Supermax Prisons - Coursework Example

RESEARCH ON SUPERMAX PRISONS Supermax Prisons: Beneficial or Socially Detrimental? [The High Security Unit is] a prison within a prison. . . . The High Security Prison is living death. . . . I believe that this is an experiment being conducted by the Justice Department to try and destroy political prisoners and to justify the most vile abuse of women and as human beings, and [to] justify it because we are political - Susan Rosenberg (James, 2007, p. 51). Introduction The origin of the supermax prison facilities within the United States resulted from a violent and deadly incident within the Marion, Illinois maximum security prison. The first of these prisons was built in Florence, Colorado and was opened in 1994. However, the supermax prison uses controversial methodologies, beginning with the lack of legal recourse that an inmate has if a prison administration chooses to send them to such a facility. The supermax prison was created because of a perceived need to have the opportunity to completely control prisoners, however with over 20,000 prisoners incarcerated in these prisons, the question of how this type of incarceration impacts the inmate relates to the subsequent impact upon society. Hard lined conservatives might question why the psychological welfare of these prisoners has any bearing when weighed against the trauma their crimes have caused on their victims. The question becomes relevant to all political platforms because of the costs of maintaining these prisons and the likelihood that once put into these prisons return to a general population is less likely to occur. As well, prisoners who are released from a supermax prison have suffered uniquely and might have a more difficult Supermax Prisons 3 acclimation back into society, creating even more problems in their assimilation. Literature Review Kurki and Morris (2001) report that most of the literature is based on anecdotal information and advocacy statements that are not probative for a study on the systems (386). In the work that Kurki and Morris (2001) do for their study, they conclude that the lack of evidentiary information does not allow for any real conclusions on the effects that the supermax has on their operations, the guards and the prisoners. The information that would best support arguments over the necessity and/or excessive cruelty within a supermax prison has not been allowed to be researched to a level that will allow a real sense of conclusive evidence (Kurki and Morris, 2001; Friedan, 2007). A major issue with the supermax prison is that being sentenced to the prison is not subject to due legal process, but left in the hands of the prison boards to make decisions at their discretion. Tachiki (1995) reports that segregation can be due to nothing more than an association with a gang and that to segregate a prisoner into a supermax solely because of this affiliation creates a problem with the severity of the restriction of the supermax in comparison to the purpose of the segregation (1117). How prisoners are transferred into the supermax is a subjective causality that can be created by a decision that is not relevant to the judicial system of courts, but by the decisions made by prison boards through recommendations from the guards and wardens. There is no trial nor legal representation afforded to a prisoner when facing sentencing into the supermax prison (Thompson and Susler, 1996; Miller, 2008, p. 521). Supermax Prisons 4 The psychological issues that are affected through incarceration within supermax prison has led J. C. Oleson (2002) to conclude that a more humane method of detention would be to place prisioners into a punitive coma (830). Mental conditions of prisoners who are confined to a supermax prison can show signs of psychosis and deterioration in associative capacities (Miller, 2008: Pollack, 2006: James, 2007). The effects of these problems will last after the release of a prisoner, creating an effect on society as the mental consequences are imposed upon society through the actions of the released prisoner (James 2007; Miller 2008). Brief History of the Supermax Prison The federal prison in Marion, Illinois was one of five prisons that was designated a federal level five security prison after the close of the high security prison at Alcatraz and by 1979 was made into the only level six prison within the United States. In 1983 six days of violence and uncontrolled behavior ended in two dead guards, two injured guards and a dead inmate (Williams, 1996, p. 149). The resulting lockdown and changes in security transformed the prison into the first model of the ’supermax’ prison. The United States Administrative Maximum Facility (ADX) in Florence Colorado was built as a response to a need to have a facility that was equipped to create a permanent maximum security facility designed to control the worst offenders and the most disruptive inmates. Norman Carlson, the director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons at the time, in response to the incidents at Marion, advocated for the building of a more secure facility that was designed in its origin for maximum security. Opened in 1994, the prison was Supermax Prisons 5 designed to isolate the guards and the prisoners from each other in a way that contact was under a completely controlled set of procedures and facilitated by the design of the facility (ADX, 2009). According to Kurki and Morris (2001), by 1999 thirty-four states had developed facilities or portions of facilities designated as supermax. Political Environment The years during which Ronald Reagan was President of the United States (1981-1989) saw an increase in concern for crime prevention and controls as policies such as the ’War on Drugs’ and increasing availability of news about crimes created a hardening attitude toward those convicted of crimes (Weir, 1998, p. 314). This awareness created a ripe environment for creating prisons with controversial policies on control and security measures. In the nineties, President Clinton made an effort to move away from the liberal associations of the democratic party on the issue of crime in order to support a policy of “responsibility” over “rights” (Weir, 1998, p. 317), thus continuing the proliferation of a public that is fearful of its vulnerability to victimization as this is exacerbated through the media sensationalism of criminal activity. Organization of the Paper Aim The aim of this paper is to discuss the problems with the supermax prisons in regard to the expense to society compared to the benefits to the prison system. In discussing this topic, the social implications in regard to the financial expense, the Supermax Prisons 6 psychological expense to the prisoners, and the consequential cost to society from the higher recidivism and higher violent behaviors creating increased numbers of victims of prisoners released from a supermax. Objectives To discuss the history of the creation of the supermax model of imprisonment and make a brief comparison of several facilities To discuss the potential effects that incarceration in a supermax may have on a prisoner and the consequential effects that are created for society. To discuss the legality of the severity of punishment as it is not associated to due process for the prisoner and to discuss the relevant consequences to society along with the humnanitarian issues that these prisons put into question. Chapter Organization During the course of this research paper, section one will be dedicated to the various supermax prisons. The facility in Florence, Colorado will be the primary facility for comparison as it is the first supermax that was built in the United States. The second section will discuss the probable psychological effects that manifest in prisoners from the isolation and multiple deprivations. In section three the legal and humanitarian issues that are associated with supermax prisons will be examined in order to correlate the effects of the treatment on the prisoners to the expected legal and humane standards that American citizens expect from the rights laid out in the Constitution. The paper will conclude with an assessment of the problems associated with the release of an inmate Supermax Prisons 7 from the supermax facility and the impact that can be observed by that release. A conclusion will be made to the necessity of these facilities versus the costs to society Comparisons of Supermax Prisons Overview The supermax prison has been created in order to serve a need that has been determined through the actions of criminals within the prison system who have threatened the security of the prison and of the surrounding community by exhibiting dangerous behavior patterns. Some prisoners who end up in a supermax facility have exhibited a propensity toward violence or escape. Others have been convicted of violent and murderous crimes and through those actions have been deemed to dangerous to be in a general population. The extreme measures that are taken to protect society and other less dangerous inmates have been instituted in response to the activities of some convicts that have endangered lives. Prisoners in a Supermax Prison In an examination of supermax prisons, it is a significant point to look at the prisoners who occupy the cells in the federal facility in Florence Colorado. Terry Friedan (2007) listed 9/11 terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui, 1993 World Trade Center Bombing conspirator Ramzi Yousef, airplane ‘shoe bomber’ Richard Reid, Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski, and Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing in Oklahoma City conspirator Terry Nichols among the 473 prisoners within the facility. Of these prisoners, Supermax Prisons 8 22% have killed other prisoners, 35% tried to kill staff members, and only 5% were sent directly to the facility after sentencing (The United States, p. 11). As of 2003, more than 20,000 prisoners are incarcerated in supermax prison facilities that hold some of the most violent and socially objectionable offenders in the United States (Mears, 2006). Prisoners in a supermax prison earn their release back into lower security prisons through working their way through levels of behavioral achievement. When a prisoner enters a the supermax prison in Florence, Colorado a designation of Level I is given whereby there are no privileges provided and are isolated for 23 hours per day. When Level II has been achieved, prison determined television viewing is allowed. At Level I and II complete shackling is required with an escort of two guards whenever the prisoner is outside of the cell. When the final Level is reached, personal freedoms are allowed and prisoners may be allowed to walk between environments without shackles and given more privileges. The Level III prisoners are intermixed with the Level I and II prisoners in order to provide a model for inspiring those prisoners to behave to earn those privileges (The United States, p. 9). Comparing Supermax Prisons In comparison to the facility in Florence, Colorado, facilities in Maryland and in Ohio have much smaller populations in supermax incarceration. In the Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center, the state supermax facility, holds about 246 prisoners which is roughly 1% of the total prison population (Mears, 2006, p. 15). The facility was built after an inmate killed a guard and is technologically advanced in its operation in Supermax Prisons 9 order to keep staff and population separated. In Ohio, the state supermax prison has approximately 260 prisoners which is not quite 1% of the total prison population. As in the Colorado facility and the Maryland facility, the supermax prison became important to the state in reaction to a riot in the Ohio maximum security prison where 1 staff member and nine prisoners were killed. There is a trend that is revealed that these prisons are built in the aftermath of a violent and deadly disturbance at maximum security prisons that encourage policy makers to provide for the creation of the supermax prisons. The cells in the Colorado facility are primarily concrete with a slab for a bed, for a desk and as a stool. The cells have a steel sink, a toilet and a 3 square shower and a florescent light is on the wall that is sometimes not turned off at night creating a difficult sleeping situation (James, 2007, p. 49). The cells in the Maryland facility are described as 7 foot by 10 foot cells with solid doors that provide a slot for food delivery and a small exterior view. The prisoners are allowed out of their cells every few days to wash and recreate, although contact with other prisoners is not allowed because of mortal consequences that were experienced when this was allowed (Mears, 2006, p. 16). The Ohio facility has similar cells to the other facilities but without windows to the outside and are only allowed of the cell for one hour per day for five days of the week (Mears, 2006, p. 24). Common Issues Inside the Supermax Prisons One of the common problems that appears in all three facilities is that prisoners Supermax Prisons 10 with mental health problems are sometimes sent to supermax prisons instead of receiving care and the screening of these prisoners once they arrive is often not done according to policy. Mears(2006) reports these occurrences in both Maryland and Ohio, while Pollack (2006) reports the same issues in the Colorado federal facility. As Pollack (2006) relates, these facilities have the worst possible atmosphere for managing prisoners with mental illness. The isolation is adverse to any hope of managing the issues of these inmates and will exacerbate most conditions leaving irreversible damage (p. 303) Another negative aspect that all three prisons have experienced is the high level of financial costs that are incurred in running the facilities. The ratio of staff to the population is higher which creates higher labor costs in running the prison. As well, the advanced technology used to run the facility creates higher costs. It is unclear as to whether or not the benefit to cost has the benefit that is perceived by the supporters of the supermax concept. However, there is no doubt the financial investment in a supermax is significantly higher. The Ohio prison spends an average of $149 per day per supermax prisoner where the average for a regular population prisoner is $65, although the Maryland facility spends three times the amount on its supermax prisoners than on those in regular populations (Mears, 2006). Psychological Effects of Restrictions in a Supermax Prison Overview The psychological effects of being in a supermax prison can be attributed to many Supermax Prisons 11 unique factors as well as common incarceration factors of the experience. The extreme forced isolation can cause a great deal of harm as the separation from human contact and from contact with the outdoors can create a deterioration in mental faculties and manifest in a disassociation. Even a disconnection to time can be experienced within a supermax, especially when the guards choose to leave the lights on in the cells 24 hours a day which is a frequent occurrence (Thompson and Susler, 1996). Violence that is perpetrated against the prisoner, especially inflicted violence that is sanctioned, can lead to trauma that can have long term effects. Isolation According to the Human Rights Watch Organization (2008), “Numerous studies have concluded that extended periods of detention in supermax-like conditions can cause significant psychological harm” ( p 20). They also suggest that the long periods without social and environmental stimulation creates deep and long-lasting problems that can be defined by everything from insomnia to psychosis. Scott and Gerbasi (2005) reveal that it has been shown that inmates with no previous mental illness have shown signs of severe psychological deterioration after prolonged periods of isolation of the type found in the supermax prisons (p. 213). The prolonged isolation can result in manifested symptoms of extreme restlessness and irritability, further disassociation with family and friends that can then manifest into a disconnection from time, dates and refusal of medical care and psychiatric evaluation. Scott and Gerbasi (2005) report that upon release or return to the regular population these symtoms begin to fade (p.213), however the Human Rights Supermax Prisons 12 Watch Organization (2008) disagrees and states that long-term evidence of harm is apparent in the behavior of supermax prisoners (p. 20). Brutality Reports of brutality come out of most prisons and the reports that come out of the supermax prisons suggest the same kind of problems. However, policy control functions that have been verified suggest violent problems that can cause long term traumas to the inmates. Beyond the ‘strip cell status’ and hog-tying procedure that has already been mentioned, other tools of control that can create violent interactions are available to the guards at a supermax. Rib spreaders are steel tipped batons that cause excruciating pain when driven into the ribs without causing much visible evidence to their use (Jackson, 2004, p. 51). Pepper spray, electric stun guns, and other forms of control that are sanctioned, but still constitute painful and tortuous results can create a long-term psychological trauma. Legalities, Social Consequences, and Humanitarian Issues Overview Prisoners have been able to fight the issues surrounding their incarceration in the supermax prisons with some success, but without being able to shut the facilities down. The political agenda that dictates that the government cannot be soft on crime provides a framework for the cautious way in which policy makers can approach reform. It does not do well for a politician to appear soft on crime. However, the courts have been able to Supermax Prisons 13 provide some guidance and promote some humane response to the unchecked authority that seems to run the system. The Constitutional Ethic and the Supermax Prison In the case of Madrid vs. Gomez, the court decided that “the conditions in the Security Housing Unit of Pelican Bay State Prison “press the boundaries of what most humans can psychologically tolerate” (Sabo, Kupers, and London, 2001, p. 141). The lawsuit was brought as a class action alleging unconstitutional conditions at the Pelican Bay supermax prison in California. The federal court issued injunctions that were intended to eliminate excessive force, improve the system of health care, and to provide more suitable arrangements for mentally ill inmates (Prison Law, 2009). An inmate in the Ohio supermax named Kunta Kenyatta was serving a sentence in a Cleveland prison when his interest in the work of Malcolm X and Nelson Mandela, along with his activity in helping inmates to change their name labeled him as a political organizer and landed him in the new Ohio supermax prison. This automatically took away his opportunity for parole in 2002 through policy. No one in the Supermax could be eligible for parole while in that prison. He was paroled in November of 2002 after he succeeded in pleading his case during a class action that objected to his placement in the Supermax as unwarranted (Sturm, 2003). The supermax prison system can be challenged by virtue of the Eight Amendment to the constitution. Challenges within the court systems have been based on the rights afforded to criminal offenders under the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution which Supermax Prisons 14 calls for prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments. Two legal reactions to suits concerning the Eighth Amendment claims most often are observed. First, the courts uphold “prolonged segregation is cruel and unusual punishment only for the mentally ill”. And second, that although the conditions are detrimental, they are necessary for the sake of public security (Stohr, Walsh, and Hemmens, 2009, p. 124). Weaknesses in the Supermax On a PowerPoint slide presentation created by The United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility (ADX) in Florence, Colorado, a surprisingly honest list of weaknesses provide insight into the nature of the supermax prison. Included on that list are increased disciplinary infractions, decreased rehabilitation, exacerbated psychological problems, cruel and unusual punishment, exacerbates re-integration, increases in recidivism, and disproportionate punishment (The United States, p. 20). One has to wonder about a system where inhumane treatment is listed on a piece of work that the penitentiary is providing to the public. Releasing a Prison from Supermax If putting a prisoner into extreme isolation develops mental deficiencies and manifests into more violent behavior, then releasing that convict back into the community further endangers that community. According to James (2007), the ADX in Florence is a place of sensory deprivation which is designed to create a psychologically detrimental effect. Constant surveillance and supervision accomplished through sophisticated electronic monitoring creates an isolation as the prisoners are locked away in Supermax Prisons 15 compartments that do not provide any direct human view or contact (p. 49). After being in this atmosphere, there is not doubt that changes in the personality of a prisoner will have occurred. If the prisoner is then released back into society, behavior cannot with any surety be predicted. According to Miller (2008), one of the issues of release back into society revolves around the lack of services provided to the prisoner within the facility. Inmates in a supermax prison have received no training or access to education providing no means of alternative pursuits once they are released. Miller (2008) describes the prisoners that are released from supermax as having significantly higher rates of recidivism and higher rates of violent behavior problems once they attempt to integrate back into society (p. 423). Mental health services are very thin and little to no preparation is given to an inmate for transitioning from the prison to society. The isolation and deprivation erodes the social self, creating an individual who has difficulty being in the presence of others and the ability to interact socially has been deteriorated (Rhodes, 2005). The result is that the most violent and anti-social offenders are released with mental disturbances and no means of integrating into the employment force, creating the potential for more victims of his crimes. Humanitarian Viewpoint According to Kurki and Morris, (2001) data on supermax prisons is hard to attain. The first time reporters were allowed into the facility in Florence was in 2007 which is thirteen years after the facility opened (Friedan, 2007). One of the reason that the facility Supermax Prisons 16 was opened to this group of reporters was because the warden wanted to dispel the rumors of inhumane conditions within the prison. While many rumors exist about adverse conditions, the very first question that supports some reproach for the system is that once introduced to the prison system, an inmate can be placed in a supermax facility without benefit of council. Decisions about placement is determined through prison administration and is not subject to providing an advocate for the prisoner and has no recourse through the legal system with which to fight his placement into such a place (Thompson and Susler, 1996). Many of the methods that are used within the prison system are severe and questionable in regard to what American citizens might consider ethically humane. One method of punishment and control is the “strip cell status” where prisoners are fire hosed and then stripped of all clothes, personal belongings and bedding and then left in this condition for periods of time that can last for days (Rosenblatt, 1995, p. 105). Other methods of control involve physical restraints such as hog-tying, which means shackling the feet and wrists together either to the front or back of the prisoner and being left in this position. Rumors about beatings after restraint, years of isolation, sexual intimidation, especially toward female prisoners, and manipulation of information, light, and deprivation of time orientation have all been reported within the facilities (Thompson and Susler, 1996: Magnani and Wray 2006). One of the most objectionable elements of the supermax prison system is that a punitive transfer is only limited by the sentence of the offender. When behavior has been Supermax Prisons 17 deemed such that it warrants a transfer to a supermax, the length of time in the isolated atmosphere can last for years. When put into solitary within a prison, a time limit is given, where transfer to the supermax does not have a restriction (Thompson and Susler, 1996). Moreover, the use of the supermax prison and its policy seems to have little real purpose, either to the actual security of the prison or to the benefit of society. “Many of the severe conditions serve no legitimate penological interest; they can only be considered punishment for punishment’s sake”(Miller, 2008, p. 424). Assessments and Recommendations Assessments The reported mental conditions within a supermax prison has shown manifestations of psychosis and deterioration in associative capacities (Miller, 2008: Pollack, 2006: James, 2007). Reported consequences of the extended isolation include self-mutilation, hallucinations, uncontrollable rage, and catatonic depressions (Miller, 2008, p. 423). Dr Stuart Grassian who is a psychiatrist for the Harvard University Medical School has said that “courts have recognized that solitary confinement itself can cause a specific kind of psychiatric syndrome”(Magnani and Wray, 2006, p. 100). Moreover, since supermax is used for punitive measures for behavioral problems, the likelihood of a mentally unstable inmate to put into this atmosphere increases, while the very isolation that is central to the experience has severely detrimental effects on inmates who arrive with mental difficulties. Supermax Prisons 18 The instigating factor of designation to a supermax prison is not based on consistent guidelines. Often they are used to warehouse inmates with mental issues which is clearly against currently held morality on the effect of this type of incarceration. As well, in 1999 a legislative committee appointed to investigate the Ohio supermax found that less than half of the inmates actually met the state’s criteria for placement within the facility. Offenses as minor as a fist fight with another inmate had backed the transfer to the facility (Miller, 2008, p. 521). The use of the punitive measures that result from the security structure of the supermax appears to be an overuse its availability. There is no doubt that there are some instances when isolation of certain prisoners is warranted. It is questionable, however, whether anyone who has hope of release from prison should be put into the atmosphere of the supermax prison. Mortal violence from prisoners with no hope of release has a specific problem in regard to the lack of incentives to behave. However, incarcerating mental patients and inmates who have committed less than deadly infractions create to high a cost to society from the effects that this form of isolating and overtly oppressive security can justify. Recommendations The creation of the supermax prisons seems to stem from incidents of violence within a prison that instigates serious repercussive reactions. As well, the political environment and the increased availability of information that developed in the 1980’s and 1990’s which has instilled deeper fears for security within the general population of the nation allowed for such severity to seem justified. After assessing the information Supermax Prisons 19 that has come to light within the scope of this research, two recommendations seem reasonable. One or two such facilities within the United States should sufficiently house any inmates that are so dangerous that integration into the population is not possible. Prisons of lower security levels should have cells with limited time frames for ’time-outs’ when prisoners exhibit behavior that doesn’t stem from mental illness. Mental illness should be treated as an illness and the money spent on excesses in supermax prison use can be diverted to treat these inmates rather than warehouse them in ways that deteriorate their condition, thus imposing that danger on society when they are released. As well, funds can be diverted to increase the tools and protections available to guards in lower security prisons. The relative danger to guards seems diminished in comparison to other professions within the United States and while deaths on duty are tragic, they should not be reacted to with the extremes of the supermax prison. According the U. S. Census, being a security guard at a prison doesn’t even come into discussion when discussing the most dangerous jobs in the United States. The top ten list, which is based on percentages, lists fishermen as having the most dangerous jobs and construction workers landing at number ten. Garbage collectors came in at number five, however, the garbage is still collected every week. In assessing the need for grand changes, the frequency of problems needs to be assessed over an emotional reaction to a horrific, but singular incident. Conclusion Supermax prisons were created in reaction to incidents of the death of guards within prisons. This holds true for the three prisons examined within this paper. However, the detrimental effect of incarceration in extreme isolation coupled with dehumanizing security impacts the mental health of inmates who will be released without preparation into a society that can experience further crime and victimization rather than embrace a rehabilitated member who can contribute. The financial costs that are incurred by running so many of these facilities could be diverted to support more productive aspects of the prison experience that increase successful reintegration into society. If the prison system is designed for the greatest benefit of society rather than for a fearful reactionary sense of control, the social ramifications will be balanced toward a positive result rather than perpetuation of a negative result. List of References “ADX Florence” (2009). Absolute Astronomy: Exploring the universe of knowledge. Retrieved on 7 April 2009 from http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/to pics/ADX_Florence Barak, G. (2007). Battleground: Criminal justice. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Retrieved on 7 April from http://books.google.com/books?id=8- 8Bqj2pSNsC&pg=PA579&dq=Federal+ADX+supermax+prison+in+Florence+C olorado#PPA578,M1 Canter, D. V., & Zukauskiene, R. (2008). Psychology and law: Bridging the gap. Psychology, crime, and law series. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate Pub. Ltd. Friedan, T. (14 September 2007). “Reporters get first look inside mysterious supermax prison” CNN (Cable News Network). Retrieved on 7 April 2009 from http://www. cnn.com/2007/US/09/13/supermax.btsc/index.html Human Rights Watch (Organization), Daskal, J., & Mariner, J. (2008). Locked up alone: Detention conditions and mental health at Guantanamo. New York, NY: Human Rights Watch. Retrieved on 9 April 2009 from http://books.google.com/b ooks?id=5_rJ0NeOX9 0C&pg=PA20&dq=Psychological+effects+of+Isolation Jackson, R. (2004). (Re)constructing cultures of violence and peace. At the interface/probing the boundaries, v. 12. Amsterdam: Rodopi. James, J. (2007). Warfare in the American homeland: Policing and prison in a penal democracy. Durham: Duke University Press. Kurki, L. & Morris, N. (2001). “The purposes, practices, and problems of supermax prisons”. Crime and Justice. 28 pp. 385-424. Retrieved from JSTOR database. Magnani, L., & Wray, H. L. (2006). Beyond prisons: A new interfaith paradigm for our failed prison system. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. Retrieved on 9 April 2009 from http://books.google.com/books?id=jHaXyzAYmMAC&pg=PA 100&dq=hog-tying+supermax#PPA100,M1 Mears, D. P. (March 2006). Evaluating the effectiveness of supermax prisons. Urban Justice Policy Center. Retrieved on 6 April 2009 from http://www.urban.org/Up loadedPDF/411326_supermax_prisons.pdf Supermax Prisons 22 Miller, J. S. (2008). Acting out culture: Reading and writing. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins. Oleson, J. C. (May, 2002). “The Punitive Coma”. California Law Review. Vol. 90, No. 3, pp. 829-901. Prison Law Office (2009). “Major Cases and Achievements”. Retrieved on 8 April 2009 from http://www.prisonlaw.com/cases.php Pollock, J. M. (2006). Prisons: Today and tomorrow. Criminal justice illuminated. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett. Rosenblatt, E. (1996). Criminal injustice: Confronting the prison crisis. Boston, MA: South End Press. Retrieved on 9 April 2009 from http://books.google. com/books?id=iYINIT46rNcC&pg=RA1-PA105&dq=strip+cell+status+ supermax Sabo, D. F., Kupers, T. A., & London, W. J. (2001). Prison masculinities. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Scott, C. L., & Gerbasi, J. B. (2005). Handbook of correctional mental health. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub. Retrieved on 7 April 2009 from http://books.google.com/books?id=XKGsyRi8wj0C&pg=PA212&dq=Psychologi cal+effects+of+Isolation#PPA213,M1 Stohr, M. K., Walsh, A., & Hemmens, C. (2009). Corrections: A text/reader. Los Angeles: Sage. Retrieved on 10 April 2009 from http://books.google.com/books? id=NFBc6wJl_N4C&pg=PA123&dq=supermax+eighth+amendment#PPA124,M 1 Sturm, D. (1 August 2005). “Indefinite detention in Ohio: Locked in confinement, no chance of parole” The Business Journal. Retrieved on 9 April 2009 from http://books.google.com/books?id=q_JbZx98eikC&pg=PA426&dq=released+out +of+supermax Tachiki, S. N. (July 1995). “Indeterminate Sentences in Supermax Prisons Based upon Alleged Gang Affiliations: A Reexamination of Procedural Protection and a Proposal for Greater Procedural Requirements”. California Law Review. Vol. 83, No. 4, pp. 1115-1149. Retrieved from JSTOR database The United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility (ADX) in Florence, Supermax Prisons 23 Colorado. Supermax Security Prisons [PowerPoint Presentation]. Thompson, E. & Susler, J. (1996). “Supermax prisons: High-tech dungeons and modern day torture” World Traveler. Retrieved on 8 April 2009 from http://www.thirdw orldtraveler.com/Prison_System/Supermax_Prisons.html Weir, M., (1998). The social divide: Political parties and the future of activist government. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. Williams, V. L. (1996). Dictionary of American penology. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. Retrieve on 6 April 2009 from http://books.google.com/books?id=IF nVIWbQt1oC&pg=PA149&dq=Marion+Illinois+prison+1983 Read More