Restraints

"Utah considers ban on shackling woman prisoners who are pregnant." I'm of many more than two minds about this. An excellent thing to consider, though I think they should expedite that phase as much as humanly possible. "We're shackling woman prisoners? I think we should seriously consider cutting that out." "I think so too." "Me too." Chorus of assent. "Well we're all in agreement. We're considering it, what next?" "Actually do it?" "Stop shackling pregnant women you mean?" "I do." Chorus of voices: "IT'S SO CRAZY IT MIGHT WORK!" "Carried unanimously then. Send guards around to strike off all those shackles."

Which is fine as far as it goes, but doesn't address the underlying difficulty: the Utah justice system allows for the shackling of pregnant woman prisoners. (A number of states do it seems on further investigation, and to be fair to Utah, it has previously prohibited the practice, but the prohibition hasn't been observed. Perhaps a ban will carry more force. Certainly it's a step in the right direction, but not having ever done it in the first place is loads preferable.) And that still leaves a large unanswered question: if we grant that male prisoners are rightly to be shackled (which some may doubt), what is it about women who aren't pregnant that makes them worthy of foot and hand bracelets of steel? I say nothing of the advantage horny guards might take: "You want out of those shackles, baby? I have just the ticket, right here in my pants." No, I think it wisest not to shackle female prisoners at all. I'm sure I'll be accused of liberalism, but there it is.