Two new reports spearheaded by the Prison Violence Consortium that examine correction systems in seven states suggest that violence in prisons is vastly underreported and undetected, resulting in a “pervasive crisis” that is often overlooked.
“Prison violence challenges the very principles of justice and public safety that our system strives to uphold by undermining rehabilitation efforts and perpetuating cycles of aggression,” the authors write in their report entitled Sources and Consequences of Prison Violence. “It increases exposure to trauma and exacerbates mental health issues, creating long-lasting effects that persist beyond incarceration and potentially contribute to future criminal behavior.”
The researches worked with representatives from seven state correctional systems — Arizona, Colorado, Massachusetts, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas — to work towards developing an evidence-based framework for reducing and preventing violence in correctional facilities nationwide.
Among their findings:
Prison violence was concentrated among a small subset of persons, as only 10% of the population accounted for more than 50% of guilty violent infractions.
People found guilty of violent infractions tended to be younger age at admission, with lower education, longer sentences, more violent criminal histories, and greater mental health needs. Most people (63%) committed guilty violent infractions within 6-12 months of admission, with fewer than 10% remaining violent throughout their incarceration.
Most violence (71%) occurred between incarcerated persons, while 29% was directed at staff, according to the incident reports.
Primary reasons for violence between incarcerated persons included disrespect, illicit markets and debts, cellmate conflicts, gang issues, strong arming and predatory behavior, and targeting persons with sex offender status
Another report, The Dark Figure of Prison Violence, found that the vast majority — four out of five — violent incidents among incarcerated men are not ever brought to the attention of correction authorities, interviews suggested. And even those incidents that are known to staff are only sometimes documented in incident reports.
The reports make suggestions for how to more accurately track prison violence, and how to prevent it. They recommend standardizing definitions of violence, improving incident reporting, and engaging correction leadership — including professional associations, such as the Correctional Leaders Association and American Correctional Association — to spearhead a coordinated effort to standardize a measure of prison violence.
In addition, they suggest implementing detailed and dynamic risk assessment to identify high-risk individuals, enhancing classification and reclassification strategies to place incarcerated individuals in units that align with their risks, needs, and social dynamics, and transforming institutional culture to a treatment-based, positive-reinforcement model of care for incarcerated persons, while enhancing mental health support for staff.
“Our work aims to shift the paradigm in how prison violence is understood, addressed and, most critically, prevented,” the authors write. “By providing a nuanced, data-driven perspective on this complex issue, we hope to catalyze meaningful changes in policy and practice. The ultimate goal is not just to reduce violence within correctional facilities, but to contribute to a more just, humane and effective criminal justice system overall.”
Comments