The practice of solitary confinement traces its origins back to the 18th century when Quakers in Pennsylvania used this method as a substitution for public punishments.

In the 1700s, religious groups, including the Quakers, thought that isolating people in their cells with a Bible would lead to repentance and rehabilitation. The Walnut Street Jail in Philadelphia expanded to include solitary cells in 1790, and other prisons and jails adopted the approach over the subsequent years.

Undoubtedly, solitary confinement causes extreme suffering, particularly over prolonged. Effects include anxiety, panic, rage, paranoia, hallucinations, and, in some cases, suicide. Prolonged solitary confinement is a form of torture and it should never be used with youths and those with mental or physical disability or illness, or for anyone for more than 15 days. Nay, it should never be used with any prisoner at all.

 

What is it like in solitary confinement?

Unless I am grossly mistaken, typical solitary confinement conditions would appear something like this:

·         Cells are about 7 or 8 feet by 10 feet in size (slightly bigger than the average bathroom or elevator)

·         People are held in their cells for 22.5 to 24 hours per day; when let out, it is into a small, solitary outdoor cage with no recreational equipment

·         No group activities or congregating with others

·         Very few activities or programmes

·         Limited visitors and then only through a thick glass barrier with no physical contact

It is interesting to note that, by comparison, it would appear that solitary confinement is more expensive than the average cost of incarceration per inmate – almost more than double.

Recently, Professor Andrew Azzopardi, the dean of the Faculty of Social Wellbeing publicly stated that solitary confinement in prison systems should be abolished as it goes against fundamental human rights and causes permanent damage to the persons that have to go through it. He could not have stated it better.

Despite recognition of the negative consequences of forced isolation in prisons, the occasional practice of solitary confinement remains quite legal and constitutional in Malta. Showing that solitary confinement constitutes cruel and unusual punishment has proven difficult for inmates and their legal counsel. Unless our legislators take the courageous plunge to do away with this form of mediaeval punishment, this hideous practice is destined to remain lurking and threatening within the confines of our Correctional Facilities. Yet one should not stop there.

 

Alternatives to solitary confinement

It is not clear how or when solitary confinement is resorted to in our Correctional Facilities as there is a wide discretionary power and authority involved.

As solitary confinement or segregation has been a “go to” to manage difficult situations, additional alternative programmes, shown abroad to be an overall success, could be. Examples of alternative programmes include: reentry programming and integrated housing units.

Using a little bit of logic and imagination, other viable alternatives can easily be devised. Because of its devastating impact on mental health and social skills, solitary confinement should never be the first option for responding to behaviour issues. Lower levels of infractions that do not involve violence toward others can be dealt with through temporary, less severe sanctions. Using a range of graduated sanctions, such as loss of privileges, visiting rights, phone calls, participation in a programme or group activity or impounding personal property or even delaying a parole date.

On a pro-active basis, rewarding positive behaviour by increasing incentives for positive behaviour rather than spending scarce resources responding to discipline problems will transform our correctional systems into a rehabilitative mechanism in conformity with its proper image that modern times dictate that it should have. More out of cell time, granting limited privileges, gaining early release by participating in pro-social activities such as anger management and problem-solving programmes can be offered to inmates who boast of good records.

Doing away with solitary confinement may actually, in the long run, reduce the number of inmate-on-staff assaults and inmate-on-inmate assaults. Inmates are bound to occasionally misbehave, and when they do, they must be humanely punished. Yet going to extremes, which are inherently counter-productive, is no solution.

In solitary confinement one starts to forget about the world outside – it becomes not relevant or relatable anymore. The darkest part of solitary confinement is that one starts to forget about cars and jobs and families and weather and politicians – and all the things that make up a society.

If you ever meet someone who cannot understand why solitary confinement is considered a cruel and inhuman punishment, you have met a misanthrope.

 

Dr Mark Said is an advocate