PSYCHOLOGICAL DEATH ROW:

Supermaximum Security Prisons, Sensory Deprivation and Effects of Solitary Confinement

(Excerpts of the below were delivered to a gathering in Boscobel, Wisconsin in October 2001. Excerpts from the blow were also delivered to a gathering in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on 9 Dec 2001 in honor of International Human Rights Day (IHRD is 10 December)

Supermax (supermaximum prison) and SHUs (Secure Housing Units) are free-standing facilities or units within other prison facilities. They are to provide for the management and secure control of inmates who have been designated by Department of Corrections (DOC) officials to exhibit violent or disruptive behavior while incarcerated. This most often means inmates are held in isolation, solitary confinement, in sensory deprived conditions and in an environment restricted of stimulation.

Today there are 38 states with supermax and SHU prisons which house nearly 20,000 prisoners in these conditions. One inmate is quoted as saying "I have not walked on anything but concrete for 3 years." Another has said, "Being round people makes me anxious."

These type of prisons have been growing at a rate of about 2 a year. The one here in Wisconsin at Boscobel, opened in November 1999. It cost the Wisconsin taxpayers between $40-50 million to build. It has the capacity to house 509 prisoners. Its current operating budget per year is about $1 million with only 345 prisoners of the 509 capacity

The phrase solitary confinement is the confinement of a person/prisoner alone in a cell nearly all day and with very little chance for social interaction or stimulation. It is also an environment that does not stimulate the any of the human senses (sight, taste, touch, sound, smell) restricted environment stimulation (RES) and one in which the person is in near isolation. Individuals tolerate these conditions in variable ways and in variable degrees which run form the mild to the severe.

It is true many inmates held in these conditions may have the symptoms they suffer from subside upon termination of solitary confinement. However, it is also true many are likely to suffer permanent harm as a result of the above types of confinement. The most common side effects can manifests themselves as intolerance to social interaction. This is critical to note since it has a direct bearing on an inmate's ability to successfully readjust once released into the broader society of either general population prison or our own communities as our neighbors.

Before the industrial age, there was little to no distinction between deviant behavior for "criminal intent" and that stemming from "mental illness." Deviant behavior was socially evil, much feared and cruelly punished.

Early in the 19^th century came a rise in social optimism. There was an interest in the possibility of rehabilitation of persons who displayed deviant behavior. Simultaneously two great social reforms began to take place, the development of large mental hospitals and the construction of the first large penitentiaries.

The premise of this new idea of penitentiaries was, psychological and social deviant behavior was due to the evils and stresses of modern society. The impetus was that inmates had to be protected from both the evil influences from the broader society and from the evil influences of each other, a type of safeguard for them. Thus, it followed, healing could take place naturally if the deviant person was removed from these evils and would then come to know his own true nature. Thus, a form of separation, isolated and solitary conditions, was devised to give each inmate the opportunity to live a life alone, like a penitent monk in his own monastic cell.

In Philadelphia in 1829, the Philadelphia Prison was very conscientious of this safeguard and one of the first to apply it. Other American penitentiaries were then devised in accordance with this system of rigid solitary confinement to ensure absolute and total isolation of offenders from any evil and corrupting influences.

Other countries jumped on this new bandwagon of "social reform."

One of the real differences between the penitentiaries during this great surge of social optimism that swept over America during the "social reform" periods of the early 1800's and today's use of solitary confinement and supermax or SHU prisons is the openness with which these early institutions were held up to public scrutiny. In the conditions of today, few if any are allowed access to our institutions of rigid confinement and punishment; no media, no journalists, no human rights organizations, etc.

Here in Wisconsin, our Department of Corrections stated openness to others is not necessary because our state egislature has oversight and access. However, even our state legislators have had their share of troubles getting access to some of the prisoners in the supermax, tours and copies of records which are available under the Freedom of Information Act.

It was the openness of the early 1800's system that enabled psychologists and clinicians to begin to see differences in the people kept under such ridge conditions verses other confinement systems. It was also this openness that allowed those psychologists and clinicians to do statistical comparisons between the ridge conditions of confinement in which the senses are deprived and environmental stimulants restricted and other confinement systems.

As early as the 1830's these comparisons began to show the difference between the Philadelphia Prison of rigid confinement and the Auburn system in New York state at Auburn and Sing-Sing. These comparisons gave enough evidence for people to voice their concerns that it was not natural to leave a person in solitary; that these conditions were so unnatural they bred insanity. These comparisons showed the Pennsylvania system had a higher incident of insanity than the New York system.

In 1842, even Charles Dickens wrote his thoughts and impressions of such conditions:

"He is a man buried alive - dead to everything but torturing anxieties and horrible despair..."

Many countries in Europe emulated the American system. However, it was the Germans who took up the task of documenting its effects. This eventually lead to the demise of such systems there. From 1854 to 1909, 37 articles were printed in German scientific journals about psychotic disturbances among prisoners.

It was becoming evident that psychotic disturbances among prisoner held in solitary and RES conditions were not only the concern of clinicians. The subject was attracting administrative attention too. Administrative personnel made some great efforts to explain the disturbances being observed and documented. However, numerous reports based on critical observation showed the majority of psychoses were a direct result of the conditions of confinement itself.

Statistical evidence was accumulating showing solitary confinement was the cause of very disturbing cases of insanity, physical disease and death in some cases. Because of this the system was falling out of favor. The systems reaction was to change from an open, optimistic experiment in social reform to a system of hidden, and perhaps secretive forms of punishment and control over people held for criminal intent.

Looking at today's supermax and SHU prisons, this seems to be exactly where we are now. The difficulties in obtaining information and getting access to the prisoners themselves, among other things, certainly is convincing the public and legislatures we have a closed and secretive system of punishment and control.

By the 1950's, many reports were appearing regarding the major psychiatric disturbances among survivors of prolonged solitary confinement in war. This was true for the American public and it's prisoners in the Korean war. Reports appeared on "brainwahsing" and the admission that alterations in the sensory environment were being intentionally imposed upon prisoners. Throughout the 1950's and 1960's, we learned it was not beyond any government to use devastating psychological techniques to "indoctrinate" and "break the will" of political prisoners and prisoners of war.

Experimental model studies were done in the 1950's and 1960's at Harvard and McGill University Medical Centers. These studies were funded by the US Government; especially the Department of Defense and the US Central Intelligence Agency.

As early as 1956, Dr. M. Meltzer, former Chief Medical Officer at Alcatrzs Federal Penitentiary made know his observations of psychiatric disturbances when persons were exposed to punitive solitary confinement at Alcatraz. He observed changes in motor skills ranging from occasional tense pacing, restlessness and inner tension from noise -- yelling, banging and assaultiveness at one end of the spectrum, to regressed, dissociated withdrawn hypnoid state at the other end. Per Meltzer, "...sense of self, the ego and the ego boundary phenomena are profoundly affected by the isolation."

In 1956 at a symposium of psychiatrists, Dr. John Lilly of the National Institute of Mental Health contributed this to the topic of factors used to increase the susceptibility of individuals to forceful indoctrination "...social and sensory isolation was still the central pathogenic factor in such confinement."

The complied research from these models and other studies revealed there are symptoms that can be attributed to conditions of confinement. Some of these symptoms are: perceptual distortions, illusions, vivid fantasies (sometimes along with vivid hallucinations) and hyperresponsivity to external stimuli. Along with these, some people developed observable syndromes which include cognitive impairment, massive free-floating anxiety, extreme motor restlessness, emergence of primitive aggressive fantasies (sometimes along with fearful hallucinations) and in some cases, delirium like conditions. EEG's confirmed the same abnormalities typical of stupor and delirium. It was also seen that there were organic changes in the brain similar to stupor and delirium.

The findings from experimental models verified previous data from non-experimental circumstances. These included those of prisoners of war held in solitary confinement and held in conditions to "brainwash," to "break a person's will" and "indoctrinate."

Appropriate and trained authorities have evaluated and found interesting observations regarding inmates held in sensory deprived or RES conditions. Instead of inmates exaggerating symptoms or presenting false or feign illness for attention purposes, prisoners were very defensive concerning psychiatric problems they were suffering. Many tended to rationalize away their symptoms, they avoided mentioning them, or denied their existence all in what seemed to be efforts to minimize the significance of their reactions to conditions of confinement.

Dr. Stuart Grassian has much experience in the area of evaluating psychiatric effects of solitary confinement. He has interviewed many prisoners. Based on his experiences, interviews, knowledge and research he has found individuals held in isolation kinds of conditions report an increasing inability to tolerate ordinary stimuli; simple things such as noise - the ordinary, everyday noises of plumbing and heating systems working.

Other common findings by Dr. Grassian's of inmates in isolation conditions are:

• hearing voices - even whispers,
• panic attacks,
• difficulty in concentration and with memory (example: inmates stated they could not concentrate to read) which can lead to disorientation,
• mind wanders,
• aggressive fantasies of revenge, torture and/or mutilation of the guards,
• paranoia and other fears,
• authorities trying to "break them down,"
• doubt oneself and troubles in determining what is real, and
• problems with controlling impulses - sometimes with random violence.

Though research and studies it was also found inmates held in isolation, solitary confinement and/or RES had difficulties sorting out in their minds the intent of their type of confinement. Inmates interpret in their minds what appears to be a perceived intent for being held in these conditions. If the inmate interpreted his situation as potentially threatening, that inmate was more likely to develop adverse psychiatric reactions. On the other hand, if the inmate perceived the situation as benign, that inmate was far more likely to tolerate the circumstances. In this later group, the inmates may experience non-threatening, visual imagery, fantasy, daydreams and hallucinations. It is interesting to note both groups, whether their perceived their confinement as threatening or non-threatening, had illusions and perceptual disturbances similar to hallucinogenic drugs.

It will surprise no one that there is much variability among individuals to tolerate solitary confinement, isolation or RSE conditions. The variability itself helps provide insight into the toxicity of the conditions in which the persons are being held, particularly if it is prolonged. Isolation conditions have been found to be toxic to brain function and can cause symptoms of the same nature as stupor and delirium. Prolonged confinement also may contribute to the recurrence of preexisting illness or cause the appearance of an acute mental illness in people who were thought to be free of such illnesses. This is particularly critical because many prisoners have been observed to have pre-existing central nervous system dysfunctions. Isolated and non- stimulating conditions can exasperate these kinds of brain dysfunctions and also shows connections with other biological, abnormal functions of the central nervous system.

Some studies present clear evidence that isolation, depriving senses and restricted stimulation are very harmful to those with pre-existing central nervous system dysfunction which can lead to adverse psychiatric reactions. There are also studies that show those with pre-existing personality disorders relating to social function exhibit an increase risk of incapacitating fearfulness, paranoia, agitation and irrational aggression mainly towards staff. These very people along with those who have difficulty controlling impulses or have internal, emotional chaotic lives are the very people who are prone to committing infractions that result in more strict incarceration conditions; thus a vicious cycle has been set up.

It is important to note the finding that depriving one of healthy sleep, disturbing the normal sleep-wake cycles or the use of sedating medication do increase individuals' vulnerability to develop delirium. The reason I state this is important to note is because in Wisconsin's supermax prison, there is a low wattage light which remains on in all the cells; 24 hours a day. Many of the inmates complain about this disturbing their ability to sleep. Inmates tried sleeping with the blank pulled over their heads or facing the wall. However, it is unacceptable at the Boscobel institute to not be able to see an inmates face at all times. Therefore, the guards wake up any inmate whose face they can not see. Sometime inmates can be woken up every hour and night after night if their face is not visible.

In general, individuals who are mature, personality and mentally healthy, with intact central nervous systems have a greater ability to tolerate isolation conditions. Individuals who have internal cognitive and or emotional chaotic lives are especially at risk under such conditions.

All of the findings, observations and evaluations above are nothing new to us today. Many of them have been known since the mid 1800's - well over 100 years. They are what made the American penitentiary "social reform" system go from an open, optimistic experiment to a closed, secretive system of punishment and control of today. If one does not believe this, they simply need ask their local Department of Corrections for records showing accountability and reasons for any inmate's transfer to a supermax or SHU prison. They simply need to question why media does not have more access. They simply need to ask why there is not more independent and impartial oversight monitoring that has some degree of authority.

It is findings, observations and evaluations like the above which lead the Germans to close down these type of institute in the mid 1800's. It's what led to the publication of 37 articles in scientific journals by the Germans on psychotic disturbances of person's held in isolation.

In the year 2000 Turkey started using what it termed "F-Type" prisons. It was going from a system of large dormitory cells that held up to 60 inmates per cell to cells that held one to three inmates. Prisoners could be held in solitary confinement or small group isolation. Many Turkish citizens were outraged. There were protests and hunger strikes all over the country which led to many arrests. One of the main concerns of this new "F-Type" prison was the secrecy it provided to authorities. The European Parliament investigated and determined this was "...a form of unnecessary oppression which can be a form of psychological torture."

I can't help but wonder where is the outrage in the US. Simply on the level of a taxpaying citizen there should be more accountability for the spending of the money (which is millions and millions of state budget dollars) and better results. Many of these inmates are going to be released and be living in our communities. We should demand they be most fit to reintegrate into society at large. There is no doubt some people have to be held in strict conditions. However, the lack of open scrutiny and the harshness of the conditions of confinement are an invitation and set up for abuse and ill treatment. As in the Turkish "F-Type" prisons, the supermax and SHU prisons here in the US make it extremely difficult to check and verify complaints because of the restricted access to the institutions.

In early September 2001 I was in Ireland. Their newspaper carried stories about the continuing hunger strikes in Turkey over the "F-Type" prisons. There was a march and demonstration of Irish citizens to show their outrage over Turkey's new system and their solidarity with the hunger strikers.

Another article appeared in the Irish Times newspaper while I was there. It's title was "Don't throw the key away." It was about a prison in Dublin called Wheatfield and had some viewpoints I think we need to consider. Per Derek Tracy, the governor of Wheatfield, "The lesson we have learned is that keeping the link to the community is the big thing." It seems to me that we here in the US have yet to learn this lesson. I base this solely on the location of our prisons; hours from the cities where most of the inmates have families and minor if any public transportation to and from these prisons.

Mr. Tracy goes on to say, "The job now is to contain the prisoners for the time decreed by the courts and to rehabilitate them." This is another statement I find most interesting and perhaps another lesson we have not yet learned. Here in Wisconsin, the word rehabilitation is being removed from our Administrative Code. Again I ask where is the outrage? since most of the inmates held in Boscobel's supermax will be released and expected to reintegrate into our communities. They need rehabilitation.

I look at the difference between the crime and incarceration rates in the US verses most any other country. I have to ask why the striking difference? Perhaps Mr. Tracy can teach us a thing or two.

A final comment in the Irish Times article by Mr. Tracy is this, "Our job is to maintain them in safe custody and keep them out of society as long as it dictates. It's our responsibility to help and support them. We shouldn't make monsters of them, as the American system does, because we must remember that everyone of the (366) prisoners in here has a release date.

Whether we agree with Mr. Tracy or not, we must be aware that this is how much of the rest of the world views the US system.

One final note.

Here in Wisconsin, we currently do not have a state death penalty or a death row. However, we have what one of our supermax prisoners at Boscobel calls a PSYCHOLOGICAL DEATH ROW.

The above is based on:

Writings and papers by Stuart Garssian, MD, a Board Certified Psychiatrist and faculty of Harvard Medical School

Fortune News magazine, summer 2001, Volume XXXVI, Number 2.

The Irish Times article, "Don't throw the key away," Features section, page 3, 01 September 2001.

Written by Angie Hougas, October 2001.