DOCSLIB.ORG

The Effect of Solitary Confinement on Institutional Misconduct: a Longitudinal Evaluation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Effect of Solitary Confinement on Institutional Misconduct: a Longitudinal Evaluation The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: The Effect of Solitary Confinement on Institutional Misconduct: A Longitudinal Evaluation Author(s): Ryan M. Labrecque Document No.: 249013 Date Received: August 2015 Award Number: 2014-IJ-CX-0003 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this federally funded grant report available electronically. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Effect of Solitary Confinement on Institutional Misconduct: A Longitudinal Evaluation A dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.) in the Division of Criminal Justice of the College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services 2015 by Ryan M. Labrecque B.S., Hesser College, 2004 M.S., Springfield College, 2005 M.S., University of Cincinnati, 2010 Dissertation Committee: Paula H. Smith, Ph.D. (Chair) John D. Wooldredge, Ph.D. Francis T. Cullen, Ph.D. Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D. Paul E. Gendreau, O.C., Ph.D. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Abstract Solitary confinement (SC) has been an important component of the American prison system since the emergence of the penitentiaries in the early 1800s. The main criticism of SC has long been that it causes inhabitants undue psychological distress and by extension increases propensity toward criminal behavior. The use of SC raises constitutional and humanitarian concerns, with critics who charge the practice constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, is inhumane, and violates the minimum standards of decency. However, SC is also a management tool in which correctional officials have come to rely upon for the effective management of prisons, and many would not waiver in the contention that SC is needed to ensure the safety and security of these institutions. Thus, there remains an active debate in the literature and in practice with respect to how SC influences criminal behavior in which three claims have been made: (1) SC decreases criminal behavior; (2) SC increases criminal behavior; and (3) SC has little, if any, effect on criminal behavior. Surprisingly, despite its long-standing and widespread use, SC has remained an elusive subject in empirical research, especially in terms of its effects on behavioral outcomes. This dissertation adds to this gap in knowledge by providing a longitudinal evaluation of the effect of SC on institutional misconduct in a sample of 14,311 inmates in the state of Ohio. The results of this study indicate SC does not have any significant effect on the prevalence or incidence of subsequent violent, nonviolent, or drug misconduct. Policy implications and recommendations based on these findings are discussed. i This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. ii This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to my wife Jackie, and our son, Lewis. iii This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Acknowledgments There are a number of people I would like to thank for their assistance and support during the completion of my dissertation. First and foremost, I would like to thank my dissertation chair and mentor, Dr. Paula Smith. I have been truly fortunate to have the opportunity to work with Dr. Smith during my five years in Cincinnati as a doctoral student. Paula has been a continued source of support and she has provided me with countless professional opportunities to develop my academic career. Paula, I am eternally grateful for all that you have done for me and I look forward to collaborating with you for many years to come. I would also like to thank my dissertation committee members, Drs. John Wooldredge, Francis Cullen, Edward Latessa, and Paul Gendreau. Dr. Wooldredge, I appreciated your availability and willingness to help me with the statistical analyses in this dissertation. I have always admired your work ethic and have sincerely enjoyed our discussions about institutional corrections. Dr. Cullen, thank you for always providing me with great advice exactly when I needed it. Your words of wisdom have had a positive impact on me and your lessons have no doubt made me a better scholar. Dr. Latessa, I am grateful for your assistance in developing the methodology of this dissertation and for your general support in completing this project. I have learned a lot from working with you, especially about grant writing and project management. I know these skills will prove to be very beneficial to me in my career. Finally, I would like to thank Dr. Gendreau, with whom I credit for first getting me interested in the study of solitary confinement. Paul, it has been an honor to work with you during these last two years, your work and passion for research continue inspire me, and I hope to have the opportunity to work with you more in the years to come. iv This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. I must also acknowledge the financial support I received from the National Institute of Justice (Award #2014-IJ-CX-0003) as part of the Graduate Research Fellowship, which afforded me the opportunity to focus my time toward the completion of this project. I am also indebted to the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) for granting me access to a considerable amount of institutional data, without which this study would not have been possible. Thank you to John Chin, Edward Rhine, Steve Van Dine, and Kathleen Lamb from the Research Review Committee for approving the request for data and to Brian Martin, Brian Kowalski, and Paul Konicek from the Bureau of Research and Evaluation who were very helpful in coordinating the logistics of sending me the data and for answering my many questions along the way. There are also a number of faculty and colleagues I would like to thank for their support during my time in the doctoral program. I would like to recognize Dr. Chris Sullivan for his great advice on publishing, analyzing data, and searching/acquiring an academic job. Chris, I admire you as a scholar and I appreciate all that you have done for me. I would also like to thank Mindy Schweitzer, who I have had the opportunity to work with on a number of research projects and reports through the Corrections Institute. Mindy, I have enjoyed working and publishing with you and I look forward to long career of collaboration. I also wish to thank my fellow writing group members, Jess Warner, Kelsey Mattick, and Lindsey Harper for their edits to the early versions of this manuscript. Finally, I would like to thank my dear friends Jay Kennedy and Garrett Grothoff. Jay and Garrett, you have both provided me with important professional advice, as well as much needed distractions from work. Above all, my wife Jackie has been a constant source of support. Jackie, I am no doubt a better person just for knowing you. You mean everything to me. I thank you for your sacrifice v This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. in moving to Ohio. I know being away from family has been hard. If it were not for you none of this would be possible. And to our son Lewis, you are my motivation and inspiration in life. I love you more than you will ever know. You have forever changed my life for the better. vi This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Social Justice in an Open World – the Role Of
    E c o n o m i c & Social Affairs The International Forum for Social Development Social Justice in an Open World The Role of the United Nations Sales No. E.06.IV.2 ISBN 92-1-130249-5 05-62917—January 2006—2,000 United Nations ST/ESA/305 DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS Division for Social Policy and Development The International Forum for Social Development Social Justice in an Open World The Role of the United Nations asdf United Nations New York, 2006 DESA The Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat is a vital interface between global policies in the economic, social and environmental spheres and national action. The Department works in three main interlinked areas: (i) it compiles, generates and analyses a wide range of economic, social and environ- mental data and information on which States Members of the United Nations draw to review common problems and to take stock of policy options; (ii) it facilitates the negotiations of Member States in many intergovernmental bodies on joint course of action to address ongoing or emerging global challenges; and (iii) it advises inter- ested Governments on the ways and means of translating policy frameworks devel- oped in United Nations conferences and summits into programmes at the country level and, through technical assistance, helps build national capacities. Note The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations. The designations employed and the presentation of the mate- rial 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 or territory or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitations of its frontiers.
    [Show full text]
  • Office for Victims of Crime
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Office for Victims of Crime Office for Victims of Crime Report to the Nation 2001 Fiscal Years 1999 and 2000 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street NW. Washington, DC 20531 John Ashcroft Attorney General Deborah J. Daniels Assistant Attorney General John W. Gillis Director, Office for Victims of Crime Office of Justice Programs World Wide Web Home Page www.ojp.usdoj.gov Office for Victims of Crime World Wide Web Home Page www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc For grant and funding information contact U.S. Department of Justice Response Center 1–800–421–6770 OVC Resource Center 1–800–627–6872 TTY: 1–877–712–9279 OVC Resource Center Home Page www.ncjrs.org NCJ 189205 The Office for Victims of Crime is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Victims of Crime Act of 1984, as amended: A Report to the President, the Congress, AND THE NATION Office for Victims of Crime Office of Justice Programs U.S. Department of Justice This report covers activities undertaken by the Office for Victims of Crime and its grantees with Crime Victims Fund revenues during Fiscal Years 1999–2000. Acknowledgments he Office for Victims of Crime gratefully acknowledges the work of Ashley Oliver Barrett, who analyzed data and numerous project T summaries to prepare the final draft of this Report to the Nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Prison Violence and the Intersectionality of Race/Ethnicity and Gender
    VOLUME 18, ISSUE 1, PAGES 106–121 (2017) Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society E-ISSN 2332-886X Available online at https://ccjls.scholasticahq.com/ Prison Violence and the Intersectionality of Race/Ethnicity and Gender Kerryn E. Bell Eastern Washington University A B S T R A C T A N D A R T I C L E I N F O R M A T I O N Minority men and women are significantly impacted by mass incarceration. Mass incarceration has also resulted in a growth in prison violence, and previous studies in this area have focused on individuals and not their interconnected statuses. This study specifically considers the role of intersectional criminology and the commitment of prison violence in a large western state on female inmates. Intersectional criminology is a theoretical approach that enables a critical look at the impact of individuals’ interconnected statuses in relation to crime. Findings suggest that an intersectional approach provides more definitive statistical results in the assessment of prison violence and show that minority females commit more violent infractions in prison than White women. As such, this study builds upon previous arguments that intersectionality should be more widely used in future research. Implications for the findings are discussed. Article History: Keywords: Received 12 July 2016 intersectionality, race/ethnicity, gender, prison, violence Received in revised form 22 December 2016 Accepted 04 January 2017 © 2017 Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society and The Western Society of Criminology Hosting by Scholastica. All rights reserved. Although incarceration rates in general have (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2015). However, when decreased since 2009,1 they are still a recognized the United States embarked on a policy of mass problem in the United States (see Carson, 2014).2 incarceration, few also considered the unintended Some scholars go so far as to argue that mass consequences that this change would have on minority incarceration has emerged as a system of racialized women (Chesney-Lind, 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • LOUISIANA on LOCKDOWN Groundbreaking New Report by Solitary Watch, ACLU of LA, and JSRI Exposes Impact of Solitary Confnement in Louisiana Prisons
    JESUIT SOCIAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE QUARTERLY JustSouth SUMMER 2019 LOUISIANA ON LOCKDOWN Groundbreaking New Report by Solitary WatCh, ACLU of LA, and JSRI Exposes ImpaCt of Solitary Confnement in Louisiana Prisons BY SUE WEISHAR, PH.D. Across the United States, 80,000 to 100,000 incarcerated The Vera Institute for Justice found in 2016 that 17.4 percent people are locked in prison or jail cells without any of people in Louisiana prisons were in solitary—almost four meaningful human interaction for 22 to 24 hours a day times the national average.3 Over the past two years, JSRI for weeks, years, and even decades straight.1 Prolonged worked4 with Solitary Watch and the ACLU of Louisiana to social isolation can infict permanent psychological and produce a major report on the use of extreme isolation neurological damage and can literally cause people to in Louisiana. It was released June 25. The report is based lose their minds. Instead of being a “last resort” measure on surveys mailed to 2,902 people in solitary confnement used temporarily for safety reasons, often incarcerated in nine Louisiana prisons in 2017. A total of 709 persons persons are placed in solitary confnement for possessing completed the survey, making it one of the largest response contraband, testing positive for drugs, or using profanity. cohorts ever for a study on solitary confnement. The survey Although it has become common practice in U.S. asked several open-ended questions about prisoners’ correctional systems, the use of solitary confnement, experiences in solitary, which many responded to in rich also known as segregation or restricted housing, has detail—painting a harrowing picture of solitary confnement never been shown to reduce violence in prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Representations and Discourse of Torture in Post 9/11 Television: an Ideological Critique of 24 and Battlestar Galactica
    REPRESENTATIONS AND DISCOURSE OF TORTURE IN POST 9/11 TELEVISION: AN IDEOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF 24 AND BATTLSTAR GALACTICA Michael J. Lewis A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May 2008 Committee: Jeffrey Brown, Advisor Becca Cragin ii ABSTRACT Jeffrey Brown Advisor Through their representations of torture, 24 and Battlestar Galactica build on a wider political discourse. Although 24 began production on its first season several months before the terrorist attacks, the show has become a contested space where opinions about the war on terror and related political and military adventures are played out. The producers of Battlestar Galactica similarly use the space of television to raise questions and problematize issues of war. Together, these two television shows reference a long history of discussion of what role torture should play not just in times of war but also in a liberal democracy. This project seeks to understand the multiple ways that ideological discourses have played themselves out through representations of torture in these television programs. This project begins with a critique of the popular discourse of torture as it portrayed in the popular news media. Using an ideological critique and theories of televisual realism, I argue that complex representations of torture work to both challenge and reify dominant and hegemonic ideas about what torture is and what it does. This project also leverages post-structural analysis and critical gender theory as a way of understanding exactly what ideological messages the programs’ producers are trying to articulate.
    [Show full text]
  • White Collar Criminality: a Prediction Model Judith M
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1991 White collar criminality: a prediction model Judith M. Collins Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Industrial and Organizational Psychology Commons, Personality and Social Contexts Commons, Social Psychology Commons, and the Social Psychology and Interaction Commons Recommended Citation Collins, Judith M., "White collar criminality: a prediction model " (1991). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 9607. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/9607 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
    [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]
  • Phasing out Our Use of Private Prisons | OPA | Department of Justice
    10/7/2016 Phasing Out Our Use of Private Prisons | OPA | Department of Justice PHASING OUT OUR USE OF PRIVATE PRISONS August 18, 2016 Courtesy of Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates When most people think of the Justice Department, they are likely to imagine the most visible parts of our job – the law enforcement agents who investigate crimes or the lawyers who prosecute them. But the department’s core responsibilities go beyond investigation and prosecution. Unlike most states, the federal government puts its law enforcement agents, criminal prosecutors, and correctional officers all in a single department. We handle every step from the start of an investigation to the end of a prison sentence. Our work to house and rehabilitate individuals incarcerated in the Federal Bureau of Prisons is an important part of our responsibility and operations, accounting for 25 percent of the department’s budget every year. The federal prison population increased by almost 800 percent between 1980 and 2013, often at a far faster rate than the Bureau of Prisons could accommodate in their own facilities. In an effort to manage the rising prison population, about a decade ago, the bureau began contracting with privately operated correctional institutions to confine some federal inmates. By 2013, as both the federal prison population and the proportion of federal prisoners in private facilities reached their peak, the bureau was housing approximately 15 percent of its population, or nearly 30,000 inmates, in privately operated prisons. 2013 was also the year that the Department of Justice launched its Smart on Crime Initiative after identifying reforms that would ensure more proportional sentences and effective use of federal resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders
    Introductory Handbook on The Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES Cover photo: © Rafael Olivares, Dirección General de Centros Penales de El Salvador. UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Vienna Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES UNITED NATIONS Vienna, 2018 © United Nations, December 2018. All rights reserved. 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. Publishing production: English, Publishing and Library Section, United Nations Office at Vienna. Preface The first version of the Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders, published in 2012, was prepared for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) by Vivienne Chin, Associate of the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Canada, and Yvon Dandurand, crimi- nologist at the University of the Fraser Valley, Canada. The initial draft of the first version of the Handbook was reviewed and discussed during an expert group meeting held in Vienna on 16 and 17 November 2011.Valuable suggestions and contributions were made by the following experts at that meeting: Charles Robert Allen, Ibrahim Hasan Almarooqi, Sultan Mohamed Alniyadi, Tomris Atabay, Karin Bruckmüller, Elias Carranza, Elinor Wanyama Chemonges, Kimmett Edgar, Aida Escobar, Angela Evans, José Filho, Isabel Hight, Andrea King-Wessels, Rita Susana Maxera, Marina Menezes, Hugo Morales, Omar Nashabe, Michael Platzer, Roberto Santana, Guy Schmit, Victoria Sergeyeva, Zhang Xiaohua and Zhao Linna.
    [Show full text]
  • Solitary Troubles, Notre Dame Law Review Download
    Notre Dame Law Review Volume 93 | Issue 3 Article 1 3-2018 Solitary Troubles Alexander A. Reinert Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Judges Commons Recommended Citation 93 Notre Dame L. Rev. 927 (2018) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Notre Dame Law Review at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized editor of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES SOLITARY TROUBLES Alexander A. Reinert* Solitary confinement is one of the most severe forms of punishment that can be inflicted on human beings. In recent years, the use of extreme isolation in our prisons and jails has been questioned by correctional officials, medical experts, and reform advocates alike. Yet for nearly the entirety of American history, judicial regulation of the practice has been extremely limited. This Article explains why judges hesitate to question the use of solitary confinement, while also providing a path forward for greater scrutiny of the practice. INTRODUCTION .................................................. 928 I. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PRACTICE OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT ............................................ 937 II. LEGAL CONSTRAINTS ON THE USE OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT ............................................ 941 A. Solitary Confinement and Procedural Due Process .......... 941 B. Solitary Confinement and the Eighth Amendment .......... 944 1. Eighth Amendment Fundamentals ............... 944 2. Judicial Deference Across Eighth Amendment Doctrine ......................................... 946 3. Deference in Action.............................. 948 4. The Failure to Regulate Solitary Confinement Through the Eighth Amendment................. 950 III. A WAY FORWARD FOR JUDICIAL REGULATION OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Unmet Promises: Continued Violence and Neglect in California's Division
    UNMET PROMISES Continued Violence & Neglect in California’s Division of Juvenile Justice Maureen Washburn | Renee Menart | February 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 7 History 9 Youth Population 10 A. Increased spending amid a shrinking system 10 B. Transitional age population 12 C. Disparate confinement of youth of color 13 D. Geographic disparities 13 E. Youth offenses vary 13 F. Large facilities and overcrowded living units 15 Facility Operations 16 A. Aging facilities in remote areas 16 B. Prison-like conditions 18 C. Youth lack safety and privacy in living spaces 19 D. Poorly-maintained structures 20 Staffing 21 A. Emphasis on corrections experience 21 B. Training focuses on security over treatment 22 C. Staffing levels on living units risk violence 23 D. Staff shortages and transitions 24 E. Lack of staff collaboration 25 Violence 26 A. Increasing violence 26 B. Gang influence and segregation 32 C. Extended isolation 33 D. Prevalence of contraband 35 E. Lack of privacy and vulnerability to sexual abuse 36 F. Staff abuse and misconduct 38 G. Code of silence among staff and youth 42 H. Deficiencies in the behavior management system 43 Intake & Unit Assignment 46 A. Danger during intake 46 B. Medical discontinuity during intake 47 C. Flaws in assessment and case planning 47 D. Segregation during facility assignment 48 E. Arbitrary unit assignment 49 Medical Care & Mental Health 51 A. Injuries to youth 51 B. Barriers to receiving medical attention 53 C. Gender-responsive health care 54 D. Increase in suicide attempts 55 E. Mental health care focuses on acute needs 55 Programming 59 A.
    [Show full text]
  • Benedict's Maritime Bulletin
    Vol. 11, No. 2 Second Quarter 2013 Dr. Frank L. Wiswall, Jr., Editor-in-Chief Robert J. Zapf, Managing Editor Inside This Issue A ‘‘No-Frills’’ Primer on Iran Sanctions A ‘‘No-Frills’’ Primer on Iran Sanctions By David H. Sump ............................................ 61 By David H. Sump EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION – LOZMAN: THE I. Introduction IMPORTANCE OF THE CONTEXT As almost everyone in the maritime community is By F. L. Wiswall, Jr. ......................................... 63 aware, much of the world is in the midst of severe The Upside Down World of Lozman economic sanctions against Iran. These sanctions have been invoked not only by the United States, but also by By Francis X. Nolan, III, Esq............................ 72 the European Union, the United Nations, and other Lozman’s ‘‘Reasonable Observer’’ and nations around the world. Although the purpose of Where It Will Go From Here these sanctions is to modify the behavior of a ‘‘rogue nation’’ that allegedly is defying international norms and By Brendan Sullivan.......................................... 77 obligations, the sanctions are also visiting great harm Substitute Security, In Rem Jurisdiction, upon the maritime trade community. This article is Appellate Jurisdiction, and Lozman intended to briefly explain the nature and status of the economic sanctions imposed upon Iran, as well as iden- By Samuel P. Blatchley..................................... 83 tify the risks to the maritime community and provide WINDOW ON WASHINGTON solutions for avoiding or minimizing those risks. By Bryant E. Gardner ........................................ 86 II. What Are Sanctions and Why Are They Used? FLOTSAM & JETSAM Economic sanctions are the tools used by the inter- national community to assert pressure and hardship By Phil Berns....................................................
    [Show full text]