Detention for immigrants may result in severe vulnerability. Given that immigration detention entails putting individuals up in conditions akin to prisons with no guarantee of when or if they will be freed, this may not come as a major surprise. The government’s present stance that holding vulnerable individuals is acceptable may surprise some people, nevertheless. Their role was not intended to be thus.
Human rights violations and conditions in detention centers
It was revealed in February 2015 that the Home Secretary has ordered a review of the wellbeing of “Vulnerable Persons” in imprisonment, to be headed by Stephen Shaw. Public access to the Shaw Review report began in January 2016. Within the 349 pages of the study, Shaw offered 64 suggestions.
The Shaw Review unequivocally stated that insufficient steps are taken by the government to shield those who are vulnerable from incarceration or to ensure their safety while they are. The government created the “Adults at Risk in Immigration Detention” policy in response to the Shaw Review’s conclusions, and it went into effect on September 12, 2016. The policy had previously drawn criticism. The strategy, according to this joint letter that was published in The Guardian, “may lead to a worsening of protection for vulnerable people in detention.” The policy weighs vulnerability against a greater variety of other variables and places an increased weight of proof on those who are susceptible. We worry that more vulnerable individuals may end up in jail for longer as a result of this.
Alternatives to detention: A more humane approach
The letter further emphasized that there was no chance for substantive discussion because the guidelines were presented to parliament the day before the summer break and were scheduled to take effect one week later. The concept of “balancing” any vulnerabilities or risks of harm against “immigration factors” while determining whether or not to detain someone is another concerning aspect of the new policy. This implies that the decision-makers’ prioritization of “immigration factors” may trump a person’s vulnerability or the potential threat of imprisonment for them.
Due to the Adults at Risk Policy’s flaws, vulnerable individuals, such as pregnant women, persons with major health conditions, survivors of sexual assault and torture, and others are still being imprisoned. Inevitably, incarceration makes vulnerable individuals more vulnerable. Additionally, it becomes vulnerable to those who were not especially so before being held. There is to be a Westminster Hall discussion on the detention of vulnerable persons one week after Members of Parliament tried to obtain the resurrection of the Dubs project to bring refugee children securely to the UK.
Economic and social impact of detention policies
The health of migrants, particularly their mental health, can be severely impacted by immigration detention both during and after release from custody. Even though immigration detention is prohibited by international law and should only be used as a last option for minors, it is still often employed throughout the WHO European Region.
“My vision of ‘leave no one behind’ applies to everyone, including refugees and migrants because the right to health must be protected for everyone, regardless of status,” says Dr. Hans Henri P. Kluge, Regional Director of WHO for Europe. In the WHO European Region, immigration detention has been a more common strategy for controlling migrant flows in recent years. Alternatives to detention, which might resemble jail, should always take precedence over detention measures in order to safeguard the health of refugees and migrants. Research indicates that the mental health consequences of detained migrants are comparable to or worse than those of incarcerated individuals.
International perspectives and best practices
Migrants’ mental health may deteriorate as a result of the conditions in immigration detention. The impacts on migrants’ mental health worsen with the length of time they are held. These detrimental effects may not go away soon after they are released. While there is ample evidence of the mental health requirements of immigrants held in immigration detention, psychological assistance and care are frequently lacking. Immigration detention centers sometimes provide less protections and services than prisons. Migrants are also more vulnerable to violence, infectious illnesses, and other unpleasant experiences because of their circumstances. A wide range of stresses, including lack of knowledge about immigration processes, criminalization of migrants, feelings of isolation, staff inadequacy, and communication difficulties, can be used to explain why health is declining in immigration detention.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Although most immigration detention centers offer access to basic medical treatment, there are still numerous obstacles to overcome. There is frequently a paucity of translators, poor training and support for medical professionals and jail personnel, distrust is rampant, and medical records are either inadequate or missing.
