|
Legal Action for Women Self-Help Workshops report
After an introduction by Nina Lopez-Jones, Niki Adams gave an overview of the implications of a clause on trafficking in the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill. She outlined how this legislation and a proposed new Bill would make women even more vulnerable to violence and deportation and could criminalise anyone who attempted to help victims of traffickers. The proposed removal of the support asylum seekers and their children rely on would force more women into the sex industry. Ms Adams also traced how academic research which laid the basis for these measures by advocating “increased surveillance of prostitute women”, “removing the need for victims to give evidence” and pressing for “repatriation and reintergration for trafficked persons” had ignored women’s needs and experiences so that instead of getting protection women were now in a more vulnerable position than before. Two young Eastern European women described fleeing to the UK to escape poverty and violence. Both had been raped and forced into prostitution. They escaped with help from other sex workers and members of the public. LAW had helped them find housing, legal advice and other support. A statement was read from a Thai woman who wanted to remain anonymous, describing how in spite of having the right to stay in Britain, she was visited by police who said they were looking for victims of trafficking. She was threatened with deportation, forced to undress in front of male police officers, taken to the police station, and generally terrorised into leaving her flat. She had come to LAW for help in complaining about this treatment. Women from Soho spoke about the impact of the ongoing police and immigration raids carried out in Soho and how illegal deportations have been prevented by the intervention of LAW. A representative of the Soho Society which represents residents spoke in support of sex workers. Abhijit Dasgupta gave a riveting and in-depth account of how he as part of Action Aid (India) is pressing for a different approach to trafficking internationally. He described how Action Aid had quickly found that anti-trafficking measures were being used internationally to prevent the migration of people, especially women who are driven by poverty and globalisation to move country. Governments claim that millions of women are being trafficked by a billion dollar sex industry but the UNHCR and others have pointed out that because of tightening immigration controls paying an agent is often the only way to migrate. Governments and most NGOs only focus on sexual exploitation, ignoring the horrendous exploitation in sweatshops and agricultural labour, including here in the UK. Mr Dasgupta explained that Action Aid India worked very closely with sex workers organisations as they had found this to be the most effective way to help victims of trafficking. He welcomed the workshop as an opportunity to come together with others to try to change the focus from trafficking to the urgent question of poverty and women's right to mobility. A very full and interesting discussion followed which addressed the issue of what practical changes are needed to ensure protection and safety for women starting with resources for those fleeing violence. The workshop was stimulating, informative and extremely useful in re-examining trafficking and anti-trafficking policies from women's point of view. A church representative described it as a "clear corrective" to many myths and misinformation on the issue. Two lawyers agreed to help women facing deportation. It was also agreed to urgently consider how the discussion and practical issues raised could reach a wider audience. Many of those present expressed an interest in doing ongoing work on this issue.
Solveig Francis (International Women Count Network – IWCN and co-author of a new book The Milk of Human Kindness) described the forces against breastfeeding and the struggle to defend paid breastfeeding breaks in the revised ILO Maternity Protection Convention (1999 and 2000). She reported on a conference of the World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action and UNICEF in Tanzania in September 2002. Magda Sachs (The Breastfeeding Network) outlined the provisions of the WHO code and how it is broken all the time. A video of a speech by Grace Loumo (Kaabong Women's Organisation and IWCN in Uganda) at the Tanzania conference described the work of rural breastfeeding mothers in Africa. Gillian Samuels (Birth Companions, a group founded by natural childbirth author and advocate Sheila Kitzinger for mothers and babies in Holloway prison) described women's struggles to breastfeed their children in prison and during lengthy court hearings. Sylvia Salley (Black Women for Wages for Housework) and Sally Harper and Adele Phemister (Fire Brigades Union National Women’s Committee) spoke about their struggle to combine breastfeeding with full-time waged work. Legislation can protect the rights of breastfeeding mothers and their babies in the waged workplace, but these are little known. It was noted that women could use UK health and safety laws to defend their babies’ right to breast milk. The women from the Fire Brigades Union said they wanted to work more closely with LAW and other organisations at the workshop to improve their maternity policies, remove obstacles to breastfeeding and strengthen the situation of women fire service workers who want to breastfeed. Representatives of La Leche League and the Breastfeeding Mothers Association also contributed to the discussions. Participants were shocked at the information which came out at the workshop that only 1/3 of babies worldwide are exclusively breastfed, resulting in the death of 1.5 million infants a year overwhelmingly in the South who are fed formula. In the UK, 70% of women start breastfeeding; but this drops to 42% by the time babies are six weeks old and only 21% of mothers breastfeed fully for at least six months. Mothers who are labeled HIV+ are told not to breastfeed and threatened with loss of child custody if they do. It was generally agreed that by bringing together a range of women from different backgrounds to discuss a subject which is often confined to breastfeeding circles and in the context of how to defend women’s and children’s right to breastfeed, broadened the discussion and brought in new forces and a fresher perspective. Women left encouraged and strengthened to continue their work. Over 30 women and men attended the workshop including people with disabilities in different situations and from different boroughs in London. After an introduction by Nina Lopez-Jones, Claire Glasman from WinVisible (women with visible and invisible disabilities) gave an overview of legal rights to community care services and the impact of recent Department of Health guidelines on charging for community care. Mary Hynes, from Visually Impaired in Camden, reported on the new eligibility criteria, whereby all users of homecare are being re-assessed, their needs graded as low, medium, substantial or critical, and services provided or withdrawn accordingly. David Roberts from solicitors firm Tyrer Roxburgh reported on a precedent case where they represented the first woman wheelchair user to win compensation under the Human Rights Act for humiliation while she was left in inaccessible housing. A woman with Sickle Cell Anemia spoke about how common it is for people’s needs to be under-assessed. Prisca Allen from the Greater London Pensioners Association spoke about free personal care available in Scotland since July 2002. Didi Rossi gave an account of the problems people with disabilities had faced during the "consultation" process on community care charges, in Camden and elsewhere. People in Tower Hamlets had pressed the Council not to charge, and were campaigning against the rationing of services which could result in people being forced into residential care. A number of councils, including Derbyshire, do not charge, and individuals are successfully refusing to pay. The lively discussion which followed initially focused on a point raised by a woman wheelchair user who asked about the responsibility of voluntary sector organizations to represent the interests and needs of people with disabilities on issues such as this. People in the workshop felt that these organisations should vigorously oppose charges and rationing, and other threats to services. Participants then spoke in detail of the discrimination and difficulties they faced getting adequate community care, the double injustice of being asked to pay out of disability benefits for these services, and needs which are no longer met or which are ignored, for example, provision for women laryngectomees, the closure of mental health day centres and the lack of social workers who can communicate with deaf people. In some cases the brutality of service providers was horrifying. It was proposed that participants in the workshop prepare a list of what has been lost, and neglected needs which could be circulated for people to add to, and publicised. This would break down the isolation that people feel when facing this kind of discrimination and bring home how widespread it is. It was also proposed that people find out what organizations had said during the consultation. It is likely that the views of organisations have been misrepresented in the official reports used to justify policy decisions. |
