In 1787 Pennsylvania prison was founded in Philadelphia focusing on improving prison conditions and improving how the inmates were treated (Bergstrom & Bucklen, 2016). From the moment prison began to be used as a form of punishment, there were groups referred to as prison reform groups who started fighting for improvement in prison conditions. Quaker Clergy, who were the leaders of the society, wanted to reduce the use of harsh punishment in jails and prison. They tried to name and define correction as a religious experience where inmates would seek redemption for their sins by reading the bible and contemplation of their misdeeds. The society implementation the use of "separate and solitary" confinement as a method to achieve their philosophical objectives was successful. Benjamin Franklin and a group of fellow Quakers made a Philadelphia society, which later became Pennsylvania prison society, for relieving the miseries of public prisons. The Pennsylvania society started lobbying for reforms in the prison system (Bergstrom & Bucklen, 2016). The Quakers believed that a separate system should be implemented where the inmate could seek penitence through isolation and reflection. The Pennsylvania society was persistent in promoting to implement, and they increasingly dominated in the planning of prisons in the first fifty years of Pennsylvania’s membership in the Union.
The Philadelphia society, which is known as the Pennsylvania prison society today, aimed at improving the conditions of inmates in the local jail. The society wanted to relieve the prisons system in response to the information received of the inhumane treatment and the unsanitary conditions at the Walnut Street Jail As the cities grew and developed, many old ways of punishments became outdated, and people began looking at prisons in different ways (Bergstrom & Bucklen, 2016). They started using incarceration as a way of punishment. As soon as imprisonment started, prisoner’s abuse began, and prison reform was also born. Prison reform was an attempt to help the inmates by improving their conditions in prison. Inmates were mistreated by other prisoners in many ways like taking their clothes. Jailers also charged inmates for food clothing and heat. There were little furniture and beddings in prisons hence the inmates slept on the floor. Intoxicated drinks were only provided for the inmates who were able to pay, and it was a common habit to take the newcomers garments to pay for their drinks. Innocent people who were suspects were also arrested and put to jail. There was also no separation of fraudulent swindler from the unfortunate. The prisons were poorly constructed at the corner of high and third streets where subterranean dungeons for those who were sentenced for death. Besides, the society proposed abolishment of iron shackles and also create a set salary for the jailer to prevent corruption. The society expressed that such conditions were harsh, unnecessary and cruel. They claimed that the prisons should be more extensive and implement methods such as hard labor and solitary confinement aiming for reform.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In 1790, the society got their wish since the legislation was passed that changed the city jail which was built on Walnut streets to the nation’s first penitentiary in the year 1773 (Bergstrom & Bucklen, 2016). The walnut street jail was changed, and one person room with a small unreachable window was made. Prisoners were separated according to sex and crime and workshops were implemented to make prisoners used their time well, and abusive behaviors were also abolished. The prisoners were provided with the materials and tools needed to make shoes, nails, tools, and clothing. The shoes were used in the prison systems, and the extra were sold to the public. Also, the prisoners only saw their guard. Also, the Pennsylvania prison system owned different attributes including isolation to foster penitence since the prisoners had time to reflect on their wrongdoing, humanitarian-based since it provided good food and healthcare, the prisoners worked alone to make goods and get educated on trade, and their focus moved to rehabilitation instead of retribution. The Pennsylvania system made changes in prison design and its administration not only in Philadelphia but also in Pittsburgh, in other states and even abroad. In Walnut Street, the unsuitable structure and overcrowding led to failure. The Pennsylvania reform also brought about increase in cost and congestion. The individual rooms were later changed to larger rooms with multiple inmates, and few prisoners learned skills since demand for their product ended. Also, the storehouses devolved into human storehouses which became filled with filth. Finally, the Pennsylvania prison society was seen as models for prison reforms efforts all over the United States and also in Europe.
As the population in the United States increases, the population system in prisons has increased as well. The rapid growth in the prison population has caused overcrowding and is dangerous. According to research, many prisons are so crowded forcing prisoners to sleep on the floor. Overcrowding has also contributed to prison violence, lack of proper supervision, inadequate food, intolerable hygiene conditions, and poor medical care. In modern times, the idea of making rooms for safe and clean mainly in prison. Unsafe and unsanitary prisons have violated the law that prohibits against cruel and unusual punishment (Jonson & Cullen, 2015). Currently, prison reform ideas include conjugal visits, greater access to legal counsel and family, proactive security against violence and also enforcing house arrest using technology. In the correctional systems today, there is dislocation of inmates from local to distant jurisdictions. Many countries are outsourcing their inmates to other state facilities away from urban areas and to a developing for-profit correctional business. There is also increased use of isolation in the punishment of prisoners. The United States has above 60 super maximum correctional facilities and houses more than 20,000 prisoners (Jonson & Cullen, 2015). The prisoners in the super maximum correctional facility spent their time in locked small sometimes windowless cells which are sealed with solid steel walls (Rothman, 2017). The quality of healthcare provided is adequate. The inmates are provided with severe medical needs. The inmates have also been allocated to their specific corrective setting concerning their sex and crime. There are female, male and juvenile correctional settings.
There have been changes in demographic and health issues. First, the number of prisoners has increased. Prisoners and jails have housed about 2.1 million prisoners, and 4.9 million are on probation and parole (Welsh & Harris, 2016). There have been reports of poor healthcare delivery in correctional facilities. The new regulation should ensure that the correctional facility reflects providing adequate healthcare considering whether to accept and provide biomedical protocols in the correctional system. Prisoners also face injury, violence, rape, and suicide in a correctional setting (Bryan, Haldipur, Martin & Ullrich, 2015). Many prisoners have reported cases of injuries since they were admitted to the facility. This shows that the prison reforms have decreased. Cases of mental illness, communicable diseases, and chronic health issues have been reported. This shows the prison conditions are poor regardless the prison reform system which was used to improve the prison conditions.
In conclusion, Pennsylvania prison society main focus was to support and help the inmates and improve the prison conditions to better their life in prison. The Pennsylvania prison reform success influenced the conditions of the prison in the past and also in the present. Currently, The correctional setting today try to improve the inmates' conditions by enhancing the structural settings, providing medical care, providing beddings and many more.
References
Bergstrom, M. H., & Bucklen, K. B. (2016). Justice Reinvestment in Pennsylvania: Another Opportunity for Bold Action. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 29(1), 15-21.
Bryan, J. L., Haldipur, J., Martin, M., & Ullrich, S. (2015). Envisioning a broader role for philanthropy in prison reform. Society, 52(6), 572-579.
Jonson, C. L., & Cullen, F. T. (2015). Prisoner reentry programs. Crime and Justice, 44(1), 517-575.
Rothman, D. J. (2017). Conscience and convenience: The asylum and its alternatives in progressive America . Routledge.
Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning: Planned Change. Routledge.
