Is solitary confinement torture?

[villa]

I’m assuming you’re using rational basis in its real not legal sense.

I understand this, and appreciate why it is done. However, we need to readdress our policies regarding pre-trial detention. I don’t know what is practical, and I am certainly willing to accept the view of others with more experience, but I think restrictions on reading materials, for example, for non-convicted people should be different to those oon convicted people. Now, if this cannot be done in an environment where there are both convicted and non-convicted people housed together, and I can see why it would be a problem, we need to address whether convicted and non-convicted people should be housed together.

[Arnold_Winkelried]

@Little_Nemo

No idea on the exercise rule. That’s one I’m not familiar with.

I don’t see how it makes any sense to disallow him from doing situps in his cell.

But limits on correspondence and property are pretty standard to all prisoners. Some of them are actually more generous than what PFC Manning would receive if he was in special housing in a New York prison.

Correspondance I could see. But I wasn’t talking about property, I was talking about reading material. I think it would be reasonable and easily explainable that someone in solitary confinement has access to a lot more reading material than the other prisoners.

I don’t now any of the particulars about PFC Manning other than what I’ve read in Wikipedia and the linked articles here. (Which say Manning is on a Prevention of Injury watch.) But I’ll note that Lt Col Coombs wrote “The guards at the confinement facility are professional. At no time have they tried to bully, harass, or embarrass PFC Manning. Given the nature of their job, however, they do not engage in conversation with PFC Manning.” so I think it’s clear that this is not something being made up by his guards.

I don’t think that the guards decided on their own to put him in solitary confinement and treat him this way, I’m sure a superior told them to. That still doesn’t mind that they are doing it for valid reasons (i.e. he is a danger to others, or he is suicidal.) The Salon article indicates that he has never been a disciplinary problem.

I agree that I’m sure they don’t wake him up every five minutes at night. No one could stand that for seven months.

In any case, even if these measures are commonly practiced, that doesn’t mean that they don’t fit the definition of torture. The New Yorker article linked to in post 19 says that several European countries (the example described in more detail in t he article is Britain) have moved away from solitary confinement with good results. It also reports that “In this country, in June of 2006, a bipartisan national task force, the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons, released its recommendations after a yearlong investigation. It called for ending long-term isolation of prisoners. Beyond about ten days, the report noted, practically no benefits can be found and the harm is clear—not just for inmates but for the public as well.”

[Little_Nemo]

@villa

I’m assuming you’re using rational basis in its real not legal sense.

I’m not sure. Waht’s the distinction between the two?

@villa

I understand this, and appreciate why it is done. However, we need to readdress our policies regarding pre-trial detention. I don’t know what is practical, and I am certainly willing to accept the view of others with more experience, but I think restrictions on reading materials, for example, for non-convicted people should be different to those oon convicted people. Now, if this cannot be done in an environment where there are both convicted and non-convicted people housed together, and I can see why it would be a problem, we need to address whether convicted and non-convicted people should be housed together.

Pre-trial detainees was fortunately not a problem I ever had to deal with. But I did have to deal with prisoners who were all hosuing in one confinement unit but for different reasons. A single confinement unit might have prisoners who were there for:

*Disciplinary confinement
*Pre-hearing confinement
*Protective custody
*Suicide watch
*Drug watch
*Administrative segragation
*Medical hold
*Medical isolation
*Transportation hold
*Civil confinement
*Investigatory hold
*Court hold
*Overflow housing

And every one of these classifications had a different set of procedures that had to be followed. The manual for all this is about fifty pages long.

[villa]

@Little_Nemo

I’m not sure. Waht’s the distinction between the two?

Rational basis for lawyers means basically the government doesn’t need any real reason at all - pretty much anything they say will be accepted as the reason.

@Little_Nemo

Pre-trial detainees was fortunately not a problem I ever had to deal with. But I did have to deal with prisoners who were all hosuing in one confinement unit but for different reasons. A single confinement unit might have prisoners who were there for:
…
And every one of these classifications had a different set of procedures that had to be followed. The manual for all this is about fifty pages long.

Trust me - I can see how it would be a nightmare for you. But would you also agree that an individual who has not been charged with a crime should, if at all possible, be restricted less than a convicted criminal?

[Little_Nemo]

@Arnold_Winkelried

I don’t see how it makes any sense to disallow him from doing situps in his cell.

As I’ve said, I’ve never seen that policy so I can’t comment on what the rationale for it might be.

@Arnold_Winkelried

In any case, even if these measures are commonly practiced, that doesn’t mean that they don’t fit the definition of torture. The New Yorker article linked to in post 19 says that several European countries (the example described in more detail in the article is Britain) have moved away from solitary confinement with good results. It also reports that “In this country, in June of 2006, a bipartisan national task force, the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons, released its recommendations after a yearlong investigation. It called for ending long-term isolation of prisoners. Beyond about ten days, the report noted, practically no benefits can be found and the harm is clear—not just for inmates but for the public as well.”

We have our own legal system in the United States. Europe may do things differently but that doesn’t mean they’re better or worse than America. America may eventually end up following the European examples. Or maybe Europe will find that there are unforeseen consequences and end up following the American example. I don’t think anyone can claim there’s a clear consensus on this issue.

[Little_Nemo]

@villa

Rational basis for lawyers means basically the government doesn’t need any real reason at all - pretty much anything they say will be accepted as the reason.

That’s definitely not the case in my experience. As I’ve said, I was often the person who had to produce the reason why were doing what we did.

@villa

Trust me - I can see how it would be a nightmare for you. But would you also agree that an individual who has not been charged with a crime should, if at all possible, be restricted less than a convicted criminal?

In theory, yes. But as a practical matter, there’s usually sound reasons why it can’t be done.

[Arnold_Winkelried]

@Little_Nemo

We have our own legal system in the United States. Europe may do things differently but that doesn’t mean they’re better or worse than America. America may eventually end up following the European examples. Or maybe Europe will find that there are unforeseen consequences and end up following the American example.

Yes, I believe that’s what this thread is about. (We do have our own legal system, but the US is bound by the Convention Against Torture, similarly to European countries.) One could always say “either could be right”, but all the evidence I see in this thread is that solitary confinement is something that should be avoided. Or maybe you have access to studies indicating why solitary confinement is superior to other methods?

[villa]

@Little_Nemo

In theory, yes. But as a practical matter, there’s usually sound reasons why it can’t be done.

True - which is why I’d argue untried and convicted detainees should be kept separate wherever possible, and we need to seriously increase things such as time to trial and non-custodial pre-trial procedures.