Jail changes pregnant inmate policy

Over a five-week period last year, attorney Bret Grote sent separate letters to officials at the Allegheny County Jail asking that his clients — three pregnant women being held there — be released from solitary confinement.

The letters prompted their release, he said, but jail staff didn’t hesitate to continue to put new pregnant inmates into solitary for even the most minor rule violations.

So, in December, Mr. Grote, along with the American Civil Liberties Union and an attorney from law firm Reed Smith, filed a federal class-action lawsuit against the county alleging cruel and unusual punishment and due-process violations.

“That got their attention, and from that day forward, staff were instructed not to put them in solitary,” Mr. Grote said. “The county needed the incentives created by the lawsuit to take this more seriously.”

On Thursday, the parties reached a settlement agreement, and a policy governing the handling of pregnant inmates — and forbidding the use of solitary in all but the most extreme of situations — is in effect. The policy was revised in July, but no one could say when it took effect.

Dave Fawcett, with Reed Smith, praised the policy, calling it “one of the most sensible and comprehensive in the country.”

In addition to its limitation on solitary confinement, the seven-

page document also requires that pregnant inmates be given professional counseling, be provided with prenatal care, an appropriate diet, vitamins and supplements, and be offered the chance to exercise and shower regularly.

The settlement also requires the county to pay the plaintiffs $90,000 in compensatory damages and legal fees.

Five inmates claimed in the lawsuit that they were being held in cells for up to 24 hours a day without adequate food or prenatal care and that jail officers were using solitary confinement as punishment for minor infractions — for example, when one woman had an extra pair of shoes in her cell.

The lawsuit prompted the court system to start looking more carefully at pregnant women being held in the jail, and Common Pleas President Judge Jeffrey A. Manning told the jail to put those inmates on the bail list so he could consider them for release pending trial.

As of Thursday, there were eight pregnant inmates at the jail. The number was at 38 in July 2016.

Amie Downs, a spokeswoman with the county, would not comment on the settlement.

Under the policy, the jail will limit solitary confinement — also known as restrictive housing — for pregnant inmates “except where it is necessary to protect the safety of [corrections] employees, the mother and unborn child or other inmates at ACJ.” Even then, it continues, they will provide “special protections against harm to the pregnant inmate and her unborn child.”

In addition, if a pregnant inmate is to be housed in solitary confinement, she must receive an informal hearing within 24 hours to express her position. Any restricted housing for more than seven days must be approved by a high-ranking jail official with at least the rank of major and must be reviewed every week.

Under the terms of the settlement, Mr. Grote said, he and the other attorneys on the case may obtain jail reports on the treatment of pregnant inmates, as well as go into the jail and interview them to ensure compliance.

Mr. Fawcett called the policy “very progressive.”

Even though the rules in it are common sense, he said it will help guide corrections officers.

“We surveyed the country, and a lot of places don’t have a policy like this, and they should,” Mr. Fawcett said. “There’s nothing more important than ensuring the health of an unborn child and doing what you can to avoid unnecessary risk.

“I give credit to the county – the county executive, the county solicitor and the warden – for recognizing what was right and doing what needed to be done. We are very pleased with the result.”

Chelsa Wagner, the Allegheny County controller and a member of the Jail Oversight Board, made an unannounced visit to the jail in October 2016 and afterward raised concerns about how pregnant inmates were being treated.

“It was very clear their needs were not being met,” she said.

On Thursday, Ms. Wagner praised the new policy, but added, “These are things the jail certainly should have been doing from the get-go.”

She hopes that the discussion on pregnant inmates at the jail will lead to finding a solution to keep them out.

“Our jail should never be the place for pregnant women,” she said. “It wasn’t set up that way.”