Compulsory commitment of inmates into the restrictive housing in U.S. prisons – roles, goals and future dynamics

Compulsory commitment of inmates into restrictive housing, or so called solitary confinement, administrative segregation, supermax, gives rise to many controversial issues that scientific research in the United States deals with. Subject to discussion are especially the constitutional controversies and the influence of such a treatment on the offender’s wellbeing as a human that tends to maintain social contact and that is vulnerable to possible negative impact of such strict conditions. Among scholars and practitioners there are opponents and also supporters of this solution, although internationally there is a conclusion (see the Nelson Mandela Rules) that restrictive housing should be banned, in particular when it is imposed on inmates for an indeterminate period or a prolonged period of time. Nowadays, the prevalent opinion is that other policies and practices should be worked out and implemented in order to replace restrictive housing, and at the same time that tools will have to be able to assist in achieving the main goals: security and order in the prison as well as rehabilitation and deterrent impact on inmates.

Abstract licence: CC BY

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.