December 2015 METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES TO THE STUDY AND UNDERSTANDING OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT 45 Methodological Challenges to the Study and Understanding of Solitary Confinement

Michael P. Harrington Northern Michigan University

ON ANY GIVEN DAY as many as 80,000 points to an important need for an empirical order of the institution, or information that, inmates are in isolated confinement in state and examination of the more day-to-day use of if true, would threaten the safety and security federal prisons. This figure does not include isolation as a strategy for managing inmates. of the institution. Temporary Segregation those isolated in local jails and detention cen- One explanation for the absence of such can be used during the investigation of rule ters or juvenile facilities (Shames, Wilcox, & research may be the methodological chal- infractions or verification of information Subramanian, 2015). The frequency and length lenges inherent in attempting to examine the of potential threats to order by individual of the isolation experienced by inmates has use of isolation in prisons. This article defines inmates. Temporary Segregation generally been criticized by many (Lovett, 2013; Baker some of the methodological challenges that precedes the other forms of segregation and & Goode, 2015; Goode, 2015) and has been may contribute to the research void. By iden- is usually for a brief time (72 hours or less). the topic of special interest groups (Baker & tifying such challenges, researchers and prison Extensions often occur following administra- Goode, 2015). In the summer of 2013, inmates administrators may have a mutual under- tive review and approval. Such extensions in the California prison system embarked on standing of these challenges and collaborate are generally tied to pending classification a hunger strike in hopes of drawing attention in the future. Collaborative research outcomes decisions or due process hearings. Because to and potentially reforming the state’s use of may influence correctional policy and offer Temporary Segregation is not punitive in solitary confinement. At its peak, over 33,000 guidance to “best practices” and evidence- nature, limitations on inmate privileges should inmates throughout the California system were based inmate management strategies. be based on a “least restrictive” approach. The refusing meals (Lovett, 2013). Such action has Defining solitary confinement, on its restrictive nature of Temporary Segregation drawn national and international attention to face, appears rather basic. Adult correctional often excludes these inmates from participa- the use of solitary confinement as a strategy facilities rely primarily on three different tion in prison programs and work details. for prison management in the United States. types of solitary confinement. These types Despite the widespread use of isolation, empir- are commonly called temporary segregation, Disciplinary Segregation ical examinations about its use are limited. disciplinary segregation, and administrative Disciplinary Segregation is the punitive isola- Those studies that have examined the practice segregation. Each of these carries with it vary- tion of an inmate for the violation of prison have focused primarily on supermax units ing restrictions on inmate movement and rules. Disciplinary Segregation follows a due (Haney, 2003; Haney & Lynch, 1997; King, inmate privileges. Browne, Cambier, and Agah process hearing consistent with conditions 2005; Mears & Reisig, 2006; Mears & Watson, (2011) and Shalev (2008) describe the types prescribed in Wolff v. McDonnell (1974). 2006; Toch, 2001). of solitary confinement used by adult correc- Disciplinary Segregation is determinate in Despite this increased awareness and criti- tional facilities. I summarize them below. nature and does not require further admin- cism of the use of solitary confinement, little istrative review for release from Disciplinary research has been done examining the phe- Temporary Segregation Segregation to the general prison population. nomenon. What research has been conducted Temporary Segregation is the immediate iso- Disciplinary Segregation generally carries with has generally focused on the effects of extreme lation of an inmate from the general prison it a broad set of restrictions on inmate move- isolation on individuals (Haney, 2003; Haney, population. Most often the decision to do so is ment and privileges that are applied to all 2008; Haney & Lynch, 1997; King, 2005). made by supervisory personnel using limited inmates in that status regardless of the severity Despite this research there remains a void information. Often these decisions are made of the rule violation, length of disciplinary term, in the quantitative examination of inmate as a result of a crisis (Browne, Cambier, & or the threat to institutional order. Moreover, isolation. Shames, Wilcox, and Subramanian Agah, 2011; Shalev, 2008), such as a physical these restrictions are not necessarily related to (2015) note that less than one-third of inmates altercation, possession of major contraband, the rule violation(s) that resulted in the punish- that are isolated are in a supermax setting. This behavior that is thought to disrupt the general ment. The limits on the length of disciplinary 46 FEDERAL PROBATION Volume 79 Number 3 segregation vary with the jurisdiction and the prison population (Browne, Cambier, & Agah, Supermax prisons generally come in two severity of the rule infraction. 2011; Shalev, 2008). Additionally, Protective forms. The first is what has been termed a Custody can come in two forms: voluntary stand-alone facility. Stand-alone Supermax Administrative Segregation and involuntary. prisons operate solely for the purpose of Administrative Segregation is for the purpose Voluntary Protective Custody occurs when isolating inmates for long periods of time. of isolating individual inmates who present a an inmate self-initiates or requests protective Stand-alone operations do not have a general continued threat to the safety and security of placement. The response by prison officials prison population, have limited programming the prison staff and visitors, as well as other varies upon the jurisdiction but traditionally opportunities, highly restricted privileges, and inmates (Browne, Cambier, & Agah, 2011), or involves placement in temporary segregation a higher staff to inmate ratio. The second form the orderly operation of the prison (Toch, 2001; while the threat is investigated to verify its of Supermax segregation is co-located facili- Irwin, 2005). The justification for the isolation legitimacy. In these cases inmates are more ties. Co-located facilities are segregation units of these inmates is based on staff perceptions, likely to challenge a denial of Protective within a prison. Depending on the size of the anonymous tips from other inmates, or prior Custody rather than the placement in protec- prison and its operational mission, co-located activities outside of prison, including past tive custody. On the other hand, involuntary Supermax prisons may be separate from seg- gang affiliation. Inmates have a limited ability Protective Custody is a classification deci- regation units that isolate inmates for shorter to challenge these decisions and are generally sion that is similar in practice to decisions periods of time. unable to confront the accusations directly. for placement in Administrative Segregation. Administrative segregation decisions generally Inmates who are involuntarily placed in Challenges to the Empirical follow a period of Temporary Segregation or Protective Segregation may challenge such Study of Isolation Disciplinary Segregation. Decisions to employ placement for a variety of reasons. Chief The methodological examination of solitary Administrative Segregation most often come among such challenges would be an avoidance confinement poses several issues. The first from classification committees or a review and of the “snitch” label that is placed on protective challenge is the nature of prison records. In order from higher administration. Inmates custody inmates irrespective of the accuracy this case, prison records refers to an individual in Administrative Segregation have severely of such a label. record of an inmate that contains pertinent restricted movement and limited access to Protective Custody is a non-punitive form information about the reason and length of prison programs and services. Additional of isolation and is indeterminate in length. the inmate’s confinement, classification infor- privileges, including property possession, are The conditions of protective custody are often mation, incident reports, and various other made based on individual criteria and the based on the institution’s or correctional sys- documents necessary both legally and opera- threat the inmate presents. Administrative tem’s ability to house these inmates safely tionally when managing inmates. Prisons Segregation is an indefinite term of isolation from the general prison population. Those traditionally operate out of the public eye and and the criteria for release are often vague, operations able to operate separate units of tend to avoid publicity. In keeping with this, general in nature, and often unknown to the protective custody inmates can manage these prison officials are traditionally protective of inmate (Toch, 2001; Irwin, 2005). The lack inmates with less reliance on total isolation. records and often reluctant to permit outsid- of clearly articulated release criteria and the This management may include congregate ers from examining these records. Under subjective nature of the rationale have been work, institutional programs, dayroom priv- such conditions, the objective examination criticized for their lack of due process (Toch, ileges, and meals, thus limiting the total of solitary confinement (or any other prison 2001; Irwin, 2005). isolation often experienced by those in other phenomenon) is nearly impossible. The pro- These forms of isolation, by these or simi- forms of isolation. Those institutions that tection of prison records and the bureaucratic lar names, are utilized in most adult prisons in do not have the operational capacity to offer hurdles that are often necessary to access these the United States. In addition to these three, opportunities for protective custody inmates records permit prison officials to define the most prison systems practice additional types to congregate are more likely to rely on iso- research agenda of most prison phenomena. of isolation in a variety of forms. Two of the lation to accomplish their protective goal. When access to prison records is permit- more popular forms are protective custody Regardless of voluntariness and institutional ted, the challenge of accessibility becomes and Supermax confinement. capacity to mitigate isolation, inmates in one of locating and tracking them down. The protective custody have fewer program oppor- initial challenge to locating prison records Protective Custody tunities and stricter limitations on privileges is based on the record-keeping system and Protective Custody is the separation and often to protect them from potential harm in the whether it is centralized or decentralized. isolation of inmates whose presence in the general population. Decentralized record keeping would require general prison population poses a risk to their researchers to access multiple areas where safety and security. Examples of these types Supermax Custody records are stored and may be faced with of risks include inmates who are thought to Supermax Custody can essentially hold all multiple instances of bureaucratic hurdles, have informed correctional staff of viola- types of isolated inmates. Supermax prisons located at each individual site, before access- tions by other inmates (“snitching”), inmates are intended to isolate inmates for longer peri- ing the records. Also, many prison systems who have a high profile such as incarcerated ods of time than traditional prisons do. The keep multiple files on individual inmates. police officers, those who committed crimes Supermax regime often intensifies the isola- There may be a “master” file that contains that were covered extensively by the media, tion of inmates through advanced architectural all certified original document and records transgender inmates, and other inmates seen strategies intended to more thoroughly elimi- from prior incarcerations. Most systems also as vulnerable to exploitation in the general nate contact between inmates and prison staff. maintain a “confinement” file that contains all December 2015 METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES TO THE STUDY AND UNDERSTANDING OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT 47 information relevant to the current incarcera- served prior to the adjudication. As a result, References tion. Depending on the nature of the inquiry, prison records may reflect that the inmate Baker, P., & Goode, E. (2015, July 21). Critics of if access to medical or treatment files is neces- served time in temporary segregation but in solitary confinement are buoyed as Obama sary, this adds additional layers to locating and actuality it was time served in disciplinary embraces their cause. The New York Times. sifting through files. segregation. Such a discrepancy may appear Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com Prison records are also maintained in a trivial to some, but the accuracy of the actual Browne, A., Cambier, A., & Agha, S. (2011). variety of forms. Most systems now oper- status is important to the true understanding Prisons within prisons: the use of segrega- ate with a computerized database of general of inmate isolation. Moreover, such accuracy tion in the United States. Federal Sentencing inmate information that may include infor- is necessary when developing evidence-based Reporter, 24(1), 46-49. mation of discipline, use of isolation, inmate practices with the isolation of inmates. Goode, E. (2015, August 3). Solitary confine- location, and classification information. Finally, when furthering our understanding ment: Punished for life. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com However, legal requirements may also require of inmate isolation through quantitative anal- Haney, C. (2003). Mental health issues in long- a redundant paper copy of such records. ysis, the issue of generalizability will always term solitary and “supermax” confinement. For example, the Wolff v. McDonnell (1974) be present. The definitions of the types of Crime and Delinquency, 49(1):124-156. decision requires that inmates receive writ- isolation may differ across jurisdictions. Such Haney, C. (2008). A culture of harm taming the ten copies of charges, evidence, and decision a difference is present in the understanding dynamics of cruelty in supermax prisons. justification for prison disciplinary actions. of Supermax confinement. Whether in stand- Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(8), 956- Moreover, inmate complaints, requests, and alone or co-located facilities, the conditions 984. appeals are in a handwritten format and are of long-term isolation may be the same, but Haney, C., & Lynch, M. (1997). Regulating pris- unable to be completely merged with digital the understanding of the isolation may be ons of the future: A psychological analysis records. The complete reliance on computer- convoluted with the logistical aspects of man- of supermax and solitary confinement. New ized records is impractical when balancing aging inmates in an isolated environment. York University Journal of Law and Social Change, 23: 477. inmate rights and the practical application of Additionally, the confinement conditions Irwin, J. (2005). The warehouse prison: Disposal prison operations. experienced in the various forms of isolation of the new dangerous class. Los Angeles: The definitions of solitary confinement vary across jurisdictions. The degree of isola- Roxbury. suggest categorical exclusivity. In reality, such tion and deprivation, the privileges afforded King, R. D. (2005). The effects of supermax cus- a suggestion may be illusory. To elaborate, to inmates in isolation, and the process for tody. The effects of imprisonment, 118-145. an inmate may be in more than one segrega- determining release, will vary greatly. Any Lovett, I. (2013, September 5). Inmates end hun- tion category simultaneously. It would not comparisons made will most likely be general ger strike in California. The New York Times. be uncommon for example for an inmate in and should be interpreted with caution. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com administrative segregation to violate prison Despite these challenges, further quan- Mears, D. P., & Reisig, M. D. (2006). The rules and as a consequence receive a determi- titative examinations of the use of inmate theory and practice of supermax pris- nate consequence in disciplinary segregation. isolation are necessary. The lack of current ons. Punishment and Society, 8(1):33-57. Doi:10.1037/0278-6133.24.2.225 Which status, administrative or disciplinary, research encourages a misunderstanding of Mears, D. P., & Watson, J. (2006). Towards a should be considered primary, and how is the isolation by scholars, media, and the general fair and balanced assessment of supermax status recorded by prison officials? public. Without further research we limit prisons. Justice Quarterly, 23(2):232-270. Similar to exclusivity is the process of our understanding of isolation to the highly Shalev, S. (2008). A sourcebook on solitary con- giving credit for time served in one status publicized and controversial use of Supermax finement. Available at SSRN 2177495. to another status. For example, inmates are confinement. Such a limitation will trivial- Shames, A., Wilcox, J., & Subramanian, R. frequently confined in temporary segrega- ize the more common use of isolation in the (2015). Solitary confinement: Common mis- tion for being suspected of violating prison prison systems throughout the United States. conceptions and emerging safe alternatives. rules. At the conclusion of the investigation Furthermore, such research is needed to prop- Center on Sentencing and Corrections. and disciplinary process, the inmate is given erly develop evidence-based and best practices Toch, H. (2001). The future of supermax a determinate consequence in disciplinary for the use of isolation in jails and prisons. confinement.The Prison Journal, 81(3): 376-388. segregation but is given credit for the time