No, it could potentially make it worse. Some inmates who are put in solitary are put there simply because they’re a physical threat to others. In other cases, inmates are put in solitary because their very communcation with others puts people in danger. For instance, on several of those jail documentaries like Lockdown or whatever, they’ve made mention of how some gang leaders are still able to get information and give orders, even in those conditions.
I’m also not really getting how torture is being used in the OP. If I took a random person off the street and locked him up in jail for 10 years, that could be seen as torture in that sense too, no? I tend to think of torture as a means of interogation and using it with reference to any form of criminal punishment seems to really be a reference to the idea of cruel and unusual punishment.
If we’re in the realm of cruel and unusual punishment, while it may be something that irrevocably damages someone, I don’t think it’s necessarily uncalled for in every case. Imagine an individual who commits a heinous crime by any standard (eg, multiple rape-murder) where pretty much anyone would agree that person should be locked up and never let out. Now imagine that individual continues to be violent and extremely uncooperative in every possible way such that he is a danger not just to other inmates but to the guards and himself. If he’s already demonstrated that he’s a danger to other individuals and he has no hope of ever getting out, why is there concern for making him more dangerous if he’s ever put back in general population, muchless let free altogether?
Punishment is inherently removal of some sort of right or privilege. One can argue that social interaction is a basic necessity on par with food, water, and sleep, and I agree with that notion, but even the most extreme forms of solitary confinement don’t completely remove all interactions. For example, I recall one situation where an individual was in solitary confinement out of visual or audial range of other inmates and was locked up in his cell by himself 23 1/2 hours a day. That half-hour he wasn’t was when he was escorted to a larger room where he could walk or run around for some exercise. But even in this case, other than the guard interaction, he still got monthly visits from his mom, and could send and receive mail, and was allowed to be interviewed on camera.
Sure, it’s not the type of social interaction that most inmates get, but like the same with food, they’re probably not getting the same quality food they’d be getting outside of prison either. That might be still be a little too much isolation, but part of that was also that, after having been in jail for some number of years, the only person who still wanted to drive several hours to visit him was his mother.
I do think there’s a point beyond which isolation is necessarily cruel and unusual, and it’s possible that it is crossed in some cases, but I don’t think the idea of denying social contact is necessarily any more cruel than denying freedom or other rights and privileges that are denied in prison and it is an unfortunate consequence of a sometimes necessary separation of an individual from those he may hurt.
I think any individuals in such a situation, whether for punishment, safety, or both, should at least have some kind of regular mental health evaluation so adjustments can be made as necessary.