There have been growing concerns from various stakeholders about the issue of restrictive housing, which fosters segregation within correctional systems, in the recent past. Various advocates, international bodies, national activist groups, policymakers and the correctional practitioners have come out strongly to criticize the use of restrictive housing within the correctional systems of the country (Cloud, Kang-Brown & Vanko, 2016). The common clarion call by all these stakeholders and interested parties has been for the prisons and jails to review their application segregation through restrictive housing. This position taken by most stakeholders and interested parties is because of the devastating long times spent by the inmates within the solitary confines. It is a practice that causes the impact of psychological as well as physiological on the inmates. Moreover, most correctional system practitioners have come out to question the viability of the huge cost spent to operate the restrictive housing practice. Furthermore, there is no clear and plausible evidence regarding the notion that segregation through restrictive housing helps in making the correctional facilities safer (Shames, 2015).
Former President Obama was prompted by the voices of criticism against the use of restrictive housing to order an investigation into the issue with an aim of developing effective reforms. In the year 2015, Obama announced his decision to instruct the then Attorney General Loretta Lynch to carry out a reexamination of the overuse of solitary confinement across all the American prisons (US Attorney General, 2016). Obama gave directions that the main purpose of the ordered review was not only understanding the sad state affairs where correctional facilities isolated specific prisoners from the general population of inmates, but also come up with effective strategies that can be applied to reduce the use of this practice within the country’s criminal justice system (US Attorney General, 2016). A number of programs have been proposed following this review. In this paper, the most exemplary and best practice chosen is the general population and step-down unit program.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Description of the program
This program offers the inmates a chance and incentives to obey and follow standards of behavior related to maximum security custody. The inmates are allowed to progressively exhibit good behavior as well as positive institutional adjustments (US Attorney General, 2016). The inmates, who show this improved character, are given the privilege of progressing from the general population to the intermediate, transitional and pre-transfer units. Importantly, the in-mates who become successful in terms of significantly improving their character and conduct in the pre-transfer unit are transferred to a suitable bureau facility.
This program has a number of privileges given to all inmates. For instance, all the inmates within this program have the opportunity of receiving a maximum of five social visits monthly. Additionally, they are allowed to send and get correspondence. It is also vital to note that they are not subjected to a numeric limit regarding the number of legal visits and calls they may receive (US Attorney General, 2016). These are just the overall privileges to all the inmates in the entire program. However, each unit mentioned above has specific privileges to it, which act as the main incentive for the inmates to behave well and target progressing to the higher one. Notably, the total time taken by an inmate to complete this particular program is a period of 36 months. Inmates in the general population unit have a stay minimum of 12 months (US Attorney General, 2016). A lot of time may also be taken in the pre-transfer unit, which has a minimum of 12 months. The other two have the shorter minimum stay period of 6 months.
Elements that lead to the success of the program
The important elements in this exemplary and best program, which give it success in terms of solving the issue of restrictive housing, is the availability of incentives for behavior improvement. The inmates are not just encouraged to adhere to the standards of conduct within the correctional system, but have the incentive of doing it. These incentives include progressive improvement of privileges offered to the inmates as they move to the higher unit right from the general population one. Another key element is the factor of having a minimum duration for each unit in this program. With this minimum duration, it means that improvement of character does not serve as the only ticket for an inmate to graduate into another unit. The minimum time given offers all inmates to gain rigorous teachings and preparations as they prepare to enter a new unit. Moreover, the teachings and preparations given to them enable them to successfully integrate within the correctional system. These elements are key to the success of this exemplary program.
Program structure and design
The strategic program structure and design provides it with the ability of effectively solving the issue of restrictive housing. The entire program is designed to have progressive privileges in each structure. It is important to note that this whole program is structured into units. The specific units include the general population, which is the lowest, pre-intermediate, intermediate, pre-transitional and the transitional units (US Attorney General, 2016). The design of the program entails minimum periods to be taken by the inmates in each unit. Moreover, there are general advantages given to all the inmates in the program.
The general population and step-down unit program is quite exemplary and the best in terms of solving the issue of restrictive housing. It gives inmates the chance to work their way out of the units back to the Bureau prisons, where they fully re-integrate. It is a program that is recommendable to the correctional systems in this country.
References
Cloud, D., Kang-Brown, J. & Vanko, E. (2016). The Safe Alternatives to Segregation Initiative: Findings and Recommendations for the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services . New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice.
Shames, A. (2015). Solitary confinement: Common misconceptions and emerging safe alternatives . New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice.
US Attorney General. (2016). US Department of Justice Report and Recommendations Concerning the Use of Restrictive Housing. Available at https://www.justice.gov/archives/dag/file/815551/download.
