prisoners. In fact, the rate of segregations in that particular prison was second only to that in the largest remand prison in the country, where men were segregated as many as 405 times per 100 prisoners. A total of 139 segregation stays lasted longer than 15 days. Mäori women were disproportionately represented in longer segregations, making up 59% of these stays; Pacific women 4.2% of longer segregations, and women of European descent 28.6%. The gross overrepresentation of Mäori women was even more pronounced in the most controlled segregation areas, Management units, where Mäori made for 78% of all stays. In Separates units (used for punishment) Mäori women made for 65% of all stays, reducing to 45% in the more treatment orientated ISU. In one prison, all bar one of the New Zealanders of European descent who were segregated for longer than 15 days were housed in the ISU unit. These discrepancies need to be explored as a matter of urgency, to determine whether decision making processes may be influenced by unconscious bias or other factors relating to gender and ethnicity. As in 2016/17, reasons for the use of segregation were at times concerning, and it was not always clear from the paperwork why it was decided that segregation was the appropriate response. For example, one prisoner on remand who selfharmed told staff that they wanted to ‘give themselves pain so that they can have a good sleep’ and that they ‘had no thoughts of killing themselves, but they haven’t spoken to their family in a while and haven’t received any mail, and it was too hard for them so they self -harmed’. The prisoner was nonetheless segregated in the prison’s ISU. History does not relate whether this person received a telephone call or other means to communicate with their family, which would have potentially eased their distress, making the ISU placement unnecessary. Other examples included victims of bullying and violence in general population wings being rehoused in an ISU, while the perpetrators remained in the general population; people who were mentally very unwell and waiting for a hospital bed (in one case, for 4 months), and; a prisoner who was placed in an ISU because they were ‘overweight, with poor hygiene, and couldn’t fit anywhere else [in the prison]’ (ISU staff). There was also a large divergence between prisons in how, why and when segregated housing was used, and how long it was used for. Reasons for placement in Management Units varied from threats and breaking a window, to serious assaults and causing life changing injuries. ISUs / At Risk units were similarly used for anything from people who were extremely unwell to people who didn’t want to mingle with others, to people detoxing. 18