KEY POINTS:
The loss of rights is a fundamental part of the punishment of imprisonment. Inmates are deprived, most obviously, of the freedom of movement and decision-making, but they also lose other liberties, such as the right to vote if they are imprisoned for more than three years. Most people might also have assumed that, as a further deterrent to criminal activity, prisoners would be unable to father children. Yet this seems not to be the case, a situation the Corrections Minister says, quite rightly, is "inappropriate".
Damien O'Connor was referring to the case of Peter McNamara, who, with former policemen Brad Shipton and Bob Schollum, is in prison for the gang rape of a 20-year-old woman at Mt Maunganui in 1989. Not only has McNamara fathered a child but he was allowed out in January for the baby's birth. This was the product of arrangements made with the prison doctor to provide a semen sample for his partner. Rimutaka Prison was not aware of the procedure because it was subject to patient confidentiality.
This substantial slice of liberty seems quite at odds with the very nature of imprisonment. Indeed, the only skerrick of sympathy in this case might be reserved for McNamara's partner. When men are imprisoned, the trials of women left to cope alone are easily forgotten. Many must contend with a sharply reduced income, while others feel the loss of emotional support most strongly. Yet, surprisingly, they are able to start or expand a family if their desire is strong enough to take on the relatively slim odds of insemination succeeding. That may be a chance women nearing the end of their child-bearing years are only too ready to take.
In the case of McNamara, however, it is difficult to sustain a case based on sympathy. He was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment in July 2005. If paroled, he can expect to be free in a relatively short time. This does not appear to be an instance where a man would be unable to father a child outside of prison for many, many years. Indeed, even if McNamara had been imprisoned for a far longer term, it would be hard to justify this liberty. Children need fathers. A circumstance depriving them of this during their important formative years is unlikely to find overwhelming support in child welfare circles.
The exact circumstances under which McNamara's sample was taken from Rimutaka Prison remain somewhat murky. Some reports suggest it was "smuggled" out. Whatever the case, it was done in a manner which suggests those involved realised it would create a furore if it became public knowledge. This sensitivity was bound to have been heightened by McNamara's involvement in a particularly horrific incident.
There may, as a prisons operations manager has stated, be no law to stop an inmate fathering a child. There may also be nothing in the Corrections Department code of conduct to stop semen being taken from a prison. Everything points, however, to this being more an oversight than an intended omission from the rule book. The Corrections Minister has ordered an investigation into the episode. Whatever the outcome, it is clear that inmates should not be able to father children. This, as most would assume was already the case, should be among the liberties they relinquish when they are imprisoned.
It is unfortunate that the punishment implicit in the loss of this right will, to a large degree, fall on the partners outside, not those doing the time. But whenever a crime is committed, there is always collateral damage. The suffering spreads far and wide. Wide enough surely for those who wish to father children to regard the loss of that right as another reason for going straight.
