Jon Silverman Home affairs analyst

No girls will be placed in prison alongside adult female prisoners, pledged the government more than three years ago. Why has this promise not been kept?

Girls still go to adult prisons

In 1999, the then Home Secretary, Jack Straw, said that girls under the age of 18 should no longer be held in prison. The following year, that commitment was enshrined in a prison service order.

Three years later, there are, at any one time, around 100 16 and 17-year-old girls sharing prison custody with adult women in England and Wales.

Legal treaties, to which Britain subscribes, make it plain that under-18s are children and should be treated differently from adults. So, how does the government justify breaching both its own and international obligations? An ongoing case at the High Court provides some illuminating answers.

In November 2001, a 15-year-old girl - referred to as DT for legal reasons - committed a burglary with her 19-year-old boyfriend. She was sentenced to three years detention and sent to a local authority secure children's home in West London.

Within 15 days of her arrival, the prison service was recommending that the girl be transferred to a prison on completion of her GSCEs at the age of 16. The court was shown a letter declaring that "it was a present priority to move all older young people out of secure units in order to free up placements for new younger offenders".

What kind of atmosphere is that for a 16-year-old to be in? Father of a girl held alongside adult prisoners

Given that the number of young people being incarcerated in England and Wales has rocketed in the last decade, it is easy to see where the remorseless pressure on places is coming from.

The prison service has defended DT's transfer on the grounds that she "did not display any aspect of vulnerability" and was being moved nearer her home. Her parents, backed by the Howard League for Penal Reform, are contesting both justifications.

But the real issue is whether the Home Secretary's 1999 commitment has been diluted to such an extent by the rise in numbers that a girl under 18 will serve her sentence in a secure children's home or unit only in exceptional circumstances.

So, what are the benefits of the secure homes? Scale, for one thing. Stamford House, where DT was held in west London, has just 24 inmates, eight per wing. Eastwood Park, the combined prison and young offender institution to which she was moved, has a maximum capacity of 260. But the differences go much deeper than that.

Is there proper separation?

During the 11 months that DT spent in Eastwood Park, there were three suicides. One, of an 18-year-old, took place on the girl's wing.

Then, there's the availability of drugs. "The majority of women in that place have been convicted of drugs offences, so what kind of atmosphere is that for a 16-year-old to be in?," asks DT's father.

The authorities maintain that any "mixing of female juveniles that occurs in such circumstances is sufficiently selective and that protection issues are properly addressed". This is something disputed by DT's family and the Howard League.

The Youth Justice Board says it is is committed to taking all 16-year-olds out of the prison system. It says that so few 17-year-olds will remain - four were in Eastwood Park this week - that keeping them totally apart from the other young offenders is impossible.

"It's not perfect, but it is the only way," says a Youth Justice Board spokeswoman.

DT's father says his daughter has experienced harrowing treatment. "She phoned home once, terribly distressed about being strip-searched. Frankly, there was only one reason why the prison service moved her from Stamford House. Because it was in its interest, not my daughter's."

The evidence seems to bear that out. Eastwood Park's performance has been so poor that on 24 July, it was given four months to produce a blueprint for improvement or face being contracted out to the private sector.

Unhappy with her GSCE grades, DT wanted to re-take them at Eastwood Park. But she couldn't because it was unable to provide her with the teaching support necessary. Given that the standard of education available to juveniles in custody has been criticised by the Chief Inspector of Prisons, this, too, should be a matter of concern to the government.