Archive for the ‘Prison Reform’ Category

Prisons for the Mentally Ill (Part I)

Wednesday, May 20th, 2009

Prisons for the Mentally Ill ( Part I )

By Michael Wachter

 

According to a recent news piece on N.P.R., Florida has a new and novel proposal for treating the states mentally ill citizens who aren’t receiving their medications and are, as a consequence, committing criminal acts. Incarcerate them! Yes, the state wants to build three new prisons to house mentally ill offenders, who desperately need psychological treatment and medication to correct their behavior.
 
Incarceration is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a viable means of providing treatment to the mentally ill. On the contrary, incarceration only serves to encourage mental illness in those who have no previous history of it, and to greatly exacerbate existing mental conditions in those with psychological problems. State officials, lawmakers, and prison authorities are well aware of these facts and thus, I would assert that their motives for wanting to incarcerate the mentally ill are stated disingenuously, and with sinister ulterior motives.
 
The prison setting is in no way equipped to address and treat, in any meaningful way, persons with mental illness. For example, at Washington Correctional Institution, in Chipley, Florida (which is an institution specifically designated as a facility for treating mentally ill inmates who require medications), the mental health services staff routinely neglect, and often times ignore, the mentally ill inmates they are employed to care for! What is worse, the corrections officers consistently refuse to grant inmates access to mental health services staff, in emergency situations. Instead, corrections officials sadistically antagonize inmates who are experiencing psychological emergencies, with the deliberate intent of setting the inmate off, at which point they usually gas the inmate.
 
Often they use the situation as an excuse for use of force, and beat the inmate. This is a pervasive practice in Washington C.I.’s main unit confinement area. On a daily basis, it is not unusual to have upwards to ten gassings in confinement. Compared, statistically, to other facilities statewide, Washington C.I. has one of, if not the highest rates of using gas on inmates. It also has an alarming rate of use of force.
 
With these facts in mind, I question how these practices serve to treat what are seriously mentally ill inmates? When an inmate is expressing feelings of suicidal ideation and asks to see mental health services staff, by declaring a psychological emergency, in compliance with institutional rules and regulations, only to be told by a correctional officer (who is NOT a competent authority able to judge an inmates mental state, I might emphasize), to “Get off the door, and shut the fuck up!” Or worse, told to go ahead and “Do it, kill yourself!” the problem ceases to be the inmate. The problem is the officer.
 
Compounding the problems at Washington C.I. is an entirely ineffective and subverted mental health services staff. Anyone slightly familiar with the treatment of psychological problems is aware that a competent diagnosis and effective treatment plan of each patient’s mental health problems is required. Personalized, one-on-one therapy. Properly prescribed medications. Close observation inside of a therapeutic setting, designed to rigorously treat mental illness.
 
Few, if any of these needs and criteria are met by the prison setting, which is an absolute diametric opposition to the effective treatment of mental illness, as I’ve already established, by detailing the standards of habit and practice at Washington C.I., for correctional officers dealing with and addressing mentally ill inmates under their care, custody and control.
 
In the case of medical services staff in general, and mental health services in specific, they are working for the state prison system because they are professional failures in the competitive medical field outside of the prison setting. Put bluntly, they are working in prison because it is the only environment left that will tolerate their incompetence, and near absolute lack of professionalism. A high percentage of prison medical services employees have been fired from previous employment in major hospitals, or from assisting doctors in their private practice. Most of the physicians employed by the department of corrections are foreigners who have been sued out of practice for malpractice and overall ineptness. They are hired by the department because they are cheap, and easy to control. They are so happy to be employed that they become puppets, not doctors. This is a key point to consider, and emphasize, because medical departments in prisons, and especially at Washington C.I., become the first line of defense for officials needing to cover up abuses of inmates by officers and/or suspicious deaths.
 
In exchange for aiding and abetting in the commission of criminal activities by officers ranging from covering up and falsifying reports, including documentation of excessive use of force incidents, to outright murder, the Institutional Administrative Staff responds with the quid pro quo of allowing medical staff to provide the least amount of services to inmates, assuring the greatest profits to the medical department, a privatized entity. The corruption is virtually all pervasive and categorical.
Unfortunately, proving this is extremely difficult and would require literally the insertion of persons with a mandate to go into the prison and document and collect evidence of the activities that are occurring. The state won’t do this on its own, because the result would be indicting its own agency for these practices. Getting the federal government involved is a bureaucratic nightmare. Incidents where the Feds have become involved are so extreme that they had no choice but to become involved.
 
Thus the only practical and effective way to place a whistle blower into position in prison medical departments would be for a group of private citizens to take it upon themselves to be hired into prisons specifically for the purpose of collecting evidence and documenting incidents. Once a preponderance of evidence has been collected, give it to investigative reporters at 60 Minutes or Fox News, so they could break the story and bring down the wrath of God.
 

This has never been tried before, and it may take time for it to be explored as a practical means to expose medical negligence, malpractice and violations of state and federal laws in Florida prisons. To be continued…

 

Michael Wachter

 mwachter452002@gmail.com

Video Surveillance for Prisons

Saturday, February 21st, 2009

It often seems that people equate the idea of being under video surveillance with the invidious spectre of Orwell’s 1984. Big Brother is watching! I disagree that such surveillance is an invasion of privacy. Unmonitored or furtive surveillance would be cause for concern; however, most video surveillance is passive, broad-based and general. Surveillance of this nature greatly contributes to public security. As a forensic and/or investigative tool, video recordings provide invaluable information and data to law enforcement agencies investigating criminal acts; for example: the 9/11 terrorists were identified by surveillance tapes as were a number of the London subway bombers.

Video Surveillance is about providing citizens with security and a sense of protection. And it works! Privacy advocates steeped to their eyeballs in Orwell and Huxley are jaundiced by paranoid thoughts of their own imagination. I would recommend to these people that they read Robert J. Sawyer’s extraordinary trilogy, Hominids, Humans and Hybrids.  Sawyer creates a surveillance system that would be the envy of “Big Brother”, the Alibi Archives. The Alibi Archives do not exist for sinister, malevolent purpose, but rather for precisely what their title implies. The Alibi Archives are complete, moment by moment recordings of each person’s life. Nobody has access to the recordings except under special circumstances, specifically to solve an alleged criminal act. When someone is accused of a crime, he or she can ask the his or her alibi archive recording of the time frame be reviewed by the court to determine the truth. The recording cuts both ways; you are either innocent or guilty, but the accused receives absolutely fair and impartial justice.

Sawyer’s novels explore the converse side of surveillance as invasive malevolence, demonstrating that it is just as possible for surveillance to protect, assure and guarantee the freedoms and security for citizens. With those points in mind, it seems to me that comprehensive, blanket video surveillance would be compulsory and mandated by law for all state prisons; particularly that maintenance of security is the primary objective at corrections facilities.

Curiously, the department is resistant to video surveillance. Officials claim (not entirely without truth) that such surveillance systems are costly and outside of the current budget. Video surveillance in the prison system would dramatically increase security. Anyone resistant to the program would have something to conceal. No? Prison employees have no right to privacy at work, and inmates have no right to privacy at all.  If I were an officer, I would welcome a system that improved the overall security of the facility as well as my personal security. Video surveillance would ease the job of prison inspectors and investigators since they could simply review tapes rather than interviewing witnesses of events which would be based on hearsay. Video footage does not lie and cannot be bribed. Video cameras do not turn their backs, blink or fall asleep. Prison guards and inmates do all of the above. Given these benefits, I would suggest that failing to blanket state prison compounds under video surveillance is irresponsible and dangerously negligent. Could video surveillance have alerted officers at Tamoka Correctional Institution that the officer who was murdered was in trouble and allowed her life to be saved? Maybe or maybe not, but video surveillance as an additional security measure that protects and could possibly save the lives of officers as well as inmates is well worth installing. What is a life worth? Inmates who are aware that all of their actions and activities are being recorded are less likely to violate rules and act contrary to regulations. The fact that an inmate knows that whatever he or she does is being recorded is a stunningly effective deterrent to illegal activities in prison. Very few people will commit acts that they know they have no chance of getting away with, thus, thefts, violent assaults, stabbing, gang activity, drug dealing and selling contraband would be reduced if not eliminated. Inmates will not smile knowing they are on candid camera. Prison officials are often unaware of what is occurring on prison compounds until it is too late or until an inmate informant tips off officials. Inmate informants are not motivated by a sense of right or wrong or justice, but usually for their own self-interests. Homosexuality is a chronic source of problems and conflicts in prisons.

The benefits of video surveillance in the prison system are numerous. Installing such systems would provide relief to the constant need for employees in the prison system. Maintenance of internal security is the primary concern of all prison officials. Video surveillance would assure that these objectives are met and further assure the safety of the general public. 

By: Michael Anthony Wachter

mwachter452002@gmail.com

Prison Reform

Thursday, October 16th, 2008

Post One

 

I share your anger at the hypocrisy of our court system too. Especially where people who like porn, clash in the American court system, with all the “‘holier than thou’s” who, if you listen to them, supposedly never had sex, never had a sexual thought, and never performed a sexual act that was ‘out of’ the American ‘maintstream.’ I think most Americans see the American court system, at least as far as sex goes, for what it is. Judges (people) who want to be re elected to a very nice, cushy, job with great pay, benefits and power, cater to a subject (sex) that is titillating in our society, for the sole purpose of getting re-elected. I have to say, I think the greatest albatross that has been hung on the neck of America, was that is was founded by Puritans.. you probably couldn’t find a bunch of more sexually uptight people if you tried to find them. Regretfully, they passed that sexual uptightness down to us since the early 1700’s and we’ve been dealing with it ever since. If th ere is a bright spot in our future, it is that, whether you like it or not, America is rapidly changing from a culture based primarily on England and Puritanism….to a culture that comes from South America with it’s acceptance and even embracement, of sex and sexuality. No wonder all the WASPs in the northeast are mustering their forces to stop immigration. God forbid, poor Muffy, would fuck herself silly with some latin guy with the heavy beat of brazilian music in the background. No…of course,….we couldn’t possibly have the masses doing that! Well, I say…bring them on….and all you north eastern, washington dc, power brokers can just go and jump off a great big cliff. Good riddance and I’m glad you will all be gone. finally, at least, with the latin culture, you can have sex for the pure pleasure of it and not be guilty. Good riddance “Muffy”…good riddance..”Brad”…and welcome “Julio” and welcome…’Juanita!”
posted by Hollywood

August 23, 2007 7:48 PM

 Post two

 Here is a game that I hope you enjoy. I have played this game with state representatives, university professors of political science, professional political people, mayors, commissioners and others. This is NOT a game of one upmanship and was never intended to be. It is a game that sort of came to me because I was looking at the world around me and my looking lead to this game. The game is nothing more than 10 questions. I have found that once you answer them correctly your perception of the world and your place in it, will probably change dramatically. And it will change your perception of the world, like I said. I’ll put the answers way at the end of this. By the way, I have an interesting comment on this that I have put at the end of the answers. You might want to get out a drink now, you may need it when you read it. I’ll put a row of x’s, in between the questions and the answers so you won’t be tempted to look ahead. Ready? Here we go. Write your answers d own on a piece of paper so you can compare your answers to the answers…if nothing else, it will be an eye opener. I’ve found this to be a fun game at parties…believe it or not, I’ve had small crowds of people together trying to answer. I’ve even been googled while i was giving the answers, right in front of everyone, so believe me, the answers are right..check them yourself. All the answers are obviously an approximation, but nevertheless, close enough that you couldn’t argue over their validity.

1. What is the population of the United States?
2. What is the population of Canada?
3. We have an immigration problem in America. Does the latin immigration problem come from Cuba or does it come from Mexico?
4. What is the population of Cuba?
5. What is the population of Mexico?
6. What is the population of Florida?
7. What state has the most number of people in it in the US?
8. How many people live there?
9. What state in America has the 2nd most number of people?
10. How many live in this state?


Ok, now lets just ask a few questions about overseas.11. Who is the number one country the US trades with?
12. How many people live there?
13. How many people live in China?
14. How many people live in India?
15. What religious belief system (protestant, catholic, jewish) in America has the most number of adherents in America.
16. Of this belief system what sect is the largest in America?
17. How many people identify themselves as Catholic in America.
18. How many Jews are there in the world.
19. What is the population of Israel.
20. If you add up the total populations of the Arab countries that immediately surround Israel, how many would that come to, approximately.
21. What is the population of the earth
22. How many Catholics are there in the world.
23. How many Muslims are there in the world.
24. What country in the world has the most number of Muslims.
 Answers:
1. 300 million
2. 28 million (90% live within 100 miles of the US/Canadian border)
3. Mexico
4. 11 million
5. over 100 million
6. 17 million
7. California
8. 35 million
9. Texas
10. 20 million
11. Japan
12. 125 million
13. 1 and a half billion
14. One billion
15. protestants
16. Baptists (15 million)
17. 60 million
18. 10 million (that’s right, in the entire world there are only about 10 million Jews)
19. 5 million ( the rest of the Jews are scattered all over the globe).
20. 225 million
21. 6 Billion
22. one billion
23. 2 billion
24. Indonesia (200 million)

 

However you did in this game, I would like you to know something that will either really upset you or make you laugh. I have played this game for years with the people I mentioned above (elected officials of all kinds, university professors, etc.) becuase I have been involved in politics since the mid 80’s and I’ve played this game many times with them. By far and away, the great majority of them were only able to get one question right. Just one. Even in groups. In a global world, WHY DON’T THEY KNOW?

 

Prison Reform

Thursday, October 16th, 2008

Prison Reform

 

     Florida incarcerates nearly 100,000 inmates. Florida leads all other states in its rate of incarcerations. Nationally, more than two million Americans are currently incarcerated. America incarcerates more of its citizens than any other nation in the world!  I do not think that anyone will refute that America has a problem with crime, but the question at hand seems to be rehabilitation. How does prison serve to correct and rehabilitate the incarcerated?  

    Prisons are defined as “Departments of Corrections”.  Recidivism consistently hovers at approximately 75 to 80 percent. What do these institutions correct? The statistical indicators point to little or nothing. One could argue that prisons serve little value beyond warehousing inmates. Removing the convicted criminal from mainstream society may be a geographical cure, but for the most part seems temporary and in the long run ineffective for the criminal and a financial burden on the taxpayer. 

     The theory prison officials often cite as their operative “raison’ detre” is rehabilitation. Florida Jurisprudence 2nd, defines rehabilitation as:  

 “. . . to restore to ones former rank, privilege or status; to clear the character or reputation of stain; to retrieve forfeited trust and confidence.”

In re: Stoller,36 So. 2d,443,160 Fla. 769.

 

     Does this definition in any way reflect the character and conduct of inmates returning to society after their period of incarceration? Rehabilitation, as defined above does not square with the reality of the prison environment, nor is it congruent with the reception prisoners returning to society can expect to receive once released. 

     The practical reality of the prison setting is that it is not geared towards rehabilitation, but is predicated upon the practice of retributive punishment. Such treatment is not conducive to rehabilitating offenders, and sadly, the opposite behavior results as the rates of recidivism will support. 

     I am reminded of statements made by General Janis L. Karpinski in response to questions about the abuse of Iraqi inmates by American soldiers at Abu Gharib Prison. General Karpinski revealed that she was instructed by her superiors to treat the Abu Gharib prisoners like dogs and to never allow the inmates to think that they were more than animals; that if she were to fail in this mandate, then she would have lost control of the Iraqi prisoners inside of Abu Gharib. This is chilling logic. Some readers may feel it is incendiary to compare events at Abu Gharib to what occurs in American prisons, then I would suggest that they review the results of the Stanford University Prison project. The Stanford project occurred in the early 70’s.  Abu Gharib over 30 years later is Stanford revisited. Stanford was the theory, Abu Gharib the practice, literally.

     It is also worthy of note that prior to being called to active duty in Iraq, several American service personnel implicated in the abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Gharib worked as civilian prison guards in state and federal facilities. Review of record of their conduct while employed in our national prison reveals numerous abuse of prisoner allegations and in at least one case, a civil lawsuit for abuse filed by an American prisoner.  A pattern of habitual practice emerges. 

     Mark Twain is famously quoted as suggesting that “Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform”.  It seems to me that this is sound advice to the Florida taxpayer.  Rather than continuing to support an ever failing status quo, constituents would better serve their own interests by applying critical thinking to the issues of crime, incarceration and prisons to determine which is the preferable result:

Rehabilitative incarceration with an emphasis on returning to society, sane, well trained men and women. Individuals who while incarcerated addressed their personal issues through treatment obtained viable trade skills and subsequently, could integrate into society as employed, law abiding citizens.  OR:

Incarceration with continued retributive punishment. Current patterns demonstrate reinforcement of criminal thinking and behavior. Consequently, you will have an inmate that is released from prison only to commit some headline grabbing crime so deplorably vicious that the first question asked is “Why was this person released from prison?”.  Right idea, wrong question.  The real question is “Why did this individual enter prison delinquent only to emerge much worse?”  Answering the question begins to confront the real problems and failures of the system. 

    In concluding, a motivational question the readers might ask themselves is: “What kind of inmate do I want released into my neighborhood or living next door to me?”

 

Michael Anthony Wachter

mwachter452002@gmail.com

(more…)