Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Victory: Shackling Pregnant Prisoners in Labor Found to be Cruel!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ccharles000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:15 PM
Original message
Victory: Shackling Pregnant Prisoners in Labor Found to be Cruel!
http://advocatesforpregnantwomen.org/blog/2009/10/victory_shackling_pregnant_pri.php

On Friday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit (the federal level appellate court that reviews decisions from federal district courts in North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, Minnesota, and Arkansas) issued the long-awaited decision in Nelson v. Norris. In this case, Shawanna Nelson argued that being forced to go through the final stages of labor with both legs shackled to her hospital bed was cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. She argued that she should be allowed to sue the director of the prison and the guard who repeatedly re-shackled her legs to the bed. Ms. Nelson, an African-American woman, was incarcerated for non-violent offenses of credit card fraud and "hot checks."

In this historic federal court decision, the Court held that the guard was not immune from (protected from) suit because it has been clearly established by the decisions of the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts that shackling pregnant women in labor violates that 8th Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. The Court suggested that the corrections officers should have known that the medical risks of shackling were "obvious" and that "the shackles interfered with Nelson's medical care, could be an obstacle in the event of a medical emergency, and caused unnecessary suffering at a time when Nelson would have likely been physically unable to flee because of the pain she was undergoing and the powerful contractions she was experiencing as her body worked to give birth."

Ms. Nelson originally filed this case in 2004. As the case progressed through the courts, she seemed to be losing. In 2008, three judges on the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that she had no right to sue. Recognizing the harm this decision would do, her counsel reached out to national advocacy groups for help in an effort to petition the court for re-hearing. The ACLU Prison Project became counsel in the case and NAPW was asked to write an amicus – friend of the court brief. Although NAPW does not specialize in prison issues, we are recognized for our commitment to pregnant women and our extraordinary ability to mobilize leading public health and advocacy groups. With allies at the Rebecca Project for Human Rights and the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative (NESRI), we were able to identify more than 35 organizations (see full list below) that wanted to be represented as amicus in this case. (Several additional groups wanted to join but were unable to respond in the very short time frame for filing.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. Uh.... victory, except for the uber fail that this was even a question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Total Uber fail
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MajorChode Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. Who woulda thunk it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Only a very dumb MAN
would ever think a woman in labor would leap off the delivery table and run.

Even after everything comes out, she's in no condition to get up and sprint to a getaway car. Everything feels like it's going to fall out if she stands up, and she can't stand up if she's had an epidural.

I give great thanks to Ms. Nelson for suing those bastards. I'm sure every nurse who cared for her offered to testify in her behalf.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Now she gets to sue the guard.
I hope he's shitting his pants over this decision, and getting ready to lose everything when she wins the lawsuit. x(

Nobody that dumb, and with that little compassion deserved to work in any position of authority. I hope this costs him his job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPedigrees Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
5. Gee, ya think? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
7. shackles were silly, just handcuff her to the rail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brigid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
9. Who were the guards -- Taliban members?
Good Lord. x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccharles000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
11. I'm guessing fear of escape wasn't the issue
I can't believe there was any fear that an inmate in labor would escape. Sounds like another dehumanizing tactic, like body cavity searches and other humiliating procedures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC