Ken’s Comments:


Here we see that use of solitary does not reduce violence, and, in fact, decreases public safety. 

READ SUBTLE BUT REAL SERIOUS DAMAGE TO SOCIETY caused by the war on drugs. Backfire Effect kra 

What most of the authors of articles about solitary confinement don’t know is the real reason that many inmates are put there. What is that reason? Totally illegally, and criminally, guards will manufacture false “write ups” against inmates and put them in isolation as illegal punishment for their having filed a grievance or spoken out about some sort of prison abuse. This pernicious practice is widespread, but all the authors of these articles see is the numbers, and in some cases, the fictitious “write ups”!

READ It’s not about What They Did to Me – Prison Abuse   and Culture of Cover Up


Excerpts from the Article:


A “white paper” published in November 2016 by Prisoners’ Legal Services of Massachusetts (PLSM) found that while the use of solitary confinement in the state was widespread, it did not produce provable cost-effectiveness or reduce prison violence – and that solitary may actually be bad for public safety.

In June 2017, members of the state legislature’s Judiciary Committee heard the first proposal for reform to follow the PLSM study – a bill that would limit solitary confinement to cases where a prisoner poses a clear threat to the safety of the facility. “You need to make sure someone poses a threat in order to keep them in segregation, and you have to give them a pathway out,” said PLSM attorney Bonita Tenneriello, who added that prisoners in solitary need “some kind of programming to address their behavioral problems.”

The Massachusetts Department of Correction (MDOC) already requires a hearing within 30 days when prisoners are placed in segregation. Further, MDOC policies state that prisoners must pose a “substantial threat” either to others or to the prison’s safe operation. Solitary is also supposed to be limited to “administrative” as opposed to punitive purposesBut Tenneriello said the MDOC had failed to follow those regulations.

PLSM published its white paper shortly after the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) reformed segregation practices in the federal Bureau of Prisons. That move came as a number of state and local corrections agencies across the U.S. began to scale back what PLSM called an over-reliance on solitary confinement.

In addition to limiting the use of solitary, other bills pending before the Massachusetts legislature would improve conditions in segregation units and require jails to disclose more information about their solitary confinement practices.

The white paper presented data from several states where reducing the use of segregation did not result in increased prison violence. In fact, some states reported that curtailing the use of solitary had coincided with fewer violent incidents. After Mississippi cut the number of prisoners in “supermax” segregation units by 85 percent, for example, there was a 70 percent reduction in violence. Maine halved the number of prisoners in its solitary population and also saw no increase in overall violence, with some units even showing a decline. And after Colorado closed a 316-bed segregation unit, reducing its solitary population by one-third, the state saved $18 million over a four-year period during which prisoner-on-staff violence fell to its lowest level since 2006. [See, e.g.: PLN, Sept. 2017, p.1].

Redirecting funds from segregation units to other programs – such as drug treatment, education and employment training – would reap Massachusetts much greater benefits, the PLSM study argued. It costs the state $100,000 to $170,000 a year to hold a prisoner in segregated housing, compared to about $50,000 per general population prisoner. The study suggested investing the savings from reduced use of solitary into “programs that will help prisoners avoid segregation in prison and succeed on release, creating a virtuous circle of reduced prison violence, reduced recidivism, and further savings.”

To the extent that other types of programming help prisoners avoid recidivism, the use of solitary confinement may actually endanger public safety, the report concluded. In addition to missing out on rehabilitative programs, the denial of family visitation – which is common for most segregated prisoners – was also shown to decrease the chance of success once a prisoner is released and returns to the community.

“Prisoners held in segregation for an extended period of time and certainly those released directly from segregation to the street are at a high risk for failure, which is undeniably bad for public safety,” the study stated.


Finally, the PLSM made several other recommendations, including prohibiting the use of segregation for mentally ill prisoners altogether, limiting the use of solitary confinement to prisoners who pose a substantial threat, providing programming to all prisoners in solitary and eliminating the release of prisoners directly from segregation to the community.


Read the Whole Story