Image Credits: @hasanalmasi on Unsplash (Unsplash License)
The Origins
The origins of solitary confinement in the United States are thought to date back to the Quaker religious community in the late eighteenth century. The Quaker people did not introduce solitary confinement as a punishment; rather, they believed it would be a strong mechanism for offender rehabilitation. Based on the spiritual orientation of the Quaker community, solitary confinement was thought to provide incarcerated people with the opportunity to reflect on their actions. By forcing these people to remain by themselves, with little to no social interaction, they would presumably have a greater opportunity to connect with God and feel inclined to change their wrongful behavior in order to improve their faith. With a grasp of the origins of solitary confinement in the US today, one can better conceptualize how our society treats the practice today.
Solitary Confinement in Modern Contexts
In modern American history, the use of solitary confinement as a punishment has been widespread. As of May 2023, almost every US state uses the punishment in some form, along with many federal and local prisons. Today, solitary confinement is a tool primarily used for punishing incarcerated people after they have begun to serve their sentence. The punishment is implemented in a variety of ways, however, the most commonly regarded seems to come from the United Nations. The UN states that prisoners are to be kept in a small, confined, empty cell for 22 to 24 hours a day. During these hours, offenders are extremely limited in their interactions with others. However, the removal of social stimuli is not all that is removed; offenders in solitary confinement are often forced to remain in bright lighting, with little to no visual or auditory stimulants. The length of someone’s solitary confinement stay is not consistent, but can range from days to decades, according to the Prison Policy Organization. Moreover, offenders in solitary confinement are often deprived of many of the standard services afforded people serving their time, as reported by the Urban Institute, including educational and vocational, job training, and more programs. Such limitations may vary state-to-state, but due to deficiencies in data, it is difficult to list them.
Many believe that solitary confinement is reserved only for the most dangerous and problematic of prisoners, yet in practice solitary confinement has become a method of control for incarceration facilities. The most commonly cited reasons for placing an inmate in solitary confinement are extensive, however the guidelines for when to use it lack some consistency. According to a March 2016 National Institute of Justice report, solitary confinement is typically used in three primary circumstances: protective custody, disciplinary segregation, and administrative segregation. In other words, incarcerated people are placed into solitary confinement if they are at risk of being physically hurt by other prisoners, if they break prison rules, or if they pose a threat to other prisoners. However, there are a substantial number of other reasons for which offenders undergo the punishment. Solitary Watch, a renowned organization advocating for the reform of solitary confinement and the prison industrial complex, confirms this. They explain that these reasons can range from ignoring simple orders to using profanity. Solitary Watch also explains how such reasons are often a testament to deeper, systemic prejudices: many offenders demonstrate such punishable behavior due to untreated mental illnesses, feeling unsafe or threatened in their political or religious beliefs, or for feeling disregarded after reporting harmful misconduct–often from staff and frequently taking the form of abuse. Furthermore, the statistics of solitary confinement’s population feature a disproportionate amount of people of color; a recent study of Pennsylvania Prisons found that black men were 8.2 times more likely to be put in solitary confinement than their white counterparts. Solitary Watch states that “people of color are even more over-represented in solitary than they are in the general prison population, and receive longer terms in solitary than white people for the same disciplinary infractions.” These are all significant problems that incarceration systems have famously left swept under the table, leading many to believe that solitary confinement is fundamentally unjust.
“The effects of solitary confinement have been debated since at least the middle of the nineteenth century.” The University of Chicago Press Journals confirms that though there have been calls for reform of solitary confinement, it remains firmly entrenched in the corrective system. Change occurs slowly within correctional systems, and is typically the subject of economic and political pressures. According to the Journal of the American Bar Foundation, Because it is an easily managed and cost-effective tool for any prison, solitary confinement is generally considered to be most convenient. Solitary confinement has proven to be resistant to prison reform efforts, given both its perception as being cost-effective, as well as what some perceive to be institutional inertia. Does solitary confinement bring a larger benefit – to the individual, the institution, and the population at large that many do not see? Or, is it an artifact of outdated thinking and stagnant policy? Perhaps the answer lies in comparing the benefits and disadvantages of the practice.
The Benefits
Despite recent criticism of solitary confinement, some studies demonstrate that it may be an effective and even necessary tool. Many scholars consider solitary confinement an important mechanism to maintain safety in prison facilities. Take, for example, an inmate who exhibits violent behavior and risks dangerous harm, repeatedly, to prison staff and other inmates. Numerous experts believe that if said person refuses to comply, to stop their dangerous behavior, or to undergo different, less extreme punishment programs, solitary confinement is the only option left. In this case, the implicit rationale is not necessarily to deter such behavior or provide a learning moment for that inmate but also to protect the staff and fellow inmates. Removing a violent threat from the general prison population is considered sufficient grounds for such recourse. Moreover, some believe that solitary confinement is a deterrent of problematic behavior within prison. In a report on Administrative Segregation in US Prisons, the National Institute of Justice stated that “segregation units are intended to offer a more secure alternative for those who cannot be safe towards others, be kept safe,” or be controlled through other mechanisms. While studies do seem to prove otherwise, this is a commonly held belief. There are many conceptions of solitary confinement from those who have not had first-hand experiences with the practice, but how do individuals who have experienced solitary confinement feel?
Effects on the Individual
Many scholars acknowledge that, for all the administrative and operational benefits it represents, solitary punishment can create significant detrimental issues for those subject to it. According to the Psychiatric Times, isolation like solitary confinement “is associated with a 26% increased risk of premature death, largely from a stress response that produces significant cortisol levels, increased blood pressure, and inflammation.” While it’s different for every individual, this stress is proven to increase the chances of anxiety and depression. In fact, previous research shows that in only two weeks after re-entry into the general prison population, “the risk of death from drug overdose, cardiovascular disease, homicide, and suicide is elevated.” These are statistics for the general person; however, for those with previous mental health conditions–a topic that is often disregarded in the criminal justice system–these effects are only heightened. The Psychiatric Times explains that “those with mental health conditions often decompensate and cycle from suicide watch to psychiatric hospital and back to SC [solitary confinement].” Thus, solitary confinement’s effects on the individual are not limited to during time in prison, but stay with the incarcerated person for a lifetime.
Potential Alternatives
Solitary confinement seems to hold widespread disapproval, socially and politically. Consequently, many have tried to come up with feasible alternatives for the practice. The most common ideas are centered around rehabilitation, not too different from the Quaker community in solitary confinement’s origins. It should be noted that such alternatives are not necessarily attempts at reforming the penal system as a whole. Rather, these are surface replacements for solitary confinement in itself.
The most common goal of these alternatives seems to be focusing on improving mental health problems. Both because of the mental health implications that isolation causes and the fact that offenders get placed in solitary confinement because of mental health-related outbreaks, many believe providing adequate care for mental illnesses—addressing the root of the issues instead of simply isolating these individuals—should be the prioritized focus.
In many propositions, this focus is best executed through placing individuals in some sort of specialized treatment diversion program, which has proven to be extremely successful. In fact, a study from the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found that these programs lowered “rates of prison infractions, inpatient mental health admissions and self-harm incidents compared to individuals placed in solitary confinement.”
An example of the success of diversion programs tailored to focus on mental illnesses comes from PBS’s Frontline. More specifically, it comes from Todd Fickett, an incarcerated person who was assigned six months in solitary confinement after assaulting an officer. During his stint in isolation, Todd began harming himself so intensely and so frequently that he earned a reputation as a “serious cutter,” which PBS believes would have gotten worse had he remained in solitary confinement longer. However, the Maine State Prison in which Todd was transferred to instead allowed him to remain in a mental health unit, where he worked with a clinician and was able to better his mental health and wrongful behaviors tremendously. Todd told PBS that “the programming I’ve done since I’ve been to prison taught me how to change my frame of mind.” Though it may be a complex undertaking and take time to implement these programs, the drastic improvements in the offender at hand should be enough to prove that there are in fact very feasible, successful alternatives to solitary confinement.