Solitary Confinement History

History

The idea of solitary confinement as a method of deterrence did not gain popularity until the 19th century, practices with its characteristics are found throughout history. However, it was not until the mid-nineteenth century that history shows solitary confinement used as a tool of manipulation to get information from prisoners of war (POW). This was accomplished by sensory deprivation, where an individual’s unmet needs were used against them until the desired information was acquired.

After the effects of sensory deprivation among POWs were brought to the attention of both media and researchers, there began a large controversy regarding methods of the correctional system and their aftereffects. For example, confessions

from prisoners in Afghanistan who went through isolation for “long periods of time” were questioned for validity after it was proposed that prolonged isolation induces damage on the psyche (Smith, 2006, 442). However, as society’s attention was swept elsewhere, research on solitary confinement fell through the cracks of the criminal justice system.
During the 1960s and 1970s, the majority of the public supported rehabilitative efforts for incarcerated individuals. Programs aimed at education, substance abuse, and counseling were put into effect in hopes of reducing the amount of people relapsing back into criminal behavior. However, support soon decreased as research pointed out the programs was ineffective in practice. As a result, media attention focused on politicians sworn to be ‘tough on crime,’ and thus, the crackdown on inmates had begun. It was this new outlook on corrections that allowed research on solitary confinement to resurface beginning with the Marion Penitentiary incident.
Marion Penitentiary is located in Illinois and has long been an environment that breeds violence and destruction. The facility-followed suit with society’s wish to be tough on crime and, in 1979, became the “first level 6 ‘super-maximum security’ prison in the United States” (Smith, 2006, 443). Inmates with long histories of violence and severe crimes were transferred to Marion and held there as a big group, it was believed isolating all of the severe offenders in one location would decrease violence in other facilities. This was shown to be false in October 1983, when two prison guards were killed in separate locations on the same day. Following the incident, Marion locked down their facility temporarily to gain control of their inmate population. Using solitary confinement as a tool to control violent inmates, very quickly turned to a system-wide normality when the lockdown was never lifted. In fact, thirty-five states have adopted super-maximum facilities specializing in solitary confinement since 1997 (Smith, 2006, 443).
Environment
Conditions in these facilities are cold and miserable.

Inmates are held between 21 - 23 hours a day in their cells, where they have little space to themselves. Most cells hold a bed and a sink on occasion a toilet or desk bolted to the floor. Doors may be made out of a single sheet of metal with a slot to facilitate communication between inmates and staff or a heavily barred door with a small window set high in the frame (Smith, 2006, 443). Offenders are only taken out of their cells to use the restroom, shower, exercise yard, or go to the visitation center. The intervals of time between these periods of freedom differ from facility to facility. For example, inmates at one facility in solitary confinement may only be allowed to shower three times a week, while others housed in a different facility may be able to shower up to five times. When being transported to locations, inmates are placed in heavy restraints, usually at the hands and feet, which connect to a chain around their stomach. They are also escorted by several correctional officers at once (Smith, 2006, 443; Haney, 2003,

143).
Social interaction for inmates in solitary confinement is extremely limited.

Most interact with correctional officers only at mealtimes or if they are being escorted to different locations. In addition, visitation guidelines are extremely strict, if allowed at all. The prison may turn away visitors for no specific reason and visitation privileges may be withheld from inmates for even minor infractions. Despite the existence of mental health issues in offenders especially those in confinement, it is rare to see a psychiatrist or mental health staff in that area of the facility. In part, this is made possible by the increase of technology in correctional facilities. For example, officers may interact with inmates via an intercom system instead of having to respond physically to the cell. Tours of cellblocks are also more infrequent as cameras are found everywhere throughout the facility, aimed to lower rates of violent encounters between inmates and staff. For mental health staff, consultations and check-ins can be made through teleconferencing. Inmate’s privileged enough to have face-to-face interactions with psychiatrists do so in specialized cells with heavy mesh separating them or in full restraints (Smith, 2006,

443).
Solitary research
Criticisms of solitary confinement are centered around physical conditions. This is in part due to the difficulties gathering research in correctional facilities presents. Correctional officers may not allow certain procedures for gathering data, as it has the potential to compromise the safety of the researches, correctional staff, and inmates themselves. Inmates may not participate in certain studies (especially psychological) because they have a reputation to uphold within the population. If enough participants are garnered and the facility allows information to be gathered, privacy concerns for the inmates presents additional concern as some of the subject matter may be inappropriate for other inmates or staff to overhear (Haney, 2003, 143). Thus, the majority of research on solitary confinement focuses on physical and environmental shortcomings because they are easier to conduct and validate.
Mental Effects
The elimination of all meaningful psychological and social contact for inmates in solitary confinement directly attributes to the negative effects found in almost all studies on the matter. Speaking of prison populations in general terms, Anderson (2004) found psychiatric morbidity is present in 46 - 88 percent of prisoners in North America (Smith, 2006, 452). His conclusion, based on a compilation of research, echoed what many before him have stated: the practice of solitary confinement and other similar methods of punishment do little more than exacerbate mental illness in prisoners with preexisting conditions or create psychosis in ones previously untroubled.
Inmates that experience stints in solitary confinement often experience higher levels of depression, anxiety, withdrawal, anger, aggression and other similar feelings than the general population. This is also true of inmates in administrative detention. They are more likely to show these symptoms both through self-report measures and direct observation by researchers. In fact, self-report studies are done most often because they allow the inmate to freely express their experiences with solitary confinement without violating their privacy. Most commonly, inmates suffer from insomnia and other sleep-related symptoms. This is not surprising, as many psychological disorders list insomnia as a common symptom (Haney, 2003, 133; Taylor, 2000, 53). It is also hard to sleep in correctional facilities in general, as staff and security measures distract the inmates.
A recent study, conducted at the Pelican Bay Prison, shows promising results for further research by focusing on psychological effects. Haney (2003) interviewed 100 inmates housed in the facility’s Security Housing Unit using a random sample. In this regard, the research design was truly experimental and was free of some design flaws that earlier studies showed. Interviews consisted of indicators of psychological trauma and psychopathological effects (Haney, 2003, 132).
In addition to the symptoms listed by Smith (2006), this study observed over half of the participants displayed all indicators, including: nightmares, headaches, feelings of being on the verge of emotional breakdowns, intrusive thoughts, suicidal ideation, and self-mutilative tendencies (Haney, 2003, 133). Critics of research voicing the dangers of solitary confinement have focused on the prevalence of mental illness in correctional facilities period and the effectiveness of isolation as a deterrent for inappropriate behaviors. Although some symptoms were experienced by the general prison population, a number - including suicidal ideation - were exclusive to the solitary confined population (Coid, 2003, 335). This leads to the conclusion that prolonged isolation can not only exacerbate certain symptoms of mental illness in individuals, but create new symptoms. The creation of new symptoms creates a perilous environment for inmates in solitary, as they are far less likely to receive the appropriate resources - in part because mental health resources are lacking in prisons, but mostly because these new symptoms are experienced by a comparatively small percentage of total inmates.
In regards to the use of solitary confinement as an effective tool for deterrence, the public has been misinformed. In theory, taking the problem offender out of general population into temporary isolation should remedy the issue at hand. However, studies speculate that solitary creates more problems than it solves. Often, inmates show distrust towards correctional staff during and after stays in such units because they have difficulty relating to other people after periods of minimum social contact. After they are integrated into general population - if such is possible - violent encounters between inmates are more common due to the same lack of trust. Additionally, certain symptoms of mental illness left untreated may cause the inmate to act out in ways disruptive to the general population while still incarcerated (Coid, 2003, 321).
The lack of effectiveness as a deterrent can be analyzed through the concept of Prison Ecology. Toch, a social psychologist, studied the needs expressed by prisoners and evaluated how well they were met. These included emotional support, feedback, and safety (Rhodes, 2005, 1693). By large, inmates across the board reported that all needs were significantly unmet. Displays of inappropriate behavior by inmates may be attributed to the belief that acting out will get the needs met. This is especially true in solitary, where only the basic needs for survival - food, water, and shelter - are given. With inmates that are confined and mentally ill, this potentially creates a pattern for post-release behavior.
The first part of this cycle is the inmates’ limited abilities while in solitary confinement. Unlike prisoners in general population, these individuals have even stricter access to participate in rehabilitative programs, such as education, work, and substance abuse treatment. Combined with the difficulties in receiving mental health treatment, the majority of time in solitary is spent with little else to do than twiddle your thumbs. Worse, it is common practice for inmates to be released into society directly from solitary confinement - where they may have been held for upwards of a decade (Taylor, 2000, 54; Coid, 2003, 315). Without giving these inmates an opportunity to build life skills and have socialization, the system sets them up for failure almost instantaneously - as the difficulties for offenders re-entering society are not a secret. These difficulties appear in housing, education, and employment - virtually all sectors of living.