One prison suicide every three days in England and Wales, say reformers

More than 100 people have killed themselves in prisons in England and Wales so far this year, , according to penal reform groups, prompting warnings of a mental health epidemic within the incarcerated population.

The Howard League for Penal Reform said it had been notified of the deaths by suicide of 102 people up until 18 November – the equivalent of one every three days and breaking the record for frequency of suicides.

“With five weeks remaining until the end of the year, it is already the highest death toll in a calendar year since recording practices began in 1978,” said Frances Crook, the director of the Howard League. “The previous high was in 2004 when 96 deaths by suicide were recorded.”

Crookwho is meeting the justice secretary, Elizabeth Truss, on Monday, said: “The number of people dying by suicide in prison has reached epidemic proportions. No one should be so desperate while in the care of the state that they take their own life and yet, every three days, a family is told that a loved one has died behind bars.

“By taking bold but sensible action to reduce the number of people in prison, we can save lives and prevent more people being swept away into deeper currents of crime and despair.”

The current rate of self-inflicted deaths in prisons across England and Wales of nearly 10 a month means the final toll for 2016 could be as high as 115, compared with 89 in 2015.

A joint report, Preventing Prison Suicide by the Howard League and the Centre for Mental Health, links the rise in the number of prison suicides to cuts to staffing and budgets and the rise in the number of people in prison that has resulted in overcrowding.]

Prison deaths

Prison deaths

“Violence has increased and safety has deteriorated. Prisoners are spending up to 23 hours a day locked in their cells, the imposition of prison punishments has increased and a more punitive daily regime was introduced in prisons at the same time as the number of deaths by suicide began to rise,” it says. “The prison suicide rate, at 120 deaths per 100,000 people, is about 10 times higher than the rate in the general population.”

The report calls for a recently revised incentives and earned privileges regime to be scrapped and for an undertaking that prisoners with mental health problems or at known risk of suicide should never be placed in solitary.

The Howard League’s figures show that the highest number of self-inflicted deaths – six – this year have been at Woodhill prison, Buckinghamshire, which is at the centre of a high court legal battle.

Mr Justice Lavender gave permission on Thursday for a judicial review case to be heard, saying that evidence of repeated failures to implement policies to prevent self-inflicted deaths at Woodhill could not be dismissed as “operational failures”.

It has also emerged that an independent monitoring board at Bedford prison, which has had four deaths so far this year, wrote “an urgent letter of concern” to the prisons minister about the “alarming rise in prisoners attempting to hang themselves” at the jail before its recent riot. They highlighted that staffing shortages were “beyond crisis point”.

An independent monitoring board report published on Monday into Bullingdon prison in Oxfordshire warns that inadequate staffing is also damaging morale and relationships with prisoners.

“The board is concerned about increasing difficulties in recruiting and retaining sufficient officers to maintain levels defined as acceptable by the prison service. It has also observed that indiscipline and violence have increased noticeably since staff cutbacks were implemented in 2013,” says the Bullingdon report.

The chancellor, Philip Hammond, confirmed in the autumn statement last week that an extra £555m over the next three years would be made available to fund prison safety measures, including the recruitment of 2,500 extra prison officers.

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said that mental health in custody was taken extremely seriously: “Providing the right intervention and treatment is vital to improving the outcomes for people who are suffering and all prisons have established procedures in place to identify, manage and support people with mental health issues.

“But we recognise that more can be done. That is why have invested in specialist mental health training for prison officers, allocated more funding for prison safety and have launched a suicide and self-harm reduction project to address the increase in self-inflicted deaths and self-harm in our prisons.”

One prison suicide every three days in England and Wales, say reformers

Reformers have to cease experimenting on individuals and verify the proof

Assets are finite, so ministers need to make sure they are obtaining the most bang for their buck when devising public support reforms. Photograph: Getty

“The poor are always with us”, and in current decades the gap among the haves and the have-nots in Britain has widened.

Some argue that more equal societies have higher amounts of wellbeing. Other individuals see the unexploited talent of the disadvantaged as a morally repugnant waste.

No matter what your perspective, the principal challenge is how to identify interventions that are efficient in strengthening the whole lot of the poor and decreasing inequality at least value.

This economic viewpoint is a product of the straightforward fact that society’s assets are finite. As a consequence, every and every single policy decision has an opportunity price. A decision to invest in childcare for kids up to the age of three means that significantly less sources are available to fund cash flow help for fellow citizens with studying problems. A selection to fund counselling for heroin addicts is also a selection to deprive other solutions such as local community psychiatric nursing of funding. Taking newborn infants into care simply because their mothers are drug addicts and intellectually handicapped, and may possibly damage the new-born’s daily life possibilities, is costly and indicates that regional authorities have much less funding for grownup social care.

Each and every single investment decision involves offering up the funding of other services which would benefit men and women in want of care. There is no this kind of point as a “free” service.

Most reforms in well being and social care are proof-free of charge in terms of their effects on recipients. A reform is an experiment on fellow citizens, usually involving considerable amounts of public and personal funding.

Experimenting with pharmaceuticals brings with it a legal obligation to evaluate effectiveness (even if this obligation might not constantly be carried out transparently and systematically). Nonetheless, there is no such obligation to evaluate overall health and social care reforms. Practitioners and policymakers are totally free to alter the use of society’s scarce sources and are too hardly ever created to account scientifically for their experimentation on the bad and vulnerable.

Decision makers in wellness and social care are continually reforming – that is experimenting – on their customers, and asserting novelty and good results.

Typically they are just replicating in ignorance the reforms adopted by other folks. These reformers get kudos for altering service delivery, however they fail to evaluate in a scientific manner, assert good results in implausible approaches such as vigorously delivered viewpoint, and add small or practically nothing to the evidence base. The blind lead the blind and recipients of care endure.

Guarding these vulnerable folks from the unwell-informed but well-intentioned reforms of ministers this kind of as Andrew Lansley, Chris Grayling and Michael Gove, and the regional selections of managers in statutory and personal providers, requires adherence to some basic principles.

1st, examine your reform against the current proof base. In healthcare there is the Cochrane Collaboration database. For reformers in social care, training, crime and the judiciary there is the emerging (but grossly underfunded) Campbell collaboration.

Second, make sure that your reform’s price range consists of funding for the systematic evaluation of your experiment on society’s vulnerable. Nationwide funding has developed academic experience with whom you can collaborate in identifying the cost effectiveness of reforms. Function with these “ivory tower” colleagues to improve the understanding base.

Third, make certain that your reform is logged nationally so there is little duplication and waste, and mutual learning, from your efforts.

Failure to adhere to these three methods is unethical – a failure to evaluate may possibly waste society’s scarce assets. This kind of waste is inefficient and deprives prospective beneficiaries of care from which they could advantage.

Identifying what interventions give the “largest bang for the buck” is the moral obligation of all reformers. Nevertheless immoral behaviour is ubiquitous.

The triggers of this consist of reformers’ ignorance of science – let alone how to assess scientifically. It is also a item of academics’ failure to convert the “ungodly” whose intentions may possibly be pure but whose practices could blight the bad.

It is time for all events concerned to increase their practices.

This post is published by Guardian Professional. Join the Healthcare Professionals Network to get typical emails and exclusive offers.

Reformers have to cease experimenting on individuals and verify the proof