Social Isolation Is Not Romantic
I posted recently on the torture that is solitary confinement in prison, noting:
We are people who evolved in small bands, living cooperatively with others, meaning our minds are adapted for social living -- being amongst others.
Even famous loners weren't all alone, or tried not to be, writes Kimberlee Brownlee at Aeon:
The wild is a source not only of sensory stimulation, but also of interspecies sociality. ... Robinson Crusoe had a dog, two cats, some goats and a parrot, and later a human companion in Friday. And another Crusoe-like character, the runaway 12-year-old Sam Gribley, the protagonist in Jean Craighead George's children's novel My Side of the Mountain (1959), takes a baby falcon from a nest, trains it, and names it Frightful. He also adopts a semi-tame weasel, which he calls the Baron.The same kind of anthropomorphising happens in the movie Cast Away (2000) where Tom Hanks, who appears to be bereft of all animal contact on a deserted island, personifies a volleyball by giving it a face, naming it Wilson, and later being genuinely grieved when he loses it.
Real, relentless isolation is not at all romantic. Indeed, it is far worse than the stress of social life. In contrast with the success of military-trained Proenneke, the inexperienced hiker Christopher McCandless died of starvation in Alaska in 1992 after venturing into the wild alone with few supplies, a victim of the fantasy of the wilderness hermit.
Moreover, the evidence from people who've endured unwanted social isolation - among them the US journalists Jerry Levin and Terry Anderson, who were held in solitary confinement in Lebanon as political prisoners by the Hezbollah in the 1980s - is heart-wrenching. Another political prisoner, Shane Bauer, who was held incommunicado for 26 months in Iran, described the black horror of his experience and his desperate desire to reconnect with other people, even with his captors.
Such accounts are confirmed by a growing body of psychological evidence that indicates that supportive social contact, interaction and inclusion are fundamentally important to a minimally decent human life and, more deeply, to human wellbeing. For the most part, we need one another; we cannot flourish or even survive without each other. These fundamental needs are the ground for a range of rights that we neglect, but should not, including the rights to be part of a network of social connections.
"Real, relentless isolation is not at all romantic. Indeed, it is far worse than the stress of social life. In contrast with the success of military-trained Proenneke, the inexperienced hiker Christopher McCandless died of starvation in Alaska in 1992 after venturing into the wild alone with few supplies, a victim of the fantasy of the wilderness hermit."
Have you read the book? Christopher McCandless died from inadequate fat in his diet, and eating some semi poisonous shit that exacerbated the problem. He did not die from loneliness.
In contrast to a very few,people who have died from stupidity alone in the wilderness, we count millions who have been helped to their deaths, if not out and out murdered by their fellow man.
Seriously Amy, this social isolation bulshit is one of the weakest arguments against solitary confinement. Which is really the only safe, and cost effective method to isolate weak defenseless prisoners from predators in the general population, and psychopathic predators from those who can function in the general population.
For the most part, prisoners are not nice people, who just took a wrong turn one day. Thanks to the closing of the psychiatric hospitals, a lot of them are seriously mentally ill, and a danger to themselves, and others.
Most of the rest would play your concern trolling on their behalf, like Van Cliburn on a Steinway.
Isab at February 7, 2016 5:37 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/08/world/prisons-in-japan-are-safe-but-harsh.html
Is this more what you had in mind?
Isab at February 7, 2016 5:59 AM
Seriously Amy, this social isolation bulshit is one of the weakest arguments against solitary confinement
It's actually not, but it's adorable that you seem to think adding the word "bullshit" makes for an argument. People go mentally ill in a short time from solitary confinement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/04/health/solitary-confinement-mental-illness.html?_r=0
Because you don't have the answer immediately popping into your mind doesn't mean solitary is okay. We have a duty to prisoners to imprison them in a way that is humane, and I say that not as somebody naive that many are in prison for horrible crimes. Many, also, are not. See the link and the kid who was in solitary for years, sans a trial, and then killed himself.
And an idea pops to mind for me which is that prisoners could be contained in separate cells, but in the same room.
And it is especially inhumane to put people in solitary because we have them locked away in a place where their lives are in danger or they'll be raped daily or more or they're mentally ill.
Should I throw in the word "bullshit" somewhere in here for emphasis?
Amy Alkon at February 7, 2016 6:35 AM
How would explain someone like your boyfriend, Amy? Or me? Both of us prefer isolation.
Patrick at February 7, 2016 6:45 AM
It's called being introverted Patrick.
She's talking about systematic social isolation-- not introversion. And even people who voluntarily isolate themselves tend to be quite unhealthy mentally and physically.
Gregg I'm assuming doesn't like to just randomly chill with peeps but he still forms strong social bonds.
Ppen at February 7, 2016 11:02 AM
"And an idea pops to mind for me which is that prisoners could be contained in separate cells, but in the same room."
This was once about adolescents and others being protected from the prison population by this seclusion.
"Seperate cells, but in the same room."
What does that look like? Got budget to build that? Tens of thousands of them?
Does the lifer who finds the new prisoner tasty get to see him, maybe act out every fantasy short of physical contact, where the new guy can see that?
Radwaste at February 7, 2016 11:34 AM
See, I'd nationalize the prison system.
First thing, if you havent gone to trail within 6 months of your arrest, the charges are dropped with predjuice
Non violent crimes, no jail time, depending on the damages cause if you cant pay you have your wages garnished, dont have a job the state can put you to work washing side walks,
Anyone sentenced to jail time gets divided into risk categories.
Each category goes to a different prison
No mixing car jackers with serial killers
Use an island in the Pacific for lifers let them fend for themselves
Every state sends their prisoners to the same facilities and pays into a national fund set aside just for the prison system,
lujlp at February 7, 2016 12:22 PM
Gregg I'm assuming doesn't like to just randomly chill with peeps but he still forms strong social bonds.
Posted by: Ppen at February 7, 2016 11:02 AM
Prisoners are not in orison to form "strong social bonds" with other prisoners.
In fact, as a condition of parole, they are often required to not be in contact with other convicts....for a very good reason, just like alcoholics shouldn't be hanging out in bars.
Prison isn't and shouldn't be a place where you have buddies that twenty years after your release, you get together with for a reunion.
They aren't the kind of people a non criminal should be socializing with.
Amy I think you need to make the acquaintance of several people who work as prison guards, and have some serious long discussions with them about the realities of the conditions they work under.
I know three of them, and a number of public defenders. How many do you know?
I personally feel the same way about convicts as I do about illegal immigrants. I can feel great personal pity for some of them, and their personal circumstances and at the same time *still* not want government social services bending over backwards to accommodate their needs.
As Radwaste has pointed out, the unintended consequences, and the logistical issues are beyond any reasonable tax payer funded fix.
Isab at February 7, 2016 12:26 PM
Every state sends their prisoners to the same facilities and pays into a national fund set aside just for the prison system,
Posted by: lujlp at February 7, 2016 12:22 PM
One of the many reasons prisons aren't nationalized is because they want families of prisoners to visit so that convicts can maintain social relationships with their families, as opposed to forming relationships with other prisoners.
If you put carjacker central in North Carolina, and wife of car jacker lives in Seward Alaska, carjacker is quite soon going to find himself new less desirable friends in car jacker central.
Isab at February 7, 2016 12:33 PM
Nobody is saying prisoners should form strong social bonds. I'm talking about the difference between introversion and isolation.
Secondly I'm with Alkon on this. Every scientific piece I've read says it creates worse outcomes for prisoners. I don't care what the Japanese do, nobody really knows what the hell goes on with their system because they're so secretive and monolithic. Don't they only take people to trial if they're is like a 99% chance of conviction? I don't remember but I remember someone explaining why their court system is so shitty.
Prisoners possibly being mentally ill doesn't make a case for isolation either. It makes their mental illness worse.
And my ex from years and years ago was a prison guard who worked in CA and NY. Alkon is friends with several law enforcement people. I guess that's supposed to make our case stronger vs the scientific shit that's available.
Ppen at February 7, 2016 12:53 PM
KenR had such a perfect response:
'I recommend putting a big Xanax salt lick in every area inmates have access to, and a smaller one in each cell. The only problem I can see with this is just keeping the guards away from it. But you probably wouldn't even need very many guards."
Psychiatric drugs are underused in prison.
Ppen at February 7, 2016 1:04 PM
And my ex from years and years ago was a prison guard who worked in CA and NY. Alkon is friends with several law enforcement people. I guess that's supposed to make our case stronger vs the scientific shit that's available.
Posted by: Ppen at February 7, 2016 12:53 PM
No what is does, if you listen to them carefully, and maybe visit a few prisons is give you some reality based experience of how a prison actually has to run with man power/ money limitations ( and mostly unionized employees)
If you bother to ask the right questions.
Psych theory has about the poorest track record of all the so called soft sciences because it is impossible to design an objective control group study.
It is basically an ivory tower wet dream with no basis or applicability to the real world.
Numerous people have already stated that,solitary confinement isn't like being placed in a dark hole somewhere. You have contact with guards (other people) every single day.
And yet, you and Amy have tried to characterize this as some sort of sensory deprivation tank, to fit your straw man arguments.
Isab at February 7, 2016 1:34 PM
Funny a complaint about straw man when anything you don't agree with is always dismissed as hippie liberal propaganda.
Have you ever considered that maybe other people have the same type of conversations with law enforcement officials and the possibility exists that they come to different conclusions than you? Naw. Must be cuz I'm a progressive hippie liberal since I advocate the use of psychiatric drugs instead of isolation.
Ppen at February 7, 2016 2:01 PM
Ms Alkon: "Because you don't have the answer immediately popping into your mind doesn't mean [some bad solution] is okay."
There's a concept that, if more people would grasp it, could lead to solutions that are actually good.
Ken R at February 7, 2016 5:57 PM
Some background before my opinion.
I have worked as a Correction Officer for almost 15 years. I currently work in the Idaho prison system. My experience includes the surrounding states of Wyoming, Eastern Washington and Eastern Oregon. My previous work was in the military in a very high stress field with lots of training(and alas real world experience) in identifying people losing their marbles. I also have multiple college degrees in various fields which is not the norm for all people working here. More people have degrees that work here then the public I have interacted with believe.
That said.
While each states prison system was somewhat different, there was absolutely no complete isolation(the kind you see in The Shawshank Redemption as an example).
In Idaho the isolation areas at max and medium are somewhat different due to age of the buildings physically but the offenders have the ability to converse and recreate daily. They see people multiple times a day. They are also monitored by licensed psychiatric personnel. Even the most violent prisoners get all the options even when it puts Officers in danger to interact with them directly. As long as they use the materials properly they are given books and other materials to help somewhat with the boredom. Outside phone calls are allowed just not as frequently as they get in the regular units. Long term isolation units allow all normal property which includes TV's, radios, books and tablets.
In Idaho they also have 2 mental health units(one in max and one in medium). I have worked in both for years. These offenders all have various mental health issues.
To get an idea of how it is setup...
The Officers are not allowed to know the offenders exact problems due to privacy issue(although we have gotten extremely good at guessing them). To make matters worse when any Officer doesn’t show up for work we get a new totally untrained Officer as a replacement. The offenders in the medium unit are allowed for the most part to do all the normal prisoner activities and we are outnumbers about 125 to 1 at the best case scenario. We carry nothing but pepper spray.
Starting in the medium side of mental health. These prisoners vary from pedophiles, rapists and murders and have little to no self control(a lot less then the regular prisoners). Like high school they have all their cliques(gangs included). They are allowed to associated with each other and general population. We are required to protect them all equally from each other. Each clique normally would like to kill/hurt the others. When they eventually get out of control(and they will) they get sent over to max.
At max they are more isolated but still have the same contact as the above regular isolation. Add to that they are constantly monitored and given psychiatric care. They are not allowed to touch each other. They can see each other through the small windows in the cells. Between the fishing and yelled conversations up and down the tiers they get constant social interaction.
Idaho has had some controversies when some senior clinicians got into more serious trouble for trying to make things seem better then reality as we started focusing on mental health in 2007-08. You can thank the Officers for pointing out their shortcomings and the politics for taking so long to sort it out.
If any prisoner states in any way they are suicidal. The process is easy in to get in hard to get out. They are immediately monitors 24hrs a day. They are given a peer to talk to and then evaluated by clinicians several times a day. They only get off suicide watch after multiple people agree they are ready to go back into a suitable situation.
Protective custody is another issue that ranges from an offender coming and asking to be taken from general population to a credible threat is made against them(they can decline if they want from this one). If enough offenders have the same issue they are not put into isolation but instead given a common living are away from general population.
Psychiatric drugs are underused in prison.
Posted by: Ppen at February 7, 2016 1:04 PM
You really have no idea have many people claim under over use of psychiatric drugs in prison. We walk a careful line not to over under medicate people that are actively seeking drugs to trade or abuse in prison. Watching pill call and making sure people are actually taking their medications consumes a lot of valuable time. Most people diagnosed with a mental health problem are on some kind of medication.
Anyone sentenced to jail time gets divided into risk categories.
Each category goes to a different prison
No mixing car jackers with serial killers
Posted by: lujlp at February 7, 2016 12:22 PM
Big surprise we already have a threat assessment process that divides offenders into categories on a local level. This assessment is constantly updated for as long as a prisoners is here. Of course killers get mixed in with regular prisoners since we have to rehabilitate them also. You need to get the judicial system to redo most of their decisions(esp the 9th circuit) if you are going to utilize any of your ideas.
Of course this is a very broad overview as this comment is long enough as it is.
My general opinion is there are many prisoners that have absolutely no desire to reform or change. Being in prison will not change this. That said in Idaho our recidivism if I remember are generally lower then California’s.
As to solitary confinement the way I have seen it done works to deter bad behavior and keep offenders safe(at least for extroverts…introverts would rather stay in our “isolation units”). I don't agree with totally isolating people but even death row doesn't get totally isolated here. Other then the states I have worked in I have no direct experience.
Having seen what was reported happens in my prison compared to what really happens makes it harder to believe everything in any studies/news article.(to many political agendas to keep track of).
Fnlckt at February 7, 2016 7:30 PM
If association with a prison guard is evidence of special insight on the subject of solitary confinement and isolation, maybe I should throw in my 2 cents worth. I've worked in health services in two correctional institutions, and in a variety of psychiatric/mental health care settings. I've worked from day to day alongside a hundred or so different corrections officers (euphemism for prison/jail guards)
The harm of isolating someone to the extent of solitary confinement has been so well known for so long (there is literature going back more than 200 years) that conducting a scientific experiment on the subject would be about as useful as a scientific experiment to see if hitting people on the head with a hammer will cause them harm. And about as unethical as well. Which is why researchers no longer conduct experiments on the effects of isolation and sensory deprivation on humans after some notorious experiments during the 1960s and 50s. And on animals after the 1970s (see Harry Harlow's monkey experiments) Because conducting such experiments is doing nothing more than inflicting the harm everyone already knows will occur.
And as far as the insight of jail guards, I found that there were a few who were aware of the harm and were sincerely concerned about it, a few who were aware and seemed to get off on it, and a lot who were oblivious or indifferent... didn't matter to them.
Radwaste: "What does that look like? Got budget to build that? Tens of thousands of them?"
Isab: "As Radwaste has pointed out, the unintended consequences, and the logistical issues are beyond any reasonable tax payer funded fix."
Those are definitely valid points.
An interesting experiment would be to identify people who consider the use of solitary confinement/isolation to be inhumane and ask each one how much more money and effort he or she is individually willing to contribute to create something better. Add it all up and see if it comes anywhere close to being enough.
Ken R at February 7, 2016 7:31 PM
Re: Fnlckt's post above: It's been a long time since I've worked in a correctional facility. Reading Fnlckt's post makes me feel optimistic. It shows that the harm of isolation is indeed well known, and their are people working in the system going out of their way to make something better. There are good people everywhere.
Ken R at February 7, 2016 7:42 PM
I think part of the problem is that the field of psychology tries like all get-out to ignore or explain away the existence of the cluster B personality disorders, traits of which can be found in most prisoners. Psychiatrists regularly get pwned by prisoners because of their lack of training in personality disorders, and because of their desire to attribute criminal behavior to more easily treated problems. (OK, "pwned", is so last-decade, but it fits here.) To be frank, most criminals are not nice people, and tea and sympathy will not convince them to change their behavior. (They will be happy to act nice towards you, for a while, if they think they can take advantage of you by doing so.)
For hardened criminal there is just nothing that can be done. Pretty much 100% of them will commit additional crimes if released, and many will commit additional crimes while in prison. For the safety of the rest of the prison population and the staff, you are probably going to have to isolate these guys. Remember as you are doing so that they have absolutely no regard for you whatsoever; anything you do for them is merely an opening for them to exploit, and they will harm you without a second thought if they can get something out of it. They are not nice people, and nothing known to science today will change that.
Cousin Dave at February 8, 2016 7:28 AM
Ms Alkon: "Because you don't have the answer immediately popping into your mind doesn't mean [some bad solution] is okay."
There's a concept that, if more people would grasp it, could lead to solutions that are actually good.
Posted by: Ken R at February 7, 2016 5:57 PM
In order to come to a better solution, or any solution at all, you have to completely understand the current structure of both the criminal justice system, and the modern American prison system.
Why they do, what they do, and run the way they do, is not a matter of arbitrary choices or malevolent or benevolent intentions.
It is usually because the way they do it, is the least bad choice among many other imperfect alternatives.
This was what I was suggesting that you do rather than just throw out sophomoric SJW slogans about *there has to be a better way*
It took me at least thirty years as an adult to realize that organizations, social systems, procedural methods and scientific systems don't spring into life out of thin air.
They all evolve, and adapt to the realities on the ground, and it takes a lot of blood sweat and tears to make even small changes. Most of which will be either ineffective at best, or make the problem a lot worse.
Most *good ideas* expire at an early phase of implementation for a damn good reason.
Form follows function, in the real world as sure as night follows day.
Now that Fnickt has blown all your straw man arguments and made for TV movie assumptions, (about the way prisons actually operate) out of the water, and Cousin Dave piled it on....I don't have much more to add.
Isab at February 8, 2016 10:53 AM
Isab: "It took me at least thirty years as an adult to realize that organizations, social systems, procedural methods and scientific systems don't spring into life out of thin air."
Why did it take you so long to realize something so obvious? From your comments above, it's still not clear that it's really sunk in.
"They all evolve, and adapt to the realities on the ground, and it takes a lot of blood sweat and tears to make even small changes."
Well duh. So you're starting to realize that just because someone can't instantly deliver a better way to do something that's currently being done poorly, it doesn't mean that a better way can't be found.
"Now that Fnickt has blown all your straw man arguments and made for TV movie assumptions... out of the water..."
To the contrary, I think he proves my point. With a lot of blood, toil, tears and sweat people "evolve, and adapt to the realities on the ground", and eventually come up with a better way. It makes me feel optimistic knowing there are people like Fnickt working in the prison system.
I'm sure the system she/he describes working in over the past 15 years, which is a lot different than the one I worked in years ago, evolved over time, with a lot of effort by people who don't think problems are unsolvable if they "don't have the answer immediately popping into their mind".
Ken R at February 8, 2016 7:57 PM
Regarding Cousin Dave's last post above:
I don't think the field of psychology tries to ignore or explain away the existence of the cluster B personality traits, but it's a long way from coming up with effective ways to treat them.
Other than that I can't see anything in Cousin Dave's post I'd disagree with.
Ken R at February 8, 2016 8:34 PM
Leave a comment