Regressive behavior in maximum security prisoners: a preliminary communication.

For many years it has been stated repeatedly that American prisons simply provide for the punishment of offenders and do not rehabilitate them. The lack of meaningful programs in facilities primarily committed to the control of aggressive behavior, deemed antisocial by the criminal law, has been associated with a recidivism rate that clearly shows the failure of these methods of correcting such behavior. For a fortunate few, however, such an approach has not always been the rule, as some officials, supported by reform groups, have been partially successful in bringing about the acceptance of new techniques; e.g., differential treatment. Others have attempted to work in existing correctional systems by attempting to upgrade present programs or adding to them, for example, through furlough programs or community treatment centers. All of this activity is encouraging, for such efforts do appear to have finally begun to take hold in the last few years, and at the moment they do seem to have met with a degree of public acceptance. This paper proposes to provide some understanding of why these changes in the practice of penology are constantly undermined by remaining deficiencies in the system. It will attempt to show that the length of sentences and the nature of maximum security prisons combine to damage the personalities of the prisoners to such a degree as to make it especially difficult for them to function as autonomous and independent individuals in a free society following their release. I believe that whenever a man serves three or more years in a maximum security prison, the experience will usually have lasting deleterious effects on his personality. Let us consider, first of all, the lengthy prison sentences so characteristic of criminal justice in this country. Although they must be attributed to the criminal courts, it is apparent that various external factors are operating to encourage them. At times the news media may place such pressures on a court that a sentence is the maximum allowed under the law for that reason alone. As Philip Q. Roche once wrote: "When the public reads in the news that a certain criminal was sentenced to a term of imprisonment, it has an illusory reassurance that society is being protected."l At a somewhat different level, it is worthwhile to consider the remarks of Kai T. Erikson, who has written of the Puritans' belief in the irreversibility of human nature and present "American attitudes towards deviation."2 Secolldly, let us consider the phenomenon of the maximum security prison as it has developed in this country. In the United States of America there are in each state one or more prisons which are considered as being maximum security institutions. The historical development of these prisons is important in terms of what is to follow. At one time physical punishment and public exposure and abuse were the principal forms of dealing with offenders.