| (May Newsletter 2003 - Page 5) (Note: MSOP’s policies and procedures are rigidly applied to residents and are a sensory deprivation of the most basic uses of even a “paperbacked emery board”, which residents use. Many residents believe that the policy and procedures create an unconstitutional environment.) Self-motivation and personal achievement are neither facilitated nor reinforced among inmates. Rigid and sometimes incomprehensible rules have always been basic features of incarceration. Inflexibility and unresponsiveness to the concerns of prisoners often results from bureaucratic indifference, whereby events, which seem important or vital to those at the bottom of the heap, are viewed with an increasing lack of concern with each step upward. The rules, commands and decisions that are imposed on inmates are not accompanied by explanations, as many corrections officers feel that they do not need to justify their demands and actions; inmates are to do what they are told and not ask questions. Thwarting the inmate’s ability to make choices and refusing to provide an explanation for prison rules and regulations involves a profound threat to the inmate’s self image by reducing the inmate to the weak, helpless, dependent status of childhood (Sykes, 1966). (Note: MSOP’s continual inflexibility can be seen in responses to the Hospital Review Board, which is designed to review conditions of confinement. MSOP often responds to this Board and residents in an indigent manner. Most employees of the MSOP feel much like the prison official who believes “they do not need to justify their demands and actions; inmates/residents are to do what they are told and not ask questions”.) Loss of autonomy can also entail a serious threat to the inmate’s self image as a fully accredited member of adult society. Public humiliation, enforced respect and deference, the finality of authoritarian decisions, and the demands for certain conduct because it is in the individual’s best interest are all features of childhood helplessness in the face of a superior adult world. This may be irksome and disturbing to a child, but for the adult who has escaped such helplessness with the passage of years, being thrust back into such helplessness could prove even more painful (Sykes, 1966). Treating inmates/residents as if they were children is contrary to the best interest of society. When long-term prisoners/residents are released, they may have lost the ability to make decisions for themselves and are less likely to be able to live productive lives in the community. (Note: This is indicative of the MSOP’s treatment programming coupled with infantile policies and procedures which creates a dependency on behalf of the resident constituting infantile regression.) Deprivation of Security When incarcerated, an offender is placed into prolonged proximity with other inmates, who in many cases have a long history of violent, aggressive behavior. It is a situation which has proven to be anxiety provoking for even the hardest of recidivists. Regardless of the mutual aid and support which may flourish in the inmate population, there are a sufficient number of offenders within this group of offenders to deprive the average inmate of the sense of security which comes from living among people who can be reasonably expected to abide by the rules of society. (Sykes, 1966) This loss of security arouses acute anxiety, not just because violent acts of aggression and exploitation can take place, but also because such behavior constantly calls into question the individual’s ability to cope in prison and hinder their abilities to live normally in the outside world. (Note: The MSOP has continually housed diverse populations such as the mentally ill and borderline mentally retarded residents with a majority population that is neither. Because of the unpredictable behavior of those with severe mental illness, it creates acute anxiety for the majority.) Deprivation of Heterosexual Relationships Some researchers have suggested that male inmates undergo a reduction of the sexual drive and that the sexual frustrations of inmates are, therefore, less significant than might be expected. However, these reports were largely based on the accounts of men imprisoned in concentration camps or similar extreme situations where starvation, torture and physical exhaustion reduced life to a struggle for survival or left the captive deep in apathy (Sykes, 1966). In addition to the physiological effects of sexual frustration, Sykes cited possible psychological problems created by the lack of heterosexual relationships for male inmates. A society composed exclusively of men tends to generate anxieties in its members concerning their masculinity, regardless of whether or not they are coerced, bribed or seduced into an overt homosexual liaison. Latent homosexual tendencies may be activated in the individual without being translated into open behavior and yet still arouse strong guilt feelings at either the conscious or unconscious level. Sykes made an observation in his 1966 work which is of relevance in our current understanding about male sexuality: “...[T]he deprivation of heterosexual relationships carries with it another threat to the prisoner’s image of himself -- more diffuse, perhaps, and more difficult to state precisely and yet no less disturbing. The inmate is shut off from the world of women, which by its very polarity, gives the male world much of its meaning. Like most men, the inmate must search for his identity not simply within himself but also in the picture of himself, which he finds reflected in the eyes of others”. (Sykes, 1966, p. 72) Paradoxically, many inmates who consider themselves to be heterosexual assert their masculinity not by suffering through the frustrations of abstinence, but by engaging in homosexual activities. In some institutions for male offenders, sub-cultural norms exist allowing “real men” to have homosexual relations without having their heterosexual identity challenged, as long as they always take the penetrative role. Receptive males, many of whom are unwilling participants in the sexual activity, are stigmatized and may be subject to prostitution and rape within the institution (Donaldson, 1990). The combination of sexual frustration and the need to maintain one’s masculine image while facing a long period of incarceration with only members of the same sex leads many male inmates to acquire sexual gratification from other men through persuasion, bribery, coercion or force. |
|