header-logo header-logo

Judges must consider interests of child when sending mothers to prison

16 May 2021
Issue: 7933 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-detail
MPs and peers have called for a statutory duty on judges to consider the interests of the child when sentencing mothers

The Joint Committee on Human Rights tabled five new clauses to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill last week, in its report, ‘Children of mothers in prison and the right to family life: The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill’.

The new clauses would require judges to consider pre-sentence reports including information about any children concerned before sentencing a mother. Judges would be required to take into account the best interests of the child, consider the impact on a child of a custodial sentence, and consider the impact on a child of not granting bail.

There would also be a requirement on the Home Secretary to gather and publish data on how many children are born in prison and how many children are separated from their mother in prison.

The committee criticised the failure of government to capture basic data about primary carers in prison and their dependent children as a ‘blatant disregard’ for the rights of the child and their parents’ right to family life. It had called on the government repeatedly to collect this data yet the government did not have it.

Harriet Harman MP, chair of the committee, said: ‘A young child’s separation from its mother when she’s sent to prison risks lifelong damage to that crucial relationship.

‘Yet, too often, the child is invisible in the court process. This must change. Most mothers who are in prison have committed non-violent crimes. And it’s appalling that there’s so little concern for children that the government doesn’t even know how many children are suffering separation from their mother by imprisonment.

‘There will be much backing from MPs from all parties for these law changes proposed by the Joint Committee on Human Rights.’

The committee highlighted that, when a parent with a dependent child is sentenced, the Art 8 rights of both parent and child is engaged therefore the court should ensure the child’s right to a family life is interfered with to the extent that is both necessary and proportionate. The committee said it failed to see how the bets interests of the child were being sufficiently considered if they were not prioritised when a parent was sentenced.

Issue: 7933 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll