The U.S. holds more prisoners in solitary confinement than any other democratic country, according to critics of the treatment. Here, an immigrant detainee makes a call from his "segregation cell" at a detention facility in Adelanto, Calif., last November.
7 comments:
Fabiola. B. Says,
The problem here is that the U.S spends about 75k per prisoner to be held in solitary confinement thats triple the amount it cost for a regular prison cell. Its a waste of money and it is counterproductive. Most of the prisoners held in Solitary confinement are pregnant women, inmates with mental illnesses, and underage inmates. They can be held for months even up to years just for minor infractions. some are thrown into confinement because its an officers easy and first choice to do.The ones who should be held in solitary confinement are the ones who are causing more chaos in the prisons. This is a social problem because its a violation of human rights even if they are criminals
The conflict perspective would examine this at a macro level looking at the structure and institution. A conflict theorist would see that the problem here is the way social order is maintained in the prisons. There is force and intimidation in prisons. And that that solitary confinement only benefits those in power. Conflict perspective would say there is no easy solution to this this problem only that it can be reformed but the system will still keep its power.
One solution that can be made here is to limit the cost of solitary confinement meaning that a prison has a certain limit of inmates they put in solitary confinement a week. The reason for a Prisoner to be held in Solitary confinement has to be a very reasonable one. This can save the country a whole lot of money. Plus there are other ways in which a prisoner can be punished such as lose there benefits they get or just plain get locked in a regular cell by themselves.
Theresa M. says
The problem here is that $78,000 are being spent on keeping an inmate in solitary confinement, more than what is being spent on a regular inmate, meaning that a lot of money is being put into the solitary confinement system, money that could be going in to other integral parts of society, such as schools for example. Most of the people being kept in solitary confinement are either pregnant women or mentally ill inmates who are being held for minor reasons. It is a social problem because not only is it violating human rights, it is an expensive hit to society’s already wavering economic status. Due to the nonexistent contact with other people, inmates kept in solitary confinement begin to lose hope, and for women, become introverted and are less likely to report sexual abuse if any in prison. It completely isolates people. This is a problem as it is essential for these people to integrate back into society when released, so they don’t continue to repeat their crimes and therefore return to prison.
The functionalist perspective would see this as a dysfunctional society. The functionalist would view solitary confinement as not something considered norm as everything in society as a whole has a purpose to everything around it to continue to function. When an inmate is released, according to the functionalist perspective, the inmate must reintegrate into society to meet the goals and expectations set by society, however, what solitary confinement teaches an inmate contradicts the expectations that society expects once an individual is released. A functionalist would view solitary confinement would do nothing to better the individual and therefore society as whole as all it is doing is pushing the problem to the side instead of directly trying to fix it.
I chose this topic because I believe that solitary confinement can be psychological traumatic to the inmate, like the article states, it makes them lose hope, and they are less likely to seek justice when they are wrong. I believe a person should be given a chance when it comes to minor infractions. A solution could be that the officers should be more conscious of what reason constitutes solitary confinement. The article mentions that inmates are held in solitary confinement due to minor infractions. May be if the officers were to put inmates who created greater problems to the prison and the prisoners in solitary confinement oppose to inmates who committed minor infractions it would lessen the amount of inmates spending time in solitary confinement, and therefore, lessen the amount of money being spent. They should also focus on the amount of inmates that should be held in solitary confinement. They should a limit to the amount of inmates that can be kept in solitary confinement in general.
I think the problem here is that an exorbitant amount of money (approximately $78000 per year) is being spent on keeping prisoners in solitary confinement. Since most of those kept in solitary confinement are guilty of minor infractions and are often pregnant, underage, or mentally ill, the isolation from social interaction does little to aid their rehabilitation. This is a social problem because mental illness and petty crime are widespread, virtually unsolveable problems in our society, and people are standing up for the human rights of the criminals subjected to these treatments.
From an interactionist perspective, a sociologist would look at the effects that constant isolation in solitary confinement would have on individuals. A criminal in solitary confinement would be "drained of hope," as the article said, and would begin to view incarceration as a permanent measure. Life outside the walls of their isolated cell--much less the idea of life outside of prison--becomes less and less believable and desirable because they lose their will to live. Even daily needs such as nutrition and bathing could lose their significance for these individuals, and so their only interaction with the outside world loses its value.
One solution to the issue of solitary confinement would be to have intermittent breaks between confinement periods. This would keep an individual from losing contact with reality and the outside world, because brief but regular exposure to the world outside their cell will encourage them to behave and reintegrate with the rest of the prison (and eventually society as well). This would negate many of the arguments about the ethics of solitary confinement, since they would actually receive a small amount of human interaction. Since the criminal will be more motivated to get out of solitary confinement, this will eventually lower the costs of keeping individuals in the cells, since they won't be there as long.
Erika P.
I agree with Theresa Montoya in her statement that prisoners that have committed a minor infraction should be given another chance, also that the more dangerous prisoners with a higher degree of violence should be held in solitary confinement not the prisoners that commit minor infractions. Solitary confinement should not be used to keep all prisoners under control just the ones that are more prone to hurt another inmate or a prison guard. What stood out for me in the post is how most of the prisoners that are kept in solitary confinement are women that are pregnant as well as the mentally ill. This stood out to me because it seems like prison guards are targeting the mentally ill as well as the pregnant women and putting them in solitary confinement just so they will not have to deal with them. The government should not be wasting $78,000 on solitary confinement for minor reason, that money should be spend on public education because the better educated minorities are the less crime society will face. I decide to comment on this peer’s entry because I agree with what she is saying about how society is just ignoring the problem that is going on instead of trying to fix it or at least make it better. It is a social problem because the money that is being spend on keeping the minor offenders in solitary confinement could be spend on other things like I mention before education, creating jobs, better community services for the poor but instead that money is being used incorrectly. For the needy, that means fewer funds for public education, as well as fewer jobs, which increases the population of the prisons because without a job or education some individuals turn to crime to survive.
Symbolic interaction perspective focuses more on a micro- level focusing on the specific individuals reaction in given situations. This theory believes that the reasons why people are imprison because of deviant behavior is due social interaction and the environment whether good or bad helped shaped their personality. If that was true that would meant that prisons should offer an environment in which it is more likely for an individual to be beneficially impacted by his daily social interactions; however, being in solitary confinement those inmates are deprived of that social interaction. The prisoners are being exposed to a bad environment by the mistreatment of the prison guards and deprivation of social interaction. The lack of social interactions will make it more difficult for those in solitary confinement to integrate into society again because they have been deprived of it for so long.
I agree with the proposed solution given my Theresa because it would be less costly if the prison guards would only put more dangerous criminals in solitary confinement as I stated before. The proposed solution is possible; however, for that to be possible guards should be better informed about the cost of putting minor offenders in solitary confinement as well as the prison directors they should be in charge on better educating the guards. Another solution to the problem would be to lower the amount of people in solitary confinement and instead of depriving them of human interactions; they should have a rehabilitation program that would give them skills to survive on the outside world once they get out so they can contribute to the economy instead. Creating jobs for ex-cons once they get out so that they won’t have to continue the cycle of criminal activity.
Patricia S.
I disagree with Fabiola B. In my opinion I believe the most dangerous criminals should be placed in solitary confinement. Individuals that are a danger to society and those who commit outrageous crimes such as rape, murder, or human trafficking should be confined to a severe punishment. I don't believe it violates a person's human rights because the individual has threaten the safety of society. The individual doesn't respect the lives of the population,in order to maintain stability these types of individuals should be removed from society. An idea that stood out to me was how Fabiola mentioned pregnant women, disabled, and underage individuals were placed in solitary confinement because I agree these people don't deserve such treatment, it is only for those individuals that threaten the rights and humanity of others. This topic is very sensitive this is why I chose it. Many people believe that jails are useless and a waste of money, others feel people should fear jail. Personally I believe that individuals who surpass the rights and humanity of others should be removed from society. It is unfair that other people should be exposed to unwanted circumstances due to other peoples actions. Solitary confinement is a social problem because more than 2.3 million people are in jail,80,000 are in some sort of restricted detention. This problem affects in the micro level because any person is vulnerable to being imprisoned. The funding for such regulating institutions are provided through the government which derive from everyone's taxes. The money can probably be in better use.
A functionalist would say that prisons provide jobs for many professionals such as law enforcement, doctors, social workers out of many. This institution primary focuses on protecting social order. Without jails people wouldn't fear surpassing the law,affecting society. This can produce Anomie suicide where there is too little regulation that individuals have no sense of morals and direction. Law enforcement is doing it's function which is to create fear within individuals conducing them to proper behavior. The dysfunction can be the cost these agencies are spending on the inmates because it is affecting society economically. Jails should properly categorize the indicated individuals who should be placed in solitary confinement. Those who are the most hazardous to society and its functioning.
I don't believe that limiting the budget for solitary confinement can be realistic. There can be an increase in inmates each week which can threaten the safety of workers in jails. Individuals are placed in jail for a reason because they are threatening social order. I believe a solution that can reduce the cost of solitary confinement can be to stratify how dangerous an inmate is to it's cell-mates and society. People who are in jail for minor charges should be placed in regular cells. Law enforcement can create certain guidelines for a person to be placed in solitary confinement and follow these rules. The proper placing of inmates can reduce the cost by just limiting certain individuals to solitary confinement who truly need to be placed in such restriction. This solution can decrease the cost and protect social order.
Daniel J says.
I agree with Teresa M about money on this issue. The amount of money we spend on food and shelter for criminals seems to be too high. The fact that it costs so much more for someone to be put in confinement where their rights are restricted seems just wrong, not morally, but mathematically. Why would we want to pay more money? They are already in jail. This acts as a jails jail, almost like a time out for prison. Now there are circumstances where this makes sense like mentally ill people and pregnant women, but the big issue is people who are either sentenced to jail for major crimes or people who misbehave in jail. People who are put directly into solitary confinement should either have a circumstance where they shouldn’t be allowed access to other inmates, or they shouldn’t be in solitary confinement. Personally I think we don’t use the death penalty enough. It takes too long for inmates to be processed in the system and when they do then they have nothing to live for for months until their execution date. You can argue the cruel and unusual punishment all you want but once someone is charged with their 3rd or 4th act of murder or rape either in or outside of prison they need to be taken out of society.
Teresa talks about how a functionalist wouldn’t view solitary confinement as something functional, I disagree. It’s no different from putting a dog in its cage for being bad or a child in time out. The function is to either teach them a lesson and have them think about their actions, or to just remove them temporarily from their environment so they can’t cause harm in the meantime. An interactionist would see how an individual interacts and socializes with other individuals, if he/she was unable to do so it might be beneficial for the whole society to remove the individual either permanently or just temporarily. Not only does this help the other people in the society interact with each other more normally, but it serves as a function of trimming away the bad and misbehaved of our society making us more peaceful and in the end more capable of functioning correctly.
A proposed solution would be to treat solitary confinement like a sort of second jail. Stay with me here. We treat jail as a way to rehabilitate people and punish them for what they did. We would use solitary confinement as a sort of 3 strikes you’re out in prison rule. If they cause too much trouble in jail then we would send them to confinement. If once they got out they caused more trouble on a repeated basis we would then just put them on death penalty. Seems rough? Yea its jail, it’s not supposed to be comfortable. Keeps gang leaders from sitting around in a jail cell their whole life issuing orders on tiny slips of paper. Keeps jail taxes lower. Benefits our society in more ways than one, hard to find a reason not to.
Anahit G.
I don't agree with Fabiola B. because I think that the people who are put into solitary confinement need to be in there, the real problem is that there is too much money being spent to house them in solitary. I think that if those people are a danger to those around them or themselves then they should be placed in solitary. As for pregnant women, they should be placed in solitary because as Fabiola said, it's not safe in prison and they need to be protected too. I don't think that placing people in solitary confinement only benefits those in power. It can also benefit the person who is being put into solitary.
I picked Fabiola's response to comment on because I think that her interpretation of the problem was interesting and it showed how people can see the same problem In so many ways.
This is a problem because it costs a lot of money to keep inmates in solitary and the conditions they are kept in is harsh. The conditions that these inmates are kept in is harsh but the reason they are kept in solitary is because they are a danger to society.
I think that this is a good topic to discuss because both sides have a good point and a solution could come out of talking about it and discussing ways that can help get to that solution. I think that the interaction it's would say that this is a problem because keeping the inmates in solitary will help in not spreading their behavior to others since they will not be interacting with society.
One solution to this problem would be that only those inmates that are a big risk to society and have committed horrible crimes should be placed in solitary and that will reduce costs because there won't be so many people to take care of.
Post a Comment