About time
Fair treatment for pregnant inmates was overdue
After being hit with a federal lawsuit, Allegheny County officials have agreed to limit the use of solitary confinement for pregnant inmates and make other changes to ensure the women’s health. That’s good for the county, the women and their fetuses. While the changes give the county what has been described as one of the country’s most progressive policies on the treatment of pregnant inmates, it’s too bad that it took a lawsuit to bring about what really are commonsense practices.
Concerns about pregnant inmates have been simmering for a year. In fall 2016, two members of the Jail Oversight Board — county Controller Chelsa Wagner and Terri Klein, a former county council member — raised concerns about the number of pregnant inmates there and suggested more of them be placed in alternative housing. That made perfect sense, especially since the University of Pittsburgh recently had issued a report urging the courts to make increased use of alternative housing options for various categories of inmates.
In December, five current and former inmates filed the federal lawsuit, alleging that the jail violated their due-process rights and subjected them to cruel and unusual punishment by putting them in solitary confinement while pregnant. They alleged the use of solitary for extended periods — up to 22 consecutive days, for example — and the jail’s failure to provide adequate prenatal care. The women — represented by the Abolitionist Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Reed Smith law firm — said the jail even used solitary as punishment for minor infractions.
After the lawsuit, some changes occurred, as Allegheny County Common Pleas President Judge Jeffrey Manning released some pregnant inmates to other housing or reduced their bail to a point where they could leave the jail under other arrangements. Bret Grote, an attorney with the Abolitionist Law Center, said the suit almost immediately halted the jail’s use of solitary for pregnant women. The settlement is a more formal and permanent step forward.
Now, solitary confinement for pregnant inmates is permitted only if they pose a danger to staff, themselves or other inmates. These inmates have the right to an informal hearing at which they can challenge the punishment, and a highranking corrections officer must approve any pregnant woman’s stay in solitary for more than seven days. Under the new policy, the county also promises to provide pregnant inmates with counseling, prenatal care and nutritional supplements. The plaintiffs’ attorneys can review data and interview inmates to ensure the county’s compliance with the agreement.
Dave Fawcett, the Reed Smith attorney involved in the case, said the changes represent “one of the most sensible and comprehensive” policies nationally for the treatment of pregnant inmates. He and the other attorneys must be sure to enforce the settlement, and the county must double down on efforts to make use of alternative housing for pregnant women and other nonviolent inmates.
Jail should be reserved for the most dangerous offenders and solitary confinement for the worst of the worst.