PRISONERS who have suffered head injuries may not be the most immediately sympathetic cause. When involvement in violent lifestyles, perhaps featuring gangs or drugs could lie behind cases, there will be those who will feel limited concern.
But there is an element of the chicken and the egg here. Evidence suggests that those who have suffered brain trauma are more likely to be involved in the criminal justice system. They may be more impulsive, less able to control their aggression or have lower levels of concentration and ability to overcome problems in their own lives.
While criminality may have preceded such injury for some, others may have seen their lives go awry following a violent incident.
We know people who grew up in the care system are more likely to end up in jail – it is reasonable to think that a violent or neglectful upbringing may have contributed to their problems. Women who have been victims of domestic violence are another example.
Regardless, the principle of equal access to health care should not be denied to someone as part of a prison sentence. Yet it often is, according to the British Psychological Society.
In evidence to Holyrood’s health committee, the society says communication between health and social care agencies and prisons is inefficient or absent. Prison staff are often unaware of the consequences of untreated brain injuries.
Much better screening and more effective access to treatment is the decent thing to do when prisoners are three to four times more likely to have suffered traumatic brain injuries. But there is also a wider public interest in addressing the long-term problems such injuries can cause, and the need to rehabilitate such prisoners.
Their cost to criminal justice services can add up to hundreds of thousands of pounds over a lifetime.
This is not about providing excuses – it is right that people are punished for the offences they have committed. But the prison sentence is the punishment. Inadequate access to healthcare should not be part of that too.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here