HM Inspectorate of
Probation
1st
Floor, Manchester
Civil Justice Centre,
1 Bridge Street
West, Manchester M3 3FX
0161 240 5336
Date: 28 September 2017
Re: Imprisonment for
Public Protection (IPP)
Thank you for your letter dated 12 September 2017
At HM Inspectorate of Probation we expect probation
services to meet the enduring expectations of probation: to protect the public,
reduce reoffending and ensure that the sentence of the court is served. We expect
a high quality,
individualised and responsive service to be provided to all service users, with
a focus on engaging the individual,
supporting their desistance and minimising their risk of harm to others. This
applies to all service users, including those who have received an IPP sentence.
With regard to
IPPs, we contributed inspection data to the IPP thematic
report by HM Inspectorate of Prisons, which was published in November 2016. As
this report notes, it is widely accepted that the implementation of the sentence
was flawed and that this has contributed to the large numbers who remain in
prison, often many years post-tariff. Individuals have been denied the opportunity to demonstrate whether they present a
continuing risk to the public, or to have this properly assessed, which is clearly
unjust. It must also be recognised that some people with IPP sentences do
remain dangerous, and need to be held in prison to protect the public. Risks of
harm need to be at a level
where they can be managed safely in the community.
The 2016 thematic
report recommended that the Secretary
of State for Justice should take immediate action to ensure adequate resources
and timely support are available to work with IPP prisoners to reduce their risk
of harm to others and to help them progress through the custodial system
towards consideration for release by the Parole Board. Furthermore, IPP
prisoners should receive regular, meaningful contact with offender managers and
supervisors, and the casework, including key assessments, should be up to date.
These recommendations remain sound.
The resources need to be in
place in the community to ensure that any risks of harm are managed
properly. We have recently reported (July 2017) on the contribution
of probation hostels (approved premises) to public protection, rehabilitation
and resettlement, highlighting the valuable role that these
premises can play in supporting IPP transition from custody to the community.
We have recommended to the Ministry of Justice that they should focus on the capacity, type and
distribution of the probation hostel estate.
HM Prison and
Probation Service (HMPPS) are introducing new arrangements for Offender
Management in custody, with IPP prisoners being allocated to a probation
officer within their prison. We intend to monitor whether this will lead to
better assessment and planning, and give more scope for focused one-to-one
work.
In your letter,
you request various statistics and information not held by HM Inspectorate of
Probation. We have thus forwarded your request to HMPPS, who can be contacted
at public.enquiries@noms.gsi.gov.uk.
your Sincerely
Dame Glenys Stacey
HM Chief Inspector of Probation
HM Inspectorate of Probation
1st Floor
Manchester Civil Justice Centre
1 Bridge Street West
Probation Officers should be named and shamed for upholding this IPP law because of their recommendations continuing to keep prisoners detained in effect years after their spent tariff based on the individual ignorance of the Probation Officer because of their failings to recognise the adverse psychological effect of the prison environment in their assessment for release as well as the misuse of resources by using the prison as a source to continue with any further support services required rather than resources in the community.
Nick Hardwick has addressed the issue of delayed / back log of parole hearings. What action are you doing such as advice to Probation Services / Officers on how to resolve the crisis of thousands of IPP prisoners being held years over tariff and the Probation Officers' assessment methods and mode of thinking?
Yours sincerely.
Pressure should be put directly on probation services who are the ones that actively obstruct the release of IPP prisoners with their recommendations upon a parole hearing and it's high time that Probation Officers were held to account. I would encourage everyone to start writing to the Chief Inspector of Probation Dame Glenys Stacey with their grievances at the address above.
I would like to remind Dame Stacey that the IPP Prisoners where repeatable unable to reduce risk , no fault of there own for decades.
Letter Dame Stacey was responding too.
1st Floor
Manchester Civil Justice Centre
1 Bridge Street West
Dear Dame Stacey
As Chief Inspector of Probation
Services you cannot be ignorant to the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP)
law that Probation Services have to abide too. Yet other authorities as
well as charitable organisations speak out about their just findings of how
inhumane this IPP law is in keeping prisoners indeterminately detained past
their tariff or sentence e.g Nick Hardwick / Parole Board, Peter Clarke /
Prisons, Francis Cook / Howard League for Penal Reform. As Chief
Inspector of Probation of which Probation Services have a direct impact on the
plight of IPP prisoners due to their reports and recommendations upon a Parole
Hearing whether the IPP prisoner should be released or not, it is very
noticeable that you have not publicly expressed any direct concerns what so
ever that you may have over this IPP law or the role or position of Probation
Officers and their decision making specific to IPP prisoners.
I would therefore be grateful if
you could answer the following questions in the interests of the general public
of whose tax payers money funds Probation Services either directly as a public
sector organisation or indirectly in the privatised sectors of probation:
- Do you have any concerns
over this IPP law and its effect on Probation Services i.e. the very minimum 10
year licence conditions if not 99 years which undoubtedly will put a strain on
probation services in the community and if so why do you not publicly raise
your concerns with the government over the IPP law and it's licence
conditions? I also understand that at the discretion of the Probation
Officer that after 4 years the licence conditions can be suspended. How
many Probation Officers have actually used this discretion?
- What are the statistics (which
should be for public knowledge) under the Freedom of Information Act where
Probation Officers have refused / not recommended the release of IPP prisoners
post tariff at their parole hearings and how many times upon subsequent parole
hearings have Probation Officers continued to refuse the release of the
prisoner? Also I would like information to be provided on what grounds
was release not recommended?
- Likewise under the Freedom of
Information Act what are your statistics where Probation Officers have refused
/ not recommended the release of IPP prisoners upon a parole hearing following
the recall of an IPP on licence detained back again in prison? Again I
would like you to provide information on their grounds for non release.
- What are the statistics of
Probation Officers recalling an IPP on licence back to prison and on what
grounds? If you can be specific if this was a missed appointment,
relapse of drug taking etc or based on reports from other
sources. How many IPP on licence were recalled back to prison for
actually having committed or charged with a convictable criminal offence as
oppose to a breach of their licence conditions?
- Do you have markers /
indicators as to which Probation Offices / Officers are the most culpable for
not recommending the release of IPP prisoners and if so should this not be
investigated as to why there may be continued obstruction of their release?
- Do the Probation services
recognise the very negative psychological and adverse effect of being held
indeterminately in prison in such a volatile environment whereby there is
increased violence, self-harm, suicide and an uncontrollable drug culture with
more drug problems on the inside within a prison than the outside in society
which is fully evidenced by statistics and inspectorate reports on prisons and
if so why are Probation Officers not recommending IPP releases and exploring
opportunities in the community as the primary options but keeping IPP prisoners
detained in such an adverse environment whereby anybody with one ounce of
common sense, logic or any psychological understanding of human nature will
know that it is impossible for an offender to be rehabilitated in such a false
environment of which it is the role of the Probation Officer to aid
rehabilitation and to reduce the risk of re-offending. The only way to truly
prove and to reduce the risk of re-offending is for a prisoner to be released
and integrated back into society whereby they are ample support services in the
community to aid rehabilitation such as counselling or alcohol / drug support
services and psychiatric services if required and in many cases support from
families and friends and for Probation Services not to recognise this and to
keep a person detained based on the premise that they are at the risk of
reoffending is an ineffective use of public sector money and resources let
alone is against humanity once a person has served their time / tariff.
- What tools are Probation
Services using to assess that a person is at risk of re-offending in their
Offender Assessment System (OASys) reports and that they are not assessed as
safe to be released in the interests of public protection because it is
impossible to assess the risk in such a pseudo, confined, volatile environment
of a prison which does not reflect on how one might behave in the outside
world? In reality Probation Officers / Offender Management Officers
barely see the prisoner once imprisoned, ignore any positive reports and focus
on negative behaviour without factoring in their adverse environment that a
prisoner has to survive in and rely on psychological reports and the excuse
that they have to complete offending behaviour management courses which even
Sam Gyimah (Under secretary to the Justice Secretary) states
"It is important to remember
that it is not mandatory for Indeterminate Sentence Prisoners (ISPs) to
complete accredited offending behaviour programmes in order to achieve
release. Accredited offending behaviour programmes are only one of the
interventions available to help reduce prisoners' risks. Other options
may include work and employment; education and training; one to one work with
psychologists or Offender Supervisors; or non-accredited offending behaviour
programmes. It should be borne in mind that completion of an accredited
programme is no guarantee that risk has been reduced".
This statement reinforces that it
is not possible to deem a person's risk of re-offending when incarcerated even
stating that an accredited programme is no guarantee that risk has been reduced
and therefore there is not such the need or emphasis for a prisoner to have to
have completed such programmes and all of these deemed options to reduce risk
are actually obtainable on the outside so why are Probation Officers'
recommending keeping a prisoner incarcerated and not released where there is
greater opportunities to achieve rehabilitation back into society and reduce
any risk of reoffending away from such an adverse and damaging
environment. Surely any Probation Officer can see that by keeping a
person detained in prison is not effective to the prisoner or society with now
such overcrowding in prisons that it is at crisis level and the longer a person
is incarcerated the more negative effect it will have on the prisoner.
- How much of your Probation
Inspectorate reports takes into consideration the recipients / IPP prisoners
experience of their Probation Officers / Offender Management Unit Officers
attitude, conduct and reliability? Are such surveys carried out for such IPP
prisoners? I maintain that any Probation Officer interviews should be
recorded on behalf of the Probation Officer and the Prisoner / Prisoner on
license just as police interviews are now recorded for transparency reasons.
Probation Officers should be named and shamed for upholding this IPP law because of their recommendations continuing to keep prisoners detained in effect years after their spent tariff based on the individual ignorance of the Probation Officer because of their failings to recognise the adverse psychological effect of the prison environment in their assessment for release as well as the misuse of resources by using the prison as a source to continue with any further support services required rather than resources in the community.
If a Probation Officers job was done correctly then they should have
monitored and ensured that any recommended courses, training and employment
that they have assessed as needed should have already been completed by the
time of the Parole Hearing and if these weren't available then alternative
options given. This is an absolute disgrace and failure of Probation Officers
not to ensure that there is a realistic achievable assessment plan for a
prisoner to complete prior to their Parole Hearing and upon a Parole
Hearing to then hold it against the prisoner if an assessment plan was not
achievable as it was out of the prisoner's control or not even given in the
first place and to recommend detaining a prison further to despite the years
they have already spent in prison because they need to do this or that
and ignoring the options and support services that are available in the
community and prolonging imprisonment even longer is a misuse of tax
payers money and an absolute abuse of their power and position .
It appears that a Probation
Officer will do anything to keep an IPP prisoner incarcerated but to not
to get them out with their rigid, unrealistic, biased and fixed
mind-set and will pass the book back to the prison service to provide services
once their tariff has expired of which the prisons should only be utilised to
detain a prisoner for their convicted period / tariff. Out of sight, out
of mind and off their caseloads!. Individual stories about Probation
Officers will illustrate the frightening conduct, attitude and decision
making of Probation Officers of which I could give you a personal example in
relation to a friend of mine currently detained following a recall under an IPP
and that it is about time that Probation Services and Officers are held to
account and their practice addressed for upholding the inhumane continued
incarceration of IPP prisoners post tariff or following a recall because of
their recommendations.
Nick Hardwick has addressed the issue of delayed / back log of parole hearings. What action are you doing such as advice to Probation Services / Officers on how to resolve the crisis of thousands of IPP prisoners being held years over tariff and the Probation Officers' assessment methods and mode of thinking?
No doubt your statistics will
transparently illustrate that Probation Services are actively hindering the
release of IPP prisoners very harrowingly so with individual cases now being
publicised on news reports, documentaries and media sites of how prisoners have
been detained and languishing in prison for years over tariff. I acknowledge
that Probation Services may be under resourced but this is no excuse to keep an
IPP prisoner in a prolonged detrimental existence in prison post tariff or
following a recall because of their recommendations in their so called
assessment of risk of re-offending rather than being rehabilitated,
monitored and any support services being provided in the community or
indeed for a Probation Officer to so easily and readily to recall an IPP
prisoner back to prison and held indeterminately again when no actual
convictable crime has been committed. You cannot be ignorant to the
practice and recommendations of Probation Officers in relation to the IPP
prisoners.
I shall look forward to your
response in anticipation.Yours sincerely.
Pressure should be put directly on probation services who are the ones that actively obstruct the release of IPP prisoners with their recommendations upon a parole hearing and it's high time that Probation Officers were held to account. I would encourage everyone to start writing to the Chief Inspector of Probation Dame Glenys Stacey with their grievances at the address above.
I would like to remind Dame Stacey that the IPP Prisoners where repeatable unable to reduce risk , no fault of there own for decades.
For the Chief
inspector to write repetitive rubbish like this is an
insult to those that suffered the continued
label of risk, because of failings and not the prisoners failings. They would not be in prison still but for failings of the IPP cover up by those wanting to stay in there jobs.
Dame Stacey is Out dated she needs to be honest with herself and take responsibility for her poor performance as a Chief Inspector. Her Serious failing, poor service, failing those with with learning differences, Poor duty of care, moreover unjust fairness and management.
I would like to see her
sacked along with others for serious failings. If you would
like a copy of the original letter to respond to her letter Email
katherinegleeson@aol.com.
Probation don’t know best
A prison none IPP said to the inside times “The only help I was offered by Probation was the promise
of a ‘second-hand settee’ if I could find my own accommodation, despite me
having no money and no references.”
The only people who bent over backwards to help me were Christian
charities for the homeless. No government-based, or private organisations
financed by the government offered me any help whatsoever.As a result, I found myself sleeping rough in a derelict barn, and
all I had was the clothes on my back. I eventually ended up recalled. But Probation always know best. Inside times.
Twelve years into a three-year jail term, Ian Hartley is languishing behind bars indefinitely. With no release date, he is one of almost 4,000 prisoners in Britain serving a tortuous indeterminate sentence.
Hartley, 44, was sentenced in 2005 for robbery under the controversial
imprisonment for public protection (IPP) program. Despite serving four times his
sentence, and the scheme being abolished five years ago, there is no release
date in sight.
“It would be more humane to give them the death penalty - at least they will know there’s an end,” Hartley’s partner Joanne Hibbert told RT.
“It is mental torture. It’s the not knowing. The government wants it to be forgotten about - and it is being forgotten about.”
“It would be more humane to give them the death penalty - at least they will know there’s an end,” Hartley’s partner Joanne Hibbert told RT.
“It is mental torture. It’s the not knowing. The government wants it to be forgotten about - and it is being forgotten about.”
The sentence was applied far more widely than envisaged for those with minor crimes, however, swelling
the prison population to unprecedented levels and putting huge pressure on the
already stretched parole board.
Rather than targeting dangerous criminals – with an expected rise in the
prison population of 900 – the sentence was handed down to 8,711 offenders
between 2005 and 2012. They included arsonists, pub brawlers, and street
muggers.
In 2012, IPP was abolished under the Coalition government after a European
Court ruling claimed it was “arbitrary and unlawful.” Former Justice
Secretary Kenneth Clarke agreed, labeling it a “stain” on Britain’s
criminal justice system.
The sanity of those inside. IPP prisoners suffer from alarmingly high levels of
suicide and self harm.
Hartley recently penned an open
letter describing his life in prison.
“Nobody knows what this environment is like unless you live or work here,
no wonder people are killing themselves, cutting themselves, or drugging
themselves up,” he wrote.
“I might be headstrong … but I honestly don’t know how long I can keep
going like this, I need emotion, love, compassion. I get that every week on a
visit that’s it, the rest is dark and scary … slashings every other day, people
beat with table legs, broom handles, stabbings - it’s no holds barred.”
‘There’s no light at the end of the tunnel’
Joshua Mcrae, 27, is eleven years into a four-year jail term for
‘wounding.’
Mcrae’s partner Racheal Franklin told RT he is struggling to cope. Without a
release date to look forward to and a future to plan, there is “no light at
the end of the tunnel,” she says.
“It is this constant never knowing.Every year you build up your
hopes thinking maybe this year, maybe this year, and then your hopes are dashed.
Then you get to the point where you don’t have any hope left.
"That’s why you see IPP prisoners self harming, high suicide rates –
because they just don’t have any hope.”
Franklin says if Mcrae had been handed down a normal sentence, he would have
already been released without any problems. She questions why sex offenders and
murderers who serve their time are released, but IPP prisoners in jail for more
minor offences are left waiting.
“We are not expecting them to release 4,000 prisoners tomorrow – that’s
just not realistic. We are asking them to look at their sentences and make them
mandatory. Then they can serve their sentences, give themselves a time period,
and be released with proper plans so that they are managed in the
community.”
Franklin says Mcrae, who has shared cells without issue and never harmed
another prisoner, has been denied the ability to demonstrate that he is not a
risk to the public.
His Offender Assessment System (OASys) report, which measures the risks of
criminal offenders on release, is 18 months out of date, he is regularly
transferred between prisons so he cannot build relationships with prison
officers, and the supervisor who is supposed to meet with him regularly to
discuss sentencing plans has spoken to McCrae just once by video link in four
years, Franklin says.
“Every time he goes to the parole board and they ask what he has done to
prove he is not a risk to the public, he says: ‘Well, what can I do? The
professionals who are supposed to be helping me with a sentence plan are not – I
don’t have access to those resources.’
“He’s going in front of a parole board and it’s almost like he’s being
set up to fail before he even starts the process,” Franklin says.
McCrae will next appear before the parole board on October 5.
Last month, the chair of the parole board, Nick Hardwick, expressed his
frustration at the government’s failure to “get a grip” on IPP. He
described them as a “blot” on the system when he was appointed to the
board almost a year ago.
The Ministry of Justice replied saying it is processing cases as quickly as
possible. By Mary Baines,RT .
Parole Board orders release of IPP prisoner ten years after end of tariff
James Ward was sentenced to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP)
with a ten month tariff, after he set fire to his bed while in jail for actual
bodily harm. The ABH conviction followed a fight with his father. Now 33, his
family, who have been campaigning for his release, have often spoken about his
mental health problems and the fact that he has regularly self-harmed while
serving his indefinite sentence. Ward is to be released to a hostel once a place
has been found for him.
Ward’s sister April who has supported her brother throughout his
sentence and raised his plight in the media said that the family are “over the
moon – we can’t stop grinning. My dad hasn’t grinned for years. I can’t stop
crying or smiling.”
In a move that will ignite hope for the thousands of other IPP
prisoners currently still in prison after serving the tariff, Ward’s release was
not as a result of having completed any particular offending behaviour course.
His sister explained that the decision to release him was made because the
Parole Board recognised that he poses no risk to the public. “James is not a
risk to the public,” she said, “he’s only ever been a risk to himself, and with
the right support we can get him there.”
James, from Sutton-in-Ashfield, in Nottinghamshire, was serving a sentence in 2006 after getting into a fight with
his father Bill. Unable to cope with prison life, he set fire to the mattress in
his cell, leading a judge to give him an IPP.
In 2016 James wrote to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme and said:
“Prison is not fit to accommodate people like me with mental health problems.
It’s made me worse. How can I change in a place like this? I wake up every
morning scared of what the day may hold.”
April Ward said she was “very confident” her brother will be able to
get the help he needs once he is freed – including support from mental health
services as well as the stability and love of his family. She added: “I hope
that IPP prisoners who are way over tariff can now also be released. I don’t
like to think about what would have happened if they’d decided against letting
[James] out. He had given up.”
In a statement the Prison Reform Trust welcomed the news of Ward’s
release: The Parole Board’s decision will come as an immense relief to James and
his family who have fought tirelessly to highlight the injustice of his
continued detention. His case highlights the devastating impact of the IPP on
them and thousands of people serving the discredited IPP sentence, imprisoned
not for what offences they did commit but for what they might do.
Although the sentence was abolished in 2012, there are still 3,353
people in prison serving IPP as of 30 June 2017. Over four-fifths (85%) of
people serving an IPP sentence are still in prison having passed their tariff
expiry date – the minimum period they must spend in custody and considered
necessary to serve as punishment for the offence. 552 people are still in prison
despite being given a tariff of less than two years – nearly half of these (278
people) have served eight years or more beyond their original tariff.
The Parole Board has put forward sensible recommendations to
expedite the release of the remaining IPP prisoner population. These include
proposals to convert IPP sentences into their equivalent determinate sentences,
and the executive release of those like James given an original tariff of two
years or less. It has also proposed measures to address the growing number of
people serving IPP sentences in the community being recalled to custody for
breach of their license conditions.
Commenting, Mark Day, PRT’s Head of Policy and Communications, said:
“The IPP continues to cast a long shadow over our justice system years after its
abolition. Despite recent welcome efforts by the Parole Board and prison service
to speed up the release of the remaining IPP prisoner population, without
legislative action there will still be 2000 people caught in indefinite
detention by 2020.
The onus is now on the government to put into action the sensible
recommendations made by the Parole Board and other senior policymakers and
finally put an end to this unfair and unjust sentence.”
Charlatans
I am not a fan of prison psychologists. I see them as nothing more than charlatans and snake-oil salesmen/women. I have, on
occasion, opined that the much-lauded SOTP employed cult reprogramming
techniques, yielded poor results and continued to waste millions of pounds of
public money from paying these charlatans salaries of up to £60,000 per
year!
Now when you hear a prison psychologist tell you that a course is
accredited you will know how meaningless that is in terms of reducing
recidivism.
So, surely these people are going to be held accountable for such
gross incompetence? Well, no. As it does not look likely that any of them will
do the honourable thing and resign, when will the government wake up and realise
that prison psychologists are, at best, average and, at worst, criminally
negligent? INSIDE TIMES
Comments
Grindley
I'm Currently working on the construction of an IPP specific program for pre-parole preparation!
as part of the background I have been looking at the disproportionate incidence of self harm in this specific cohort.......ALL references on this site reflect that the mental wellbeing of IPP
prisoners is not being acknowledged let alone addressed..........I would really appreciate some help to get the REAL position recognised.........I'm
interested in issues that ONLY family and friends will be willing to
identify! The true extent of mental ill health and self harm is simply
not documented and it just takes too long to build trust relationships
with all 3,000+ IPP's even if the access was facilitated.
Farren Just had a call from our son, currently in his seventh year of ipp sentence. He’s 37 years old and was sobbing his heart out in despair. Needless to say his mother is out of her mind and feeling helpless for him. He missed a drug test because it meant not turning up for one of his useless bloody courses so has been put on basics and had 30 days added to his sentence. That’s a joke isn’t it!! He feels he can’t win. I can’t understand why the powers that be do not realise the psychological effect this cruel sentencing is having on him and all the other ipp prisoners like him. Doesn’t do any good I guess but at least I can have a rant on this site occasionally to people in the same situation who I know are going through the same ordeal. Best wishes to all.
White This breaks my heart to hear 
💔 . This sentence is a living nightmare I hate it
Bates I am rasing the funds to take the State to Court for the use of
the Hare PCL risk assessment tools that they hadn't even validated prior to the
use, there are potential claims for all of those who were subjected to these
tools..
Look into New Labour and C3, they put what they did in place knowing that Savile et el had done as they had, they pushed blame to the public when they were covering up their chaos..
Cooke Oh the frustration and feelings of helplessness are dreadful. It's the most cruellest sentence and is probably giving rise to a generation with mental health problems. My son is then you and same age and has completed 6 years of a nine year tariff. A long way to go. God bless you and your family.
Pullman It's inhumane my fella got 10 month tariff for arson on his sister partners empty car he's now done nearly 11 years just had parole all looks positive for d cat. my Mans mental health is really bad at minute self harming lost weight etc
Owen If I may suggest the following. Write to the number one governor and be sure to write his name on the envelope and put private and confidential. Express your dismay at what has occurred and ask him to intervene. Having an ipp sentence dangling over your head is bad enough without having to cope with the trauma of this kind treatment. Stress your concern for your sons mental wellbeing. The prison is failing him and damaging not just his emotional state but yours as well. The main governor should be aware of the statistical data which shows that prisoners are being persecuted for simply being in prison. A controlled environment which in the main they have little control of. Just to clarify. If extra days have been added this would have involved an external judge to impose such a punishment, at least as far as I am aware. Technically he should have been entitled to legal representation so I am unsure as to whether he has been correctly informed. The stress and trauma this IPP sentence causes should never be underestimated. Whatever has occurred will only exacerbate the trauma he is having to endure. Its therefore vital that the people at the top appreciate its effect on not just the subject but their loved ones as well. Write also to your local MP, send a copy of that letter to Mr Lidington and the prison minister. Make sure you clearly describe the trauma you are experiencing as well. Inexcusable persistent persecution, the true definition of IPP.
Biamonti This sentence is beyond cruel. I can empathise with you, it is the worst thing to hear the person you love so distressed and to feel so helpless in it all... important to keep letting them know that they are not alone and not to give up hope.
Coles My sons in same situation it’s disgusting my son was just a lad aged 16 and handed a 2 years Ipp been in nearly 12 his mental health is getting worse he’s lost loads of weight he’s not going out of his pad it’s not like him this . I can’t cope all I do is cry .
Mcluckie Hi ya Stan I also have a son on IPP 11 yrs in now for a 3 an half yr tariff no its not good the way they get treated an I do agree wit u about the courses they can b useless an it's been proven that NO course can prove that any if them r danger free the only way to prove this is by allowing them to b released an mix witin the community it's bad enough they do way over the tariff an they still ha e a 10 yr licence hanging over their heads once released.
Bevan My sister a ipp and self harms
Look into New Labour and C3, they put what they did in place knowing that Savile et el had done as they had, they pushed blame to the public when they were covering up their chaos..
Cooke Oh the frustration and feelings of helplessness are dreadful. It's the most cruellest sentence and is probably giving rise to a generation with mental health problems. My son is then you and same age and has completed 6 years of a nine year tariff. A long way to go. God bless you and your family.
Pullman It's inhumane my fella got 10 month tariff for arson on his sister partners empty car he's now done nearly 11 years just had parole all looks positive for d cat. my Mans mental health is really bad at minute self harming lost weight etc
Owen If I may suggest the following. Write to the number one governor and be sure to write his name on the envelope and put private and confidential. Express your dismay at what has occurred and ask him to intervene. Having an ipp sentence dangling over your head is bad enough without having to cope with the trauma of this kind treatment. Stress your concern for your sons mental wellbeing. The prison is failing him and damaging not just his emotional state but yours as well. The main governor should be aware of the statistical data which shows that prisoners are being persecuted for simply being in prison. A controlled environment which in the main they have little control of. Just to clarify. If extra days have been added this would have involved an external judge to impose such a punishment, at least as far as I am aware. Technically he should have been entitled to legal representation so I am unsure as to whether he has been correctly informed. The stress and trauma this IPP sentence causes should never be underestimated. Whatever has occurred will only exacerbate the trauma he is having to endure. Its therefore vital that the people at the top appreciate its effect on not just the subject but their loved ones as well. Write also to your local MP, send a copy of that letter to Mr Lidington and the prison minister. Make sure you clearly describe the trauma you are experiencing as well. Inexcusable persistent persecution, the true definition of IPP.
Biamonti This sentence is beyond cruel. I can empathise with you, it is the worst thing to hear the person you love so distressed and to feel so helpless in it all... important to keep letting them know that they are not alone and not to give up hope.
Coles My sons in same situation it’s disgusting my son was just a lad aged 16 and handed a 2 years Ipp been in nearly 12 his mental health is getting worse he’s lost loads of weight he’s not going out of his pad it’s not like him this . I can’t cope all I do is cry .
Mcluckie Hi ya Stan I also have a son on IPP 11 yrs in now for a 3 an half yr tariff no its not good the way they get treated an I do agree wit u about the courses they can b useless an it's been proven that NO course can prove that any if them r danger free the only way to prove this is by allowing them to b released an mix witin the community it's bad enough they do way over the tariff an they still ha e a 10 yr licence hanging over their heads once released.
ZingThe reason why self harm is so high for IPP,S is because through no fault of their own, they are being knocked back to do courses none of which have been shown to reduce recidivism. This generates hopelessness further to this it is unfair and there is two tiers, as Pierre Bourdieu wrote decades ago two tiered systems create mental anguish, stress and causes mental illness.what that means is obviously ipp is causing mental illness.rate of violence is 15 times higher in prison, so most knock-backs have no relationship to risk.
Bevan My sister a ipp and self harms 
😐 although she tries to cover it up she has been so bad at times the prison has called us.
Corrigan My son has just had the same he was given 10 minutes notice to take test failed because he couldn't do urine test.“I'm to blame”: Blunkett's indefinite
prison sentences and ...
Imprisonment for Public
Protection (IPP) sentences were ruled a violation of human
rights.
|
http://www.inquest.org.uk/media/pr/senior-coroner-raises-concerns-about-the-unmet-mental-health-needs-of-priso
IPP PETITION
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/free-the-remaining-ipp-prisoners?source=facebook-share-button&time=1457618246
IPP PETITION
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/free-the-remaining-ipp-prisoners?source=facebook-share-button&time=1457618246
www.405343-ipp-prisoners-sentence-limbo
No comments:
Post a Comment
comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.