Offender Management Bill

moved Amendment No. 112C: 112C: Before Clause 24, insert the following new Clause— ““Duty to promote children’s welfare Duty to promote children’s welfare The Secretary of State shall by regulations provide for all individuals and agencies responsible for the management of offenders to be subject to a duty to have regard to the need to protect and promote the welfare of the children of offenders including, in particular, the children of those serving prison sentences.”” The noble Lord said: The amendment is not about children who are in prison or about to go to prison, but about the welfare of that small but often disadvantaged subgroup of the nation’s children who have a parent or parents in prison. It is also about reducing offending, which is one of the Government’s main objectives in the Bill. I shall give a few facts. Dodd and Hunter in 1992 said: "““There are no accurate, up-to-date estimates of the numbers of imprisoned parents, or children of imprisoned parents, in the UK. The last National Prison Survey in England and Wales reported that 47 per cent of female prisoners and 32 per cent of male prisoners had children living with them before coming to prison””." It is estimated today that some 150,000 children in the United Kingdom have a parent in prison. Often those children and their families become seriously disadvantaged. They are the innocent victims of imprisonment. In preparing for the amendment I was greatly helped by and wish to give credit to Dr Shad Maruna of Queen’s University Belfast and through him to Dr Joseph Murray and Dr David Farrington of the Institute of Criminology at Cambridge. I shall quote first from a report by Murray and Farrington, which is shortly to be published. They have said: "““It is surprising that researchers and policy makers have largely neglected to consider the effects of parental imprisonment on children. As Shaw in 1987 pointed out over twenty years ago, if we do not attend to the effects of imprisonment on children we run the risk of punishing innocent victims, neglecting seriously an at risk group, and possibly causing crime in the next generation””." The number of children experiencing parental imprisonment is increasing in the western industrialised countries. Parental imprisonment has been shown to be a factor for child anti-social behaviour, offending, mental health problems, drug abuse, school failure and unemployment. Children of prisoners are at much higher risk than their peers—about three times as great—for their own anti-social behaviour; for mental health it is about twice the risk and probably about the same for educational outcomes. The latest results from the Cambridge study also suggest that they are at risk for drug abuse and unemployment. A 2006 Cambridge study of delinquent development—a longitudinal study of 400 males—showed that 48 per cent boys of who were separated because of parental imprisonment in their first 10 years of life were later convicted as adults, compared with only 14 per cent in a control sample whose parents were not imprisoned. Murray and Farrington conclude: "““Parental imprisonment is a strong risk factor for””," and a possible cause of, "““a range of adverse outcomes for children, including anti-social behaviour, offending, mental health problems, drug abuse, school failure, and subsequent unemployment””." A recent Joseph Rowntree Foundation report of May 2007 on research carried out by the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London confirms the Cambridge findings. It says that, "““criminal justice and social welfare policy combine to impoverish, disadvantage and exclude prisoners' families, and their children in particular””." It goes on to point out: "““Maintaining family relationships during imprisonment was financially draining””." Yet, at the same time, "““families are officially recognised as significant in enabling the successful resettlement of prisoners””." The Social Exclusion Unit identified that fact in 2002, so that information has been available for some time. I could produce more evidence, but the Committee has probably had enough, and the examples that I have given are probably sufficient to establish that the impact of imprisonment on children is a serious social issue, which all those concerned with offender management should have at the front of their minds when taking decisions about imprisonment, prisoners and prisoner management. They should consider in particular the way in which prisoners’ ongoing relationship with their children can best be facilitated and fostered before, during and after imprisonment. If the son becomes a criminal as a result of the father’s imprisonment, whether or not the father reoffends, the offender management service will have failed. The importance of this issue justifies it having a place in the Bill. I beg to move.