As part of COPE’s annual network meeting held 12-13 June, network members and affiliates met virtually for the Forum for Reflection and Exchange to discuss urgent issues surrounding how best to manage visits for children as prisons emerge from COVID-19 lockdown, issues first raised at COPE’s webinar in May 2020. Thanks to all who participated in making this Forum a successful collaboration towards providing answers to these questions, and thanks especially to our presenters, including COPE President Rachel Brett, Kate Philbrick, former COPE President and Viviane Schekter of REPR (Switzerland) for facilitating the event.
The first panel, ‘Promoting the child-parent relationship through a Partnership Model’, explored a multisectoral project integrating support for children with imprisoned parents through cooperation between Ireland’s Limerick Prison, the NGO Bedford Row Family Project, and Tusla, the statutory Child and Family Agency. The Irish model gave many positive examples of collaborative efforts to mitigate the impact of prison for visiting children and to bolster support for the mother-child relationship: prison visits rooms are designed as family ‘sitting rooms’ where both visits and meetings with social workers take place; a ‘parenting under pressure’ therapist works with mothers to encourage meaningful relationships with their children; and the ‘Through the Eyes of the Child’ programme, co-designed with mothers in prison, emphasises the mother’s emotional intelligence and awareness. Making the voice of the child pivotal and allowing child participation to influence service design and activities has been a fundamental value in this Irish model as they develop programmes and tools like the forthcoming ‘Living Well, You and Me’ workbook, which features online and in-person activities for parents and children.
The second panel focused on coming out of lockdown and making ‘protected’ non-contact prison visits child-friendly throughout Europe, with an eye to restrictions and developments during and after COVID-19. In Norway, privacy in prison visits is highly valued, so as families face the prospect of visits that are monitored by a prison officer to ensure social distancing, some families are opting to continue video visits over physical visits (prison visits have resumed as normal as of 22 June; social distancing measures in place don’t apply to children under 12, who can hug their imprisoned parent once again). The value of in-person prison visits was highlighted by the Cyprus prison service, which described face-to-face visits as ‘golden’ in contrast to virtual visits. In Catalonia and Cyprus, post-lockdown visits are resuming, with glass partitions limiting physical contact and allowing for some privacy. In all three of these country contexts, flexibility and a human touch are key to ensuring visits for children are genuinely child-friendly.
Children should be involved and heard in decision making—this became a primary theme of the Forum—and the ‘chat’ that was ongoing throughout the event made this much clearer, developing that while children must be consulted to ensure decisions are based on their best interests, this does not mean they should be burdened with the weight of decision making when that itself would not be in their best interests. (A webinar for children with parents in prison across Europe about lockdown and after would allow COPE to hear them as we co-develop good practice together).
The issue of the child’s autonomy to choose—or to determine for example whether visits are child-friendly—should also be central to the question of prison visits. Noted child expert Ann Adalist-Estrin stressed that children’s moods will change from day to day, especially given the difficulty of reckoning with imprisonment and separation. They should be asked on multiple occasions if they would like to visit prison or otherwise be in contact. Emotional behaviour or ‘acting out’ after a visit does not necessarily mean visiting is not in their best interests or is not sufficiently child-friendly; it may stem from something totally unrelated to the prison visit itself. Space should be available for these decisions to be made organically, as Bente Grambo highlighted in the Norwegian context, where families and children can choose between in-person visits and virtual visits depending on their needs and desires. If given appropriate space for reflection on their needs, children can help decide if they want to go to the prison — once in-person visits resume—or whether they want to talk to their parent via video, as prison visits can be stressful for some children. This need for an organic process in which child participation is a key component was seen as a major takeaway point from the Forum, as was the need to further explore who and what determines if an intervention or measure is child-friendly or not.
One key issue that was raised during the Forum as an area into which COPE should expand is on children in care who have a parent in prison, including from marginalised communities like Roma children, of which there are many in care situations—with the attending issues that come with variations in national policies and prison visiting practices.
As countries and prison administrations move towards opening and regaining some degree of ‘normalcy’, it is vital to maintain and continue to build upon some of the positive outcomes that have emerged from this period, most notably the introduction of virtual visits, which came into force in some country contexts, though certainly not all. This variety of visits should be maintained—without limiting access to in-person visits—because every child and young person has their own needs, like the toddler who relies on non-verbal contact and physical play to form bonds with his or her parent and has a need for shorter, more frequent visits; or the adolescent who would prefer a video call. Children with hearing disabilities can also benefit from video visits, which opens up possibilities not afforded by telephone contact. A critical issue is the need to work to ensure that all children have equal opportunities to access video visits, embedding children’s rights to communication and contact with their parent as these new ways of engaging during the pandemic and beyond unfold. This entails ensuring that all children have appropriate equipment and adequate bandwidth to enable connecting. Still another issue is that of ensuring child protection and safeguarding during video visits. In addition, a key question will be how can we collectively ensure that video calls or non-contact physical screened visits do not become the new norm? The removal of physical visits would fly in the face of UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and Council of Europe recommendations, as well as EU standards such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights. There is collective work for the COPE network to collaborate with children to develop and ensure the best possible situations for children with imprisoned parents post-COVID-19.
Many thanks to the following presenters for their valuable contributions to the Forum: Bernie O’Grady (Bedford Row Family Project Ireland), Theresa Beirne (Assistant Governor, Limerick Prison, Ireland), Damian Landy (Tusla – Child and Family Agency), Bente Grambo (FFP, Norway), Athena Demetriou (Deputy Governor, Cyprus Prison and member of the EuroPris expert group on children with imprisoned parents), Nuria Pújol (Social worker, Catalonian Prison Service and former member of EuroPris expert group on family ties), Ann Adalist-Estrin (Director, National Resource Center on Children and Families of the Incarcerated, Rutgers University, US).