This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Cohen, F. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Penal Isolation

Beyond the Seriously Mentally Ill

9771B. Vista Montanas, Tucson, AZ 85749, Fredlaw97{at}aol.com

The duration and conditions of penal confinement (i.e., segregation) in use by our prisons, and regularly upheld by the courts, are so extreme and so harmful that ultimately such confinement should be prohibited as a matter of law and policy. Correctional officials, and the courts, tend to conflate the need to insulate some inmates from each other with the use of a 23/7 regimen of segregation, devoid of social interaction. Inmates suffering with mental illness or who are at risk from such confinement and juveniles are the exceptions, and they have had some success in the courts. This article reviews the relevant history of penal isolation, Supreme Court decisions and other case law, and the evidence of harm caused by extreme penal isolation. It is proposed that the law relating to the acceptable uses of mechanical restraints serve as an analogy for the basic reform in the use of penal isolation.

Key Words: s: confinement • penal isolation • mental illness

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 35, No. 8, 1017-1047 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854808317569


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?