 dropped on Monday, January 18th,
2010 and prohibits Washington state correctional facilities of any kind from
shackling pregnant incarcerated women or youth except in “extraordinary
circumstances, where a corrections officer makes an individualized
determination that restraints are necessary” to prevent escape or the woman
from injuring herself or others. In this scenario, however, the least
restrictive restraints must be used and if a medical professional or youth
requests that the restraints not be used, the corrections officer must
immediately remove them. Shackles
may never be used on pregnant prisoners, as outlined in the bill, during labor,
delivery and the post-partum recovery period with no exceptions and pertains to
all institutions from juvenile detention centers and municipal jails to state
prisons.
“We’re lobbying for the broadest protection possible.
One reason that it is important to limit restraints throughout pregnancy
is to avoid the situation where a corrections official is deciding whether or
not someone is in labor and using their own judgment to decide whether or not
someone should be shackled,” Ainsworth told me.
If the legislation passes, Washington will become the
seventh state in the country to ban the use of restraints on pregnant and
laboring incarcerated women. Most recently, New York, New Mexico and Texas have
all passed laws prohibiting the use of shackles on pregnant women in nearly all
circumstances. Thanks in large part to the Rebecca Project the Federal Bureau
of Prisons has a policy against shackling pregnant women as well.
Malika Saada Saar, Executive Director of the Rebecca
Project, writes
on RH Reality Check that, “The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) in September 2008 ended
shackling mothers as a matter of routine course in all federal correctional
facilities.”
State governments have found the practice to be cruel and
unusual punishment, inhumane, degrading and a violation of human rights
standards. And medical organizations from the American College of Obstetricians
and Gynecologists and the American Public Health Association to the American
College of Nurse Midwives (ACNM) have forcefully condemned the practice as
wholly unsafe for both mother and baby.
Tina Johnson, Certified Nurse-Midwife and the Director of Professional Practice
and Health Policy at ACNM told me, “Under no circumstances should a woman be
confined in a way that inhibits her ability to safely delivery her baby. Labor
and birth are active, physical processes that require the fetus to work with
the mother’s body in maneuvering through the birth canal. A woman should not
lie on her back during labor, as this can severely restrict blood flow to the
placenta. In addition, there are certain complications, such as hemorrhage…in
which the ability to reposition quickly is critical to facilitating a safe
outcome.”
Johnson is clear: “Shackling a woman during pregnancy is cruel,
inhumane and unsafe.”
Just ask Kimberly Mays.
“I felt like an animal giving birth in front of its human
masters,” Mays told me over the phone.
On August 2, 2000, Mays went into labor at the Washington
State Corrections Center for Women.
“Before being transported by ambulance, I was shackled –
both hands and feet. I was pretty scared, even though this was not my first
time giving birth to a child. I was shackled to the ambulance bed all the way
to St. Joseph’s Hospital [in Tacoma, WA], in excruciating pain…
When I got to the labor room, I thought some reprieve from
the shackles would occur. On the contrary, only the leg shackles were removed
so I could be examined and one wrist was shackled to the bed.”
Mays remained shackled during labor and delivery, screaming
in pain. According to Mays, the attending nurse “forcefully covered” her mouth
to get her to stop screaming.
“Instead of a mother who was about to give birth, I lost all
sense of dignity and self-respect,” she wrote in her birth story, sent to me
via email.
After giving birth, Mays remained shackled to the bed,
either by one arm or one leg – only unlocked to go to the bathroom or to
shower.
Simply, Kimberly writes, “That experience was the most
demoralizing event in my entire life.”
Mays, like Brawley, was incarcerated for a non-violent
offense and held as a minimum-security prisoner. Brawley told me, “I was a
model prisoner and had not one single infraction while in prison. I took every
self-help course. I was in college in prison and going to church three times a
week.”
Today Kimberly Mays is two-quarters shy of earning a Masters
in Public Administration at the Evergreen State College in Washington State.
She serves on several boards for organizations “that serve our most marginalized
citizens” and is a mother to ten children.
Mays recently testified at the hearing for the Senate bill
in the Washington state legislature and says that she hopes her story “will
help to alleviate the disgraceful practice of shackling women during labor,
which in turn will help alleviate the negative behaviors of prison guards and
hospital staff toward women who give birth while incarcerated.”
But hopefully both Mays and Brawley’s stories will do even
more than that. The power to change these policies lies not only in the obvious
pain and suffering of these two women but in what their stories can excavate
about why exactly this practice is
needed at all.
When asked if there has ever been a case recorded of an
incarcerated woman in labor ever attempting to escape or posing a threat to
herself or others in the United States, Sara Ainsworth told me, “We have heard
no stories of any incidents in our state – ever.”
The Seattle-based website Publicola reported on
the lack of any real opposition to the Washington state bill at the hearing
this month:
“Some law enforcement lobbyists, like Jo Arlow of the
Washington Association of Sheriffs & Police Chiefs raised concerns about
the language of the bill. She said there are rare circumstances where restraint
might be necessary for safety’s sake (though she couldn’t actually produce an
example of such a case when asked), but overall her group supports the bill.”
The Women in Prison Project in New York City calls shackling
“unnecessary” as women cannot run with any significant level of speed during
labor or after delivery and therefore are not a flight risk. An informational
document from the project states:
“New York City jail policies restricting restraints have
been in effect for 20 years without incidents of escape or harm to staff.”
One significant reason for this beyond a woman’s absolute
inability to do much more than push, groan and focus on the birthing process
during labor is that the majority of incarcerated women in the U.S. are in
prison for non-violent crimes.
According to the Women’s Prison Association’s Institute on
Women & Criminal Justice, two-thirds of women in prison are there for
non-violent offenses. Both drug-related crimes and property offenses make up
this 2/3 number. A report put out by the National Institute of Corrections in
2003, written by Barbara Owen & Stephanie Covington, notes that “the
majority of incarcerated women are in for first-time, non violent offenses.”
The number of women in prison is only increasing. Over the
last thirty years, the female prison population has grown more than 800% while
the number of men in prison has grown by only half that.
With 5 percent of incarcerated women in the U.S. pregnant, and the
number of women in prison increasing, it’s critical that as a country we make
some clear decisions about the ways in which we treat pregnant women and their
newborn babies. If our goals are to protect the health and safety of pregnant
women and their babies rather than endanger, and ensure the best possible
health outcome for mother and child regardless of whether a woman is
incarcerated at the time of her labor or not, then we are failing, overall, as
a nation.
Let’s review then:
Pregnant and laboring women are proven not to be safety or flight risks. Medical and health professionals
from obstetricians to nurse-midwives consider the practice of shackling
pregnant and laboring women harmful to womens’ and newborns’ health. Keeping women in ankle, arm and belly
restraints while pregnant and/or laboring a federal court has now ruled
unconstitutional, while six states have banned the practice. Finally, women
themselves are speaking up and letting the world know that being shackled
during pregnancy and birth is nothing short of inhumane, robbing them of their
self-dignity and human rights.
A sea change is on the horizon in the ways in which we think
about this issue. It is likely that Washington State will pass a bill for the
Governor to sign. The Rebecca Project continues its campaign, on a national
level, against shackling with the work of its unlikely yet powerful collection
of anti-shackling allies. Cassandra’s
trial is set for June of this year where a judge will hear her case against the
Washington State Department of Corrections. Through all of this, both Cassandra
and Kim continue their work as mothers like any and all of us, tending to the
children who came into this world unaware of the struggle and injustice that
surrounded them. But for these two women and so many others in this country,
their stories of giving birth in chains will never leave them.
“I am not a worthless piece of trash, but rather a valuable
asset to people, families, and the community at large, “ says Kimberly Mays.
Everyone is building an app store these days. Most have focused on the mobile space, but Google is looking beyond that, fittingly, at Google Apps. The New York Times reports that the search giant is planning to launch a dedicated Apps market place to enable third-party developers to sell their add-ons for Google’s suite of enterprise a… (
German carmaker BMW had just revealed pricing information for the 2011 Alpina B7, one month after revealing the sedan will be coming to the United States this spring. Getting straight to the point, BMW announced that pricing for the 2011 BMW Alpina B7 will start at $122,875 for the standard wheelbase and $126,775 for the extended wheelbase.
It was only a matter of time until Jaguar Land Rover appoints Carl Peter Forster as CEO, after David Smith decided to leave the company. And according to autoblog.it, all things are already official and Forster will become responsible for the company’s well being but, more importantly, he will also be in charge of the international performance of the Nano.
Winning a 7th consecutive world title in the World Rally Championship will not be an easy task for Sebastien Loeb. The Frenchman has barely won his last crown in the series by a single point from Ford rival Mikko Hirvonen, and the Finn will most likely enter the 2010 season even more determined to break Loeb’s domination in the WRC.
