Australia🏛️ PoliticsProgressiveOverlooked by conservatives
Hospital staff raise alarm, claiming mother shackled while baby in NICU
In Queensland, Australia, hospital staff have raised concerns about the treatment of an Aboriginal woman who was allegedly shackled during her recovery after giving birth via C-section at Townsville University Hospital. The woman was reportedly restrained by her ankles and wrists to the bed, preventing her from visiting her newborn in the neonatal intensive care unit. Sisters Inside, an organization supporting criminalized women, received reports from hospital staff who expressed distress over the situation, stating that prison officers refused requests to remove the restraints. Staff claimed the woman's health deteriorated during the week, and prison officers made racist and derogatory comments. Queensland Corrective Services have initiated an internal review of the incident, emphasizing that restraints are only used as a last resort for public safety. Minister for Corrective Services Laura Gerber stated the woman was not restrained during the delivery itself. This follows failed efforts at the federal level to ban the practice, prompting calls from state politicians for legislative action.
Queensland Corrective Services has initiated an internal review into allegations that an Indigenous woman was physically restrained in a north Queensland hospital shortly after giving birth. The incident occurred at Townsville University Hospital, where the mother was reportedly shackled by her ankle and wrist to her bed following a caesarean section. Her newborn infant was placed in the neonatal intensive care unit during this period. The Queensland government faces increasing political pressure to outlaw the practice of restraining women during childbirth and the immediate postnatal period. The woman, whose identity has not been released, delivered her baby on October 10 while in custody. Hospital staff, including midwives, nurses, and medical personnel, raised alarms regarding the use of restraints. They contacted Sisters Inside, an organization dedicated to supporting criminalized women and girls, expressing distress over the mother’s treatment. Debbie Kilroy, the chief executive of Sisters Inside, stated that staff members requested the removal of the shackles. The medical team argued that the restraints hindered the woman’s recovery from major surgery and prevented her from visiting her child in the neonatal intensive care unit without physical restriction. Prison officers refused these requests. Kilroy described the scene as one of severe suffering. She noted that the midwives and nurses advocated for the removal of the shackles because the woman was unable to move freely and was in agony. According to Kilroy, the mother became highly distressed, and her health visibly deteriorated over the course of the week. Hospital staff further alleged that prison officers made racist and derogatory remarks toward the woman. The staff are currently in the process of formalizing a complaint against the corrective services agency regarding the manner of her treatment. One group of staff members described themselves as deeply upset, with some reporting that they cried due to the rudeness displayed by the officers. Queensland Corrective Services responded to the allegations through a spokesperson, stating that the management of the prisoner during her hospital stay would be subject to an internal review. The agency maintained that restraints are utilized only as a last resort for pregnant prisoners when necessary to maintain public safety. Minister for Corrective Services Laura Gerber confirmed she was aware of the incident. She reiterated that pregnant women can only be restrained as a last resort due to public safety concerns. Gerber added that she had been briefed by her department, which indicated that the woman was not restrained during the actual delivery of the baby or during the surgical procedure itself. The controversy has intensified amid broader legislative efforts to ban such practices. Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe recently introduced a bill in federal parliament aimed at prohibiting the shackling of incarcerated women during childbirth and the strip searching of children. However, the legislation was blocked by Members of Parliament from both the Labor and Coalition parties. Following the defeat of the federal bill, Kilroy stated that the responsibility now falls to individual states and territories to legislate an end to what she termed a barbaric practice. State Labor Member of Parliament Jonty Bush launched a petition on Monday urging the Queensland government to expressly prohibit the use of handcuffs, shackles, and other custodial restraints on women during labor, childbirth, and the immediate postnatal period. Bush argued that there is no valid justification for such practices. He dismissed the common rationale of flight risk, noting that anyone familiar with the experience of labor would recognize the absurdity of that claim. Bush cited the United Nations’ Bangkok Rules, which govern the treatment of women prisoners. These international guidelines assert that instruments of restraint shall never be used on women during labor, birth, or immediately after birth. Bush emphasized that women in these situations are often in fear for themselves and their babies, yet they are shackled to beds under the guise of protection. He called on the state to uphold its human rights commitments and ensure that birthing processes within the prison system remain as free from restriction as possible. Fridae King, assistant secretary of the Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union, voiced strong opposition to the use of shackles during childbirth and labor. She stated that the application of restraints in such contexts is traumatizing and potentially compromises the quality of medical care. King called for a national prohibition on the use of restraints throughout pregnancy, childbirth, and the post-birth period, emphasizing the need to uphold the human rights and dignity of women. Tahlia Isaac, a female prisoner advocate based in Townsville, criticized the concept of using restraints as a last resort. In her experience working with female prisoners, she observed that restraints were frequently applied based on values-based judgments rather than strict necessity. Isaac questioned the practical definition of a last resort, suggesting that the term did not align with the reality of how restraints were deployed in her professional observations. The ongoing review by Queensland Corrective Services aims to determine whether protocol violations occurred during the care of the mother at Townsville University Hospital.
2 reports
The AgeIndependentProgressiveFactual 94Objective 75
In October 2026, hospital staff in north Queensland raised concerns about an Aboriginal woman being physically restrained with shackles during her recovery after giving birth via c-section. The incident occurred at Townsville University Hospital, where the woman was allegedly shackled to the bed by prison officers while her newborn was in the neonatal intensive care unit. Sisters Inside, an organization supporting criminalized women, reported that hospital staff were distressed by the situation and requested the removal of restraints, citing the woman's physical discomfort and deteriorating health. Prison officers reportedly made racist and derogatory comments, prompting hospital staff to file a formal complaint. Queensland Corrective Services confirmed an internal review would be conducted, stating restraints are only used as a last resort for public safety. Meanwhile, calls for a statewide ban on shackling incarcerated women during childbirth intensified, following the defeat of a federal bill aimed at ending such practices.
Bias read (Progressive): The article highlights systemic issues related to the treatment of incarcerated individuals, particularly Indigenous women, and emphasizes calls for legislative reform. It frames the use of restraints as 'barbaric' and criticizes the actions of prison officers through quotes from advocacy groups and
Why factuality (94): The article provides specific details such as the date of the birth (October 10), the location (Townsville University Hospital), the involvement of Sisters Inside and Debbie Kilroy, and the launch of an internal review by Queensland Corrective Services. These details align with the cross-source cons
Why objectivity (75): The article uses emotionally charged terms like 'barbaric practice' and describes the situation with strong language ('highly distressed', 'crying because the prison officers were so rude'). While it presents statements from multiple parties, including the official response from Queensland Correctiv
In Queensland, Australia, hospital staff have raised concerns about the treatment of an Aboriginal woman who was allegedly shackled during her recovery after giving birth via C-section at Townsville University Hospital. The woman was reportedly restrained by her ankles and wrists to the bed, preventing her from visiting her newborn in the neonatal intensive care unit. Sisters Inside, an organization supporting criminalized women, received reports from hospital staff who expressed distress over the situation, stating that prison officers refused requests to remove the restraints. Staff claimed the woman's health deteriorated during the week, and prison officers made racist and derogatory comments. Queensland Corrective Services have initiated an internal review of the incident, emphasizing that restraints are only used as a last resort for public safety. Minister for Corrective Services Laura Gerber stated the woman was not restrained during the delivery itself. This follows failed efforts at the federal level to ban the practice, prompting calls from state politicians for legislative action.
Bias read (Progressive): The article highlights systemic issues related to the treatment of incarcerated individuals, particularly Indigenous women, and emphasizes calls for legislative reform from progressive groups and politicians. It frames the use of restraints as 'barbaric' and criticizes the actions of prison officers
Why factuality (93): This article mirrors the content of Article 0 closely, providing identical details regarding the incident, the involvement of hospital staff, Debbie Kilroy, and the internal review by Queensland Corrective Services. It includes the same quotes and events, suggesting high fidelity to the cross-source
Why objectivity (74): Like Article 0, this article employs emotionally charged language and frames the situation as a clear case of mistreatment. The use of phrases like 'barbaric practice' and descriptions of the staff being 'distressed' and 'crying' suggest a biased perspective rather than a purely objective report. Ho
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.