Backbenchers Spotlight EDS Care Gaps, Question Mandatory Prison Body Armour

High-Level Summary

Westminster Hall held two Backbench Business debates. The first examined outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (EDS) and craniocervical instability (CCI), highlighting long diagnostic delays, gaps in NHS pathways and imaging access, and severe personal effects; the Minister outlined existing programmes and committed to explore guidance, research and pathway consistency, with potential development if justified. The second considered the potential merits of mandatory body armour for prison officers amid rising assaults; speakers called for wider protection, while the Minister emphasised officer safety but said a universal mandate is operationally complex, noting roll‑outs in high‑risk settings alongside other safety measures. Both motions were agreed without a division that the House had considered the subjects.

Detailed Summary

Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes and Craniocervical Instability (Westminster Hall)

Josh Newbury moved the motion: “That this House has considered outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and craniocervical instability.”. He relayed patient experiences, including his constituent Connor, who said “his head is quite literally falling off his body” and that he felt “gaslit” by the system. Newbury stated there is “no established or commissioned NHS service for investigation, multidisciplinary discussion or surgery for CCI in patients with hypermobile EDS” and that “there is no way for anybody to get an upright MRI scan in the UK”. He sought immediate harm‑reduction steps and a longer‑term NHS diagnostic and care pathway. Members echoed barriers: Patricia Ferguson cited a report indicating waits of up to 20 years in Scotland; Jayne Kirkham described misdiagnosis and disjointed care, quoting a constituent who felt viewed as “a hypochondriac or overanxious”; Jim Shannon pointed to limited data and 5‑10 year diagnostic times; and Lee Anderson read Hannah’s account of mobility and equipment delays: “I am still waiting to be seen by wheelchair services and have been on the waiting list for 18 months”. Liz Twist referenced emerging evidence that “as many as one in 250 people” may have a relevant diagnosis and that some wait “between 10 and 23 years” for diagnosis.

Responding, the Minister, Sharon Hodgson, said NHS England is strengthening clinically led pathways for hypermobility-related disorders with “non-surgical management, co-ordinated physiotherapy, and pain management” and highlighted the GIRFT and RightCare programmes to reduce variation. She committed to ask NICE’s prioritisation board to consider the Welsh primary care pathway when updating guidance: “I commit to asking the NICE prioritisation board… if it will look at the Wales pathways”. On CCI, she said there is currently “no separate national diagnostic or treatment pathway for CCI because it is not recognised as a distinct NHS diagnosis” but the Department is working to “improve pathway consistency”, with the potential to create a pathway “if… deemed necessary”. She agreed to consider international best practice and NIHR-supported research, and to look into aftercare for those returning from surgery abroad. She linked next steps to the 10‑year health plan’s integrated, multidisciplinary care: it “will help to join up those pathways for the first time”. The motion that the House had considered the topic was agreed to.

Prison Officers: Mandatory Body Armour (Westminster Hall)

Sir Julian Lewis opened a debate on the potential merits of making protective body armour mandatory for prison officers, citing Claire Lewis’s petition following her assault, which left her with “life-changing physical injuries and deep psychological toll…to this day”. He argued that risk is universal across the estate: “Any prison officer working on any wing of any prison can be attacked”. Members highlighted inspectorate findings of serious violence—at HMP Woodhill, “The prison was not safe” with the highest rate of serious assaults on staff, and at Swaleside, a prison “in disarray” with “some of the highest” levels of violence and drug‑related assaults. Broader concerns included staffing, experience loss and culture; the Prison Reform Trust was cited that drivers of violence must be addressed through “improved safety, decency, and respect”. Industrial relations issues were raised, including a Government barrister’s description of violence as “business as usual in a prison” during litigation, and international criticism of the blanket strike ban.

The Minister, Jake Richards, paid tribute to officers and said safety is paramount, but a universal mandate is operationally complex: “All our prison officers… deserve protection. Whether that means we should roll out mandatory body armour is a more complex question”. He outlined practical considerations—storage, fitting and compatibility with radios, cameras, batons and PAVA—and cautioned that armour “is not an instant silver bullet”. He confirmed that protective body armour is mandated in close supervision and separation centres and high‑security segregation, with roll‑out in high‑risk areas, alongside over “13,000” body‑worn cameras and training and deployment of up to “500” tasers in the long‑term high‑security estate. He agreed to meet Claire and to review what safety and retention data can be published. The House resolved, without a division, that it had considered the matter.