DOCSLIB.ORG

A Guide to Preparing for and Responding to Prison Emergencies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Guide to Preparing for and Responding to Prison Emergencies U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Corrections A Guide to Preparing for and Responding to Prison Emergencies Self-Audit Checklists • National Survey Results • Resource Materials • Case Studies U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Corrections 320 First Street, NW Washington, DC 20534 Morris L. Thigpen Director Larry Solomon Deputy Director George M. Keiser Chief, Community Corrections/Prisons Division Randy Corcoran Project Manager National Institute of Corrections World Wide Web Site http://www.nicic.org A Guide to Preparing for and Responding to Prison Emergencies Self-Audit Checklists • National Survey Results • Resource Materials • Case Studies Jeffrey A. Schwartz, Ph.D. Cynthia Barry, Ph.D. LETRA, Inc. Campbell, California June 2005 NIC Accession Number 020293 This document was funded by cooperative agreement number 02P11 from the National Institute of Corrections, U.S Department of Justice. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not neces- sarily represent the official opinion or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Cover photos: Left photo courtesy of the Office of Law Enforcement Technology Commercialization, Wheeling, West Virginia. Middle photo ©Photodisc Illustration/ Getty Images. Right photo ©Corbis. Contents Foreword . .v Preface . .vii Acknowledgments . .ix Section 1: Introduction . .1 Background . .3 Development of This Guide . .9 Section 2: Conducting an Audit . .15 Purpose and Philosophy . .17 Preliminary Considerations . .21 How To Use the Self-Audit Checklists . .25 Section 3: Self-Audit Checklists . .37–180 Emergency Preparedness Self-Audit Checklist . .EP-1 Natural Disaster/HAZMAT/Fire Self-Audit Checklist . .ND-1 Counterterrorism Self-Audit Checklist . .CT-1 Section 4: Report on the National Survey of Emergency Readiness in Prisons . .181 Section 5: Resource Materials . .201 Leadership Issues During Crises . .205 Prevention of Prison Emergencies . .215 Emergency Teams . .227 Prisons and Counterterrorism . .241 iii Contents (continued) Section 6: Case Studies . .255 Fire in a New Institution: Taney County, Missouri . .257 Lucasville Prison Riot: Ohio Department of Corrections . 261 Helicopter Intrusion/Escape: Colorado Department of Corrections . 271 Riot at Max: Montana State Prison . .277 The 1993 Midwest Floods: Missouri Loses Renz Correctional Center . 289 The Morey Unit Hostage Incident: Arizona Department of Corrections . .293 Hurricane Andrew: Florida Department of Corrections . 319 iv Foreword In 1996, the National Institute of Corrections initiatives designed to improve their emergency (NIC) published its monograph Critical Analysis readiness at both the departmental and institu- of Emergency Preparedness: Self Audit tional levels. As a result, substantially more cor- Materials. In introducing that monograph, I rectional agencies are well prepared today for wrote: the possibility of a major crisis situation, and fewer remain complacent and/or unprepared. Emergency preparedness is a crucially important topic for every state depart- Obviously, the world around us has changed dra- ment of corrections and for every cor- matically in recent years. The bombing of the rectional institution. Large-scale inmate federal building in Oklahoma City, the events violence or a natural disaster can of September 11, 2001, the subsequent anthrax threaten the lives of both the institution- incidents, and, as this is written, the train bomb- al staff and inmates. In hours, a major ings in Madrid, Spain, and the killing of hun- emergency can cost a state tens of mil- dreds of school children in Russia serve notice lions of dollars and result in many years on American corrections about a whole new of litigation. The negative publicity sur- range of risks that cannot be ignored. Bomb rounding a major institutional crisis can threats or even the possibility of an outside also be overwhelming and almost assault designed to free an inmate are not new interminable. considerations for prisons or jails. However, the threat of concerted terrorist activity with sophis- Emergency preparedness is often not ticated planning, coordination, and even muni- afforded the priority that it needs and tions represents a challenge that is categorically deserves. In some cases, this may be due different from our traditional concerns about sit- to complacency. In other cases, it hap- uations involving inmate violence or natural dis- pens because establishing a comprehen- asters. It is NIC’s hope that this new guide will sive system of emergency preparation help state and local correctional agencies contin- and emergency response is not easy. It ue to improve their preparedness for traditional requires budget, time, equipment, inter- emergencies and will also provide a starting agency coordination, and long-term point for considering the emerging realities of management attention. terrorist threats. Nearly a decade later, those comments still ring This guide builds on the self-audit instruments true. However, the field of corrections has made that were at the heart of the 1996 monograph. a great deal of progress regarding emergency Those instruments, together with a related series preparedness. A number of state departments of of NIC-sponsored seminars, were designed to corrections have committed to comprehensive v help state departments of corrections evaluate We hope that this new guide will be even more their readiness, at both the institutional and useful. It is much more than a simple update of departmental levels, to handle major crisis situa- the earlier monograph. The self-audit materials tions. The 1996 monograph proved to be have been substantially modified, refined, and extremely popular and useful, and NIC contin- expanded, and the rest of the guide is essentially ues to receive requests for it to this day. One new in scope and character. measure of its success is that department- Morris L. Thigpen conducted self-audits of emergency readiness Director have largely replaced what had been a growing National Institute of Corrections trend of NIC-funded assessments conducted by outside experts. vi Preface It is instructive to review the introduction to the few have changed quite dramatically—as prison emergency preparedness self-audit mate- reflected in the content of this guide. One sub- rials published in 1996 as an NIC monograph. stantial change is the much broader appreciation The monograph noted a number of positive today of the need to prepare for crises that arise changes that had occurred in the previous 20 to not from inmate violence but from incidents 30 years with regard to prison emergencies, and such as fires, floods, and hurricanes. Thus, this it also underscored several problems and chal- guide includes a separate checklist for assessing lenges that remained widespread. The 1996 prison readiness to deal with natural disasters. monograph reviewed the trend toward serious emergency preparedness at most state prisons With regard to dramatic change, terrorism has and drew contrasts with earlier times when com- taken front and center stage. When the 1996 prehensive emergency planning was the excep- monograph was published, the events of tion rather than the rule. It singled out the September 11, 2001, were, for most people and emphasis on prevention of crises and emergen- most agencies, simply unimaginable. It is clear cies as another major improvement. On the that since September 11, some things will never other hand, the 1996 monograph was candid be the same. Considerations of terrorism now about the number of institutions and depart- seem to be a part of our daily lives. Therefore, ments in which emergency preparedness was not this guide includes a separate checklist for taken seriously or existed only on paper, not in assessing counterterrorism efforts and planning reality. The prevailing belief in such places was in prisons—the first self-audit checklist of its “it can’t happen here.” The monograph also kind, but likely not the last. noted a more specific problem: the tendency of In today’s world, the forces that define prison departments and institutions to base their emer- emergencies continue to change, sometimes gency planning almost solely on riot and very rapidly. Thus, this guide clearly cannot be hostage situations. the final word on prison emergency prepared- More than 8 years have passed since that mono- ness. The purpose of the materials in this guide graph was published—not a long time in the is to help move the field of corrections forward evolution of a discipline like corrections. in understanding the demands of prison emer- Predictably, many of the observations in the gency and crisis situations and in understanding 1996 monograph still hold true today. However, current best practices with regard to emergency some things have changed substantially, and a plans, policies, and practices. vii The goals of this guide, then, are simple but averted entirely and others may be mitigated. If important. It is hoped that the guide will result this guide helps prevent violence in just a few in improved prevention efforts, planning, and locations and if it minimizes injuries, deaths, or response, so that some emergencies may be escapes during just a few prison crises, then it will have fully satisfied its objectives. Jeffrey A. Schwartz, Ph.D. Cynthia Barry, Ph.D. LETRA, Inc. Campbell, California viii Acknowledgments This guide is the result of a cooperative agree- of administrative tasks for the Institute. Randy ment funded by NIC. The
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 83550NCJRS.Pdf
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. .-. --.-..--------- -- " , ~, -' . ~ 0'-;,0 , ..... ' . , '..;:- .' : " --r ,. .. ' . ;,.,..'. .,t' " ., ~ /1 '"fY) " --~~ '/ ' , ~ ., , r- . .;~ I ... ~",,--,.-.-'---' -...,...,----- '..,......., --"" -~- . ,-, ,:' ); "~ ,,,";~r .•. t:-- ' ":","-,,f,(., .), " ,~ /': ~~.,y'~" ~............ ----------------~.-~------------------------------------~----------~----------~ ----~-------------------- - -s-- !1 ) ~) ~ i ,';' ~ : 'THE CORRECTIOnS PROGRAr1 A "Corrections Program" within the Office of Vocational and Adult Education has been established by the Department of Education. The National Institute of Corrections has provided senior level staffing through a cooperative grant as their commitment to this new corrections initiative. A FOR CORRECTIONAL The overall goal of this joint effort is to increase the quality and quantity of ~ECTORY education and training opportunities for adult and juvenile offenders. In order to EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS reach this goal, the Corrections Program wlll.;nitiate a variety of liaison, technical assistance and clearinghouse activities, includi'ng: 1. Coordinate existing ED funding programs which could benefit corrections. 2. Coordinate ED programs with those of other federal agencies such as the Departments of Labor, Justice, Health and Human Services, Housing and U.S. Department of Justice Urban Development, Veterans' Administratio~, and the Military Services. National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Citizens Kidnapped by the Islamic State John W
    CRS Insights U.S. Citizens Kidnapped by the Islamic State John W. Rollins, Specialist in Terrorism and National Security ([email protected], 7-5529) Liana Rosen, Specialist in International Crime and Narcotics ([email protected], 7-6177) February 13, 2015 (IN10167) Overview On February 10, 2015, President Barack Obama acknowledged that U.S. citizen Kayla Mueller was killed while held in captivity by the terrorist group known as the Islamic State (IS). This was the fourth death of an American taken hostage by the Islamic State: Abdul-Rahman Kassig (previously Peter Kassig), James Foley, and Steven Sotloff were also killed. The death of Mueller and the graphic videos depicting the deaths of the other three Americans have generated debate about the U.S. government's role and capabilities for freeing hostages. In light of these deaths, some policymakers have called for a reevaluation of U.S. policy on international kidnapping responses. Questions include whether it is effective and properly coordinated and implemented, should be abandoned or modified to allow for exceptions and flexibility, or could benefit from enhancements to improve global adherence. Scope The killing of U.S. citizens by the Islamic State may be driven by a variety of underlying motives. Reports describe the group as inclined toward graphic and public forms of violence for purposes of intimidation and recruitment. It is unclear whether the Islamic State would have released its Americans hostages in exchange for ransom payments or other concessions. Foley's family, for example, disclosed that the Islamic State demanded a ransom of 100 million euros ($132 million).
    [Show full text]
  • Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2015 Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice Allegra M. McLeod Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1490 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2625217 62 UCLA L. Rev. 1156-1239 (2015) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Social Control, Law, Crime, and Deviance Commons Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice Allegra M. McLeod EVIEW R ABSTRACT This Article introduces to legal scholarship the first sustained discussion of prison LA LAW LA LAW C abolition and what I will call a “prison abolitionist ethic.” Prisons and punitive policing U produce tremendous brutality, violence, racial stratification, ideological rigidity, despair, and waste. Meanwhile, incarceration and prison-backed policing neither redress nor repair the very sorts of harms they are supposed to address—interpersonal violence, addiction, mental illness, and sexual abuse, among others. Yet despite persistent and increasing recognition of the deep problems that attend U.S. incarceration and prison- backed policing, criminal law scholarship has largely failed to consider how the goals of criminal law—principally deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retributive justice—might be pursued by means entirely apart from criminal law enforcement. Abandoning prison-backed punishment and punitive policing remains generally unfathomable. This Article argues that the general reluctance to engage seriously an abolitionist framework represents a failure of moral, legal, and political imagination.
    [Show full text]
  • Prisoner Testimonies of Torture in United States Prisons and Jails
    Survivors Speak Prisoner Testimonies of Torture in United States Prisons and Jails A Shadow Report Submitted for the November 2014 Review of the United States by the Committee Against Torture I. Reporting organization The American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) is a Quaker faith based organization that promotes lasting peace with justice, as a practical expression of faith in action. AFSC’s interest in prison reform is strongly influenced by Quaker (Religious Society of Friends) activism addressing prison conditions as informed by the imprisonment of Friends for their beliefs and actions in the 17th and 18th centuries. For over three decades AFSC has spoken out on behalf of prisoners, whose voices are all too frequently silenced. We have received thousands of calls and letters of testimony of an increasingly disturbing nature from prisoners and their families about conditions in prison that fail to honor the Light in each of us. Drawing on continuing spiritual insights and working with people of many backgrounds, we nurture the seeds of change and respect for human life that transform social relations and systems. AFSC works to end mass incarceration, improve conditions for people who are in prison, stop prison privatization, and promote a reconciliation and healing approach to criminal justice issues. Contact Person: Lia Lindsey, Esq. 1822 R St NW; Washington, DC 20009; USA Email: [email protected] +1-202-483-3341 x108 Website: www.afsc.org Acknowledgements This report would not have been possible but for the courageous individuals held in U.S. prisons and jails who rise above the specter of reprisal for sharing testimonies of the abuses they endure.
    [Show full text]
  • Slavery by Another Name History Background
    Slavery by Another Name History Background By Nancy O’Brien Wagner, Bluestem Heritage Group Introduction For more than seventy-five years after the Emancipation Proclamation and the end of the Civil War, thousands of blacks were systematically forced to work against their will. While the methods of forced labor took on many forms over those eight decades — peonage, sharecropping, convict leasing, and chain gangs — the end result was a system that deprived thousands of citizens of their happiness, health, and liberty, and sometimes even their lives. Though forced labor occurred across the nation, its greatest concentration was in the South, and its victims were disproportionately black and poor. Ostensibly developed in response to penal, economic, or labor problems, forced labor was tightly bound to political, cultural, and social systems of racial oppression. Setting the Stage: The South after the Civil War After the Civil War, the South’s economy, infrastructure, politics, and society were left completely destroyed. Years of warfare had crippled the South’s economy, and the abolishment of slavery completely destroyed what was left. The South’s currency was worthless and its financial system was in ruins. For employers, workers, and merchants, this created many complex problems. With the abolishment of slavery, much of Southern planters’ wealth had disappeared. Accustomed to the unpaid labor of slaves, they were now faced with the need to pay their workers — but there was little cash available. In this environment, intricate systems of forced labor, which guaranteed cheap labor and ensured white control of that labor, flourished. For a brief period after the conclusion of fighting in the spring of 1865, Southern whites maintained control of the political system.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Montana Prison a Self-Guided Tour Of
    A SELF-GUIDED TOUR OF OLD MONTANA PRISON 2 WELCOME Bands of outlaws and Vigilantes roamed early Montana Territory leaving a path of destruction and death. In an attempt to tame the Wild West, a prison was established in Deer Lodge in 1871. Constructed primarily with convict labor, Old Montana Prison was an active prison until 1979, when it was moved to a new site four miles west of town. The Old Montana Prison Is preserved and presented to you by Powell County Museum and Arts Foundation and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. • This tour will take 45 to 60 minutes to complete. • This site is over 130 years old and some of the grounds are uneven, so please watch your step. • Please stay on the tour route. • Do not mark or remove any property under penalty of law. You are standing next to the entrance just inside the prison yard. Turn right and follow the sidewalk along the Wall. Numbered markers will indicate the attraction that is described in this booklet. 3 1896 Cell House 1. Location of 1896 Cell House An enormous red brick cell house with rounded towers loomed over the city of Deer Lodge until 1959 when it was damaged by an earthquake and torn down. In 1960, this slab was poured as a foundation for a gymnasium and classroom buildings. Both buildings were moved to the new prison. The 1896 Cell House was divided into two sections by a two-foot thick wall, which ran from the roof to the floor.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hostage Through the Ages
    Volume 87 Number 857 March 2005 A haunting figure: The hostage through the ages Irène Herrmann and Daniel Palmieri* Dr Irène Herrmann is Lecturer at the University of Geneva; she is a specialist in Swiss and in Russian history. Daniel Palmieri is Historical Research Officer at the International Committee of the Red Cross; his work deals with ICRC history and history of conflicts. Abstract: Despite the recurrence of hostage-taking through the ages, the subject of hostages themselves has thus far received little analysis. Classically, there are two distinct types of hostages: voluntary hostages, as was common practice during the Ancien Régime of pre-Revolution France, when high-ranking individuals handed themselves over to benevolent jailers as guarantors for the proper execution of treaties; and involuntary hostages, whose seizure is a typical procedure in all-out war where individuals are held indiscriminately and without consideration, like living pawns, to gain a decisive military upper hand. Today the status of “hostage” is a combination of both categories taken to extremes. Though chosen for pecuniary, symbolic or political reasons, hostages are generally mistreated. They are in fact both the reflection and the favoured instrument of a major moral dichotomy: that of the increasing globalization of European and American principles and the resultant opposition to it — an opposition that plays precisely on the western adherence to human and democratic values. In the eyes of his countrymen, the hostage thus becomes the very personification of the innocent victim, a troubling and haunting image. : : : : : : : In the annals of the victims of war, hostages occupy a special place.
    [Show full text]
  • Hostage-Taking
    Chapter II Hostage-Taking The development of the international humanitarian law rules that prohibit hostage-taking followed a similar trajectory to those relating to collective pun- ishment recounted in the previous chapter, although the transition from per- mitted practice to a prohibited one was much more abrupt. The taking of hostages had been embraced by belligerents as a means of warfare from ancient times right up to the Second World War, after which it was transformed almost overnight into one of the most egregious violations of international humani- tarian law, a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Previously, hostages were exchanged pursuant to interbelligerent agreements and taken from com- munities as a means of ensuring compliance with demands and for the purpose of deterring hostile acts. Those held were frequently executed in the event of disobedience, killed in response to the acts of others. As such, the taking and particularly the killing of hostages was based on a notion of collective respon- sibility, whereby those held were liable to death, injury, or continued detention for the acts or omissions of the target group or its members.1 The use of hostages was common during the wars of Ancient Greece and Rome. These were usually exchanged or taken to ensure the maintenance of truces and other agreements, and although an injured State often “wreaked a terrible vengeance on the foreign hostages,” they were, for the most part, treated with courtesy and consideration.2 Early international law writers, such as Grotius and de Vattel, supported the taking of hostages, but opposed their killing, if the hostages themselves were innocent of any crime.3 But killed they were, through- 1 Unless otherwise stated, hostage-taking is used in this chapter to mean both the taking and the killing or ill treatment of hostages.
    [Show full text]
  • (UNODC), Handbook for Prison Leaders: a Basic Training Tool
    Handbook for prison leaders A basic training tool and curriculum for prison managers based on international standards and norms CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES Cover images: Left and right: ©Photodisc.com, Centre: ©iStockphoto.com/theprint UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Vienna Handbook for prison leaders A basic training tool and curriculum for prison managers based on international standards and norms CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES UNITED NATIONS New York, 2010 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. E.10.IV.4 ISBN 978-92-1-130292-9 © United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, March 2010 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. This publication has not been formally edited. Publishing production: UNOV/DM/CMS/EPLS/Electronic Publishing Unit. ii Acknowledgements This Handbook for prison leaders was prepared for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) by Vivienne Chin, Associate, International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Vancouver, Canada, with the assistance of Robert E. Brown, Yvon Dandurand and Eric McAskill. The Handbook was reviewed by a group of international experts. UNODC wishes to acknowledge the valuable contribution of experts who reviewed this tool and helped finalize it: Elias Carranza, Aggrey Nyapola, Michael Langelaar, and Richard Kuuire. UNODC also wishes to acknowledge the support provided by the Government of Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of Prison Privatization in Arizona
    Prison Privatization in Arizona A briefing paper prepared by the American Friends Service Committee, Arizona Area Program American Friends Service Committee, Arizona Area 103 N. Park Ave., Ste. 111 Tucson, AZ 85719 (520)623-9141 (520)623-5901 fax [email protected] October 2010 Introduction The American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) is a Quaker organization that works for peace and justice worldwide. Our work is based on a commitment to nonviolence and the belief that all people have value and deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. The AFSC‟s programs promote social justice by focusing on a diverse set of social concerns. The organization‟s criminal justice work has always focused on the need for an effective and humane criminal justice system that emphasizes rehabilitation over punishment. Here in Arizona, our criminal justice program advocates for a reduction in the state‟s prison population through rational sentencing reform and a moratorium on new prison construction. A key focus of that effort is our work to educate the public on the risks inherent in prison privatization through for-profit prison corporations. This document is an attempt to paint a picture of the current efforts at privatization of prisons in the state of Arizona and raise questions about the potential pitfalls of this practice. Arizona Overview Arizona‟s experiment with for-profit incarceration began in the early 90‟s when the state faced the first of many prison overcrowding crises. Arizona‟s first privately operated prison was the Marana Community Correctional Treatment Facility, a minimum-security prison for people with substance abuse issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Supermax Isolation
    one Supermax Isolation Solitary confinement has been part of American correctional practice since the birth of the nation. Th e idea of isolating prisoners for their own good was supported in the fi nal years of the eighteenth century by such prominent fi gures as Benjamin Franklin and his friend Benjamin Rush, the pioneering psychiatrist. During that era, many Quakers viewed crime as a moral lapse and jail as a place where prisoners would be left by themselves in a cell and would be expected to search their souls about their errant ways and be “penitent” (thus the origin of the word penitentiary). But over the years, prison funding could not keep pace with a growing prison population, so this kind of solitary confi nement for the general population of prisoners was abandoned as too expensive to construct for or to maintain. Where solitary was retained, its original rehabilitative rationale was stripped away; it was now openly used merely as a dreaded punishment and deterrent within the prison and as a convenient means of separating out, for months, years, even decades, individuals whose inclusion in the general prison population might pose problems for prison management. the long history of solitary confinement in the united states Th e fi rst correctional facility in the nation to consign prisoners to single cells was the Walnut Street Jail in Philadelphia. It was originally built in 1773 to handle the overfl ow of prisoners from the nearby, massively overcrowded High Street Jail. Th ere were simply too many debtors, paupers, prostitutes, thieves, and ex- slaves going to jail for the jailers to fi nd the space to house them.
    [Show full text]
  • Care and Custody in a Pennsylvania Prison
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2016 Wards Of The State: Care And Custody In A Pennsylvania Prison Nicholas Iacobelli University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Public Health Education and Promotion Commons, and the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Iacobelli, Nicholas, "Wards Of The State: Care And Custody In A Pennsylvania Prison" (2016). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2350. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2350 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2350 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Wards Of The State: Care And Custody In A Pennsylvania Prison Abstract In this dissertation, I examine the challenges and contradictions as well as the expectations and aspirations involved in the provision of healthcare to inmates in a maximum-security prison in Pennsylvania. In 1976, the Supreme Court granted inmates a constitutional right to healthcare based on the notion that a failure to do so would constitute “cruel and unusual punishment.” Drawing on two years of ethnographic fieldwork from 2014-2016 in the prison’s medical unit with inmates, healthcare providers, and correctional staff, I demonstrate how the legal infrastructure built around this right to healthcare operates in practice and the myriad effects it has for those in state custody. Through traversing the scales of legal doctrine, privatized managed care, and collective historical memory, bringing these structural components to life in personal narratives and clinical interactions, I advance the notion that the physical space of the prison’s medical unit is a “ward of the state” – a space of care where the state itself is “made” through interactions among individuals who relay and enact the legal regulations on inmate healthcare.
    [Show full text]