In the recent past, numerous instances of officers using excessive force when dealing with inmates in prisons around the globe have been documented. Despite denials made by some authorities regarding this subject, the issue has been established. Former prisoners have spoken out about their negative encounters with the prisons. One is left thinking how unhuman and unrealistic the offers have become after reading some of the dehumanizing stories. (Awofeso, 2010). The majority of ex-offenders have criticized the criminal justice systems, claiming that they are not what people outside the system believe. The circumstances do not fit with the correctional centers' planned use. According to reports on human rights, it has been found that most of the officers at the correctional facilities are reliving the ancient purpose of what used to be referred to as prisons. The prisons were first used by the Romans as rooms for confining offenders. At the time, the prisons were meant to punish the law breakers. Much pain was inflicted on them as a way of persuading them from committing the same crime in future. However, over the years, the prison system has experienced a lot of changes. The correctional centers have evolved to be areas where offenders can be offered a second chance to correct their mistakes and be responsible people in the society. The United States of America in particular passed an Act known as the 8th Amendment (Briggs and Castellano, 2003). This amendment protects citizens against any form of excessive fines and bails imposed or unusual and cruel punishments that may be inflicted on a person. However, the situation has been opposite in most of the correctional centers. The excessive use of force by the correctional officers against inmates is therefore a violation of the 8th amendment.
Impacts of officers' violence
As the 8th amendment states, it is unlawful to expose any citizen to harsh and inhuman treatments. Therefore, it is unwarranted that the correctional officers are going against the constitutional rights of the inmates by using a lot of force when handling them. One case famously known as Ward v. Smith et al (Hare et al., 1999) that was submitted to the authorities, by Ward, exposed a lot of rot in the correctional centers. The case was submitted by the inmate on December 21, 2016. Ward was an inmate at Missouri Department of Corrections (MDOC). He was serviced a prison sentence and was housed at the Administrative Segregation Unit which is at the South Central Correctional Center. Ward stated that he sustained injuries and inhuman treatments in the hands of an officer by the name Smith (Caldwell, 2010). In the case submitted to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, details show that the officer used pepper spray on the inmate. According to the filed petition, Ward said that the officer used the spray at a closer distance. It exposed him to harmful health conditions. In this instance alone, the inability of the officer to use dialogue and negotiation to make Ward submit to wrist restrains depicts a lot of cruelty. Through the information given by other inmates, it was found that the only mistake that Ward had committed was talking to a fellow inmate in a different cell. In normal circumstances, the disobedience by Ward should not have caused unnecessary attention that it was given by Smith. The officer had other options of ensuring that the conversation stops. Smith could have achieved that by relocating the other inmate instead of harming Ward.
Excessive use of force leads to humiliation of the inmates. In some cases, reports have shown that some officers go to the extent of undressing the inmates as a way of punishing them. The matter is devastating as it causes low self-esteem in the inmates. Such an issue also undermines the privacy of the inmates. The constitution of the country states well that irrespective of the criminal offence an inmate had committed, he or she is entitled to protection by the state (Calzavara et al., 2003). The protection involves ensuring that the inmates are sheltered from any harm that may be caused by their fellows or by the officers who are supposed to monitor them. Therefore, the humiliation that such inmates may receive as a result of the actions of the officers is against their fundamental rights.
Excessive use of force by officers also exposes the inmates to health problems. There are instance where officers have resorted to beating up inmates. The officers claim that this is the only effective way of making the inmates obey the orders they give them. However, such officers fail to realize that violence is not the only way of earning respect and authority over the inmates (Garau, 2014). As a matter of fact, it only causes serious misunderstandings among the two parties. The misunderstanding between the officers and the inmates creates an unconducive environment both for the officers and the inmates. In such situations, both parties will live in constant fear of the conditions that may come up in the future.
A lot of violence when handling inmates has been found as the major cause of psychological problems to most of the convicts. Many scholars have come up with different arguments regarding this issue. Instead of correcting their behaviors while in the correctional centers, inmates are becoming more violent (Caldwell, 2010). Research indicates that the use of violence has made them to think that the only way of achieving the desired outcomes. Some of the inmates have ended up causing a lot of harm to the members of the community upon their release. The situation shows that the torture that inmates are exposed to by the officers causes them more harm than good. The ill treatment is against the requirements of the 8th amendment which protects people from any mistreatment which can negatively impact on their lives (McCorkle et al., 1995). Research indicates that abuse is also against the purpose of the correctional centers which is to make the offender useful people in the community. Therefore, it is important for the governments and other relevant authorities to do a follow up on the activities of the centers.
Some correction centers have established areas they refer to as solitary rooms. These areas are renowned for the torture that takes place in the secluded rooms. The solitary rooms are examples of the violence that the officers use in the correction centers (Caldwell, 2010). As a fact, violence does not only involve harming someone but also exposing them to treatments that show intimidation. Violence also includes the infliction of fear in another person. According to the narration by some ex-inmates, the solitary rooms are small housings that have no provisions at all. These enclosures have no toilets or even a space where an inmate can sit. Therefore, when a person is taken to the solitary residence, he or she must stand for the entire duration (Hassine et al., 1996). These quarters are also situated in locations where an inmate is exposed to the harsh environmental such as bad weather. The only person an inmate can communicate with during that period is an officer. That kind of treatment is against a person's right which gives him or her freedom of speech. Putting mistreatments into consideration, it is right to say that this kind of treatment infringes the right of an inmate. It is against the provisions of the 8th amendment.
Researchers found out that solitary confinement has some psychological effects on the inmates. Most of these effects cannot be reversed. A person does not have to be in solitude for long to be affected (Hassine et al., 1996). A short duration of fifteen days can cause considerable damage to the well-being of the victim. In the solitary state, the victims are deprived of stimuli and social contact with the other people. That kind of confinement is mostly practiced in maximum correction centers. In such places an inmate can be held in the small rooms for over five years (Hare et al., 1999). The inability of inmates to move about and associate with the other people may lead to development of brain problems. In some cases, the norm of providing limited view may lead to fading vision in an inmate. Solitary confinement can also lead to hopelessness and anxiety. A psychologist by the name Terry Kupper said that solitary confinement "destroys people as human beings" (Hare et al., 1999).
In some instances, the violence that the correctional officers use on the inmates has led to death. Most of these deaths are not reported due to the fear of facing the consequences. The failure to report mistreatments has brought a lot of debate where most of the human activists have come up condemning such acts. The 8th amendment focuses on the protection of human life (Mahan et al., 2017). In the case where violence causes death, then appropriate procedures must be followed to ensure that the culprit is held accountable for their acts. However, it is devastating that little interest has been given to this sickening state at the prisons.
Most of the campaigners for prison reforms have maintained that the escalating rates of suicide and murder in the prisons depict the meltdown in this state department. The situation shows that the correction centers and officers have failed to perform their intended functions. The primary purpose of the unit is to teach the inmates the bright side of life (Hassine et al., 1996). The change of behavior cannot be achieved by exposing them to violence. The violence on several occasions causes loss of lives, and the state ends up losing people who would have changed and become responsible people in the society.
Whereas the American constitution does not give provisions of a comfortable prison, it does not grant permissions for inhuman treatment of inmates either. The 8th amendments outline the duties of the correction officials. The act states that the officials must ensure that the inmates receive better treatment at all times (Gaes et al., 2002). Therefore, sensible measures must be put in place to ensure that their rights are not ignored. If an officer uses excessive force when handling a prisoner, he or she exposes the said person to unusual and cruel treatments.
There are set standards on how the correctional officials should apply force when handling the inmates. However, on some occasions, these officials have gone an extra mile in ensuring that they cause fear in the inmates. The application of force in the correctional centers makes it look like the officers find solace in knowing that the prisoners feel their presence and authority. Reports have indicated that there are cases which do not need the use of force (Hassine et al., 1996). The circumstances may include the failure of inmates to follow orders of remaining silent. Before an officer decides to apply force when handling a prisoner, he or she must have interest in establishing what the problem may be. The constitution respects the freedom of expression of everyone irrespective of the circumstances. However, in most cases, the officers do not show concern for the genesis of the actions (McIlwain, 2004). Some psychological studies have shown that the excessive force that some of the officers use is an outward show of frustration (James and Glaze, 2006). However, a professional officer knows well how to handle his or her problems. Therefore, the frustrations should not be an excuse in any way. The transfer of bitter emotions to the inmates is erroneous and must be condemned. The inmates may not be the cause of the hurt that an officer may have felt. Therefore, it is a violation of the rights of the inmates to make them pay for a crime they have not committed.
Unlike the street officers who have to deal with criminals in uncontrolled environments, the correctional officers must not conspire to cause harm to the inmates. A street officer has to work with uncontrolled subjects who may be armed unlike the correctional officers because the inmates live in a controlled environment (Caldwell, 2010). The correctional facilities are specially constructed to contain them. As some may say, the inmates are in the "rooms of the officers." The statement means that in case of an emergency situation, the correctional officer is able to document it down. Whenever things go out of control, the controlled environment around the correctional centers can keep them in check. The environment can provide adequate time for further security measure to be taken. However, these outlined measures have not been put into practice when handling inmates. Whenever any form of unrest emerges, correction officers are prone to using a lot of violence (McIlwain, 2004). The reaction of the officers often fuels angry responses from the inmates. Sometimes the inmates feel that they are looked down upon and develop the urge for vengeance. Therefore, there is no need for a correctional officer to take the law in their arms. The actions of the officers expose the inmates to dangerous situations both mentally and physically.
The perception of the public towards the manner in which the correctional centers are run matters a lot in the conduct of the officers. The view limits the extent to which a correctional officer can use violence. In as much as some people argue that the peoples' views towards the correction centers do not have any effect, they may be wrong. Correction officers have a mandate of keeping themselves safe physically while they handle the inmates (Penn et al., 2003). However, the officers must also be able to give the reasons that necessitate the use of excessive force in any circumstance. The danger that an officer may perceive at a given time must not overcome them to the extent of turning violent.
Another fact that renders the use of force to control inmates illegal is because of the knowledge an officer has of the person he or she is handling. The correctional centers provide elaborate background information about an inmate. The officer in question should be able to understand the inmate and take corrective measures. The measures do not include the use of violence. The information also enables the officers to understand the reactions of the inmates in question (McIlwain, 2004). Therefore, in case of any issue, the officer can make adequate preparations. Adequate preparation may include involving another officer to help where necessary. In this kind of planning, the use of violence will be the last resort or may not be necessary at all. In contrast to the situation in the streets where an officer may not have any backup at all, the opposite is true in the correctional centers. The prison as a department ensures that there is a rapid response to an alarm raised. The action taken must be able to reduce or preferably minimize the use of force and violence. If an officer is experiencing a problem with an inmate, he or she should call an emergency team (Bottoms, 1999). If this protocol is followed, there would be no need for violence. It has been found that most of the officers have used the emergency situations to mercilessly beat and cause physical injuries to inmates. The coordinated and efficient responses in the correctional centers are supposed to moderate the need for any physical confrontation between the officer and the inmate. There is also a subject control system of response that allows the use of less insensitive physical control.
The use of violence by the correctional officers is a violation of the human rights as stated by the 8th amendment. The application of excessive force when handling inmates is in total disregard to the adequate measures that have been put in place by the authorities. The physical design of the correctional centers alone is made in a manner that facilitates control of the inmates (Freudenberg, 2001). The designs assist in the isolation of the areas experiencing problems. These structures are made in a way that enables them to isolate any forms of disturbance either in the cell blocks or even in the entire facility. Therefore the correctional officers have no excuse for resorting to the use of violence in controlling the activities of the inmates.
Another form of violence that has been on the rise is the case of sexual misconduct between the inmates and the guards. Several reports have been made by inmates indicating that there are rising occasions when the correctional officers use them to satisfy their sexual needs. The cases have been rampant in the juveniles and female correctional centers (Penn et al., 2003). According to a report made by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a wide range of unconstitutional and inhumane treatments have been recorded by the U.S. Department of Justice. The organization had launched an investigation in the period between the years 2010 and 2012. Its main aim was to document on the conditions of the correctional facilities in the country (Sorensen and Cunningham, 2010). On top of the list was the issue of sexual misconduct. The interviews done by the department exposed the moral rots that have left most of the inmate depressed in their cells. The report also disclosed the indifference treatment accorded to both the youths and the adult inmates. The United States female correctional centers have recorded the highest rates of sexual violence. Currently, it stands at twenty-seven percent. 1% to 40% of the inmates have been exposed to sexual victimization during the period of serving their sentences. Most of these cases have left the inmates worried and with a lot of distrust. Others have been entirely distressed. The situation shows how the officers have conspired to violate the rights of the inmates to satisfy their own needs.
Some correction centers still use torture as a way of controlling the inmates. Some have even constructed designated rooms where the tortures take place. The action is against the 8th amendment that protects the inmates from any form of ill-treatment. Correction officers have been found to use pain as a way of obtaining confessions from the inmates (Penn et al., 2003). The technique has also been used as a way of punishing inmates who have shown inappropriate conduct. The torture in most cases induces severe pains on the victims, and some of them have ended up dying from the unnecessary pain caused to the inmates. Torture happens despite the correction departments having stipulated guidelines to be followed if an inmate shows any indecent behavior. In most contexts of the society, inmates are viewed as people with little or no powers during the period they are behind bars. In most cases, the community sees them as people who deserve to have no liberty and freedom at all. In some states, it has been found that corrective institutions and prisons have decided to torture inmates when they want to thwart some severe criminal activities.
Some corrective institutions have resorted to the use of dogs to control and restrict the activities of inmates. The dogs are released, and the officers let them savage on the inmates or offenders. The action causes severe pains, and in other cases, it leads to loss of limbs or other body parts (Sorensen and Cunningham, 2010). The cruel blows and kicks that inmates receive in some instances cause cuts and fractures on their bodies. The wounds sometimes are left unattended to thereby causing their rotting. The situation further exposes the inmate to further pains and mistreatment. Some correction officers choose to amputate the injured inmates without using anesthesia. The officers argue that this is a way of teaching the offenders a lesson. Cases of electrocution have also been recorded in some correction centers. The torture is mostly done using a cattle prod. Electrocution can cause severe brain damage rendering the inmate incapacitated.
The society must be aware that there are some experiences in the life of a human being that cannot be forgotten. The personal experiences may cause an everlasting damage to the life of an inmate. Some correction centers torture inmates to death before their fellows. The actions make the witnesses to live a life full of anxiety and fear. In some instances, such experiences lead to hallucinations or permanent shock in the people. Violence in the correction centers may also deny the inmates an opportunity to freely interact with people even after they are released (Calzavara et al., 2003). The experiences makes the prisoners suffer from low self-esteem and other dull emotional reactions for example sexual incorrectness particularly those who had been sexually abused either by a fellow inmate or the officers. The inmates may also develop aggressive responses to the people around them. As a result, some ex-inmates fail to change their criminal lives. The matter comes as a result of the negative outlook they have of life in general. Some even end up being worse than they were before as a way of escaping the harsh reality of their experiences in the correction centers. Upon release, some inmates may choose to live a solitary life. Because of the exposure to a rebellious life, the former inmates may have severed relationships with their relatives. Several cases have been reported where inmates have nightmares and many other sleeping problems (Awofeso, 2010). They sometimes wail, scream and even try to fight back invisible beings. The actions show that the violence they are exposed to in the correction centers causes them a lot of trauma and brain damage.
Some officers have pointed at the behavior of the inmates as the factor that has led to the increased use of violence. They maintain that some of the inmates have become "resistant" to all the other control measures instituted by the correctional centers (Calzavara et al., 2003). However, no matter the circumstances, the officers must first exhaust all the other options they have of managing the activities and conducts of the inmates. They must be able to follow the outlined procedures when dealing with any unruly behavior noticed in an inmate.
The use of chemical has found its way into the correctional centers despite a stern warning from some activists. The correction officers have embraced the use of sprays such as the pepper spray to force inmates into submission (Penn et al., 2003). Most of these sprays that are used have long-term effects on the health of the inmates. According to health reports piled regarding the use of the chemical in correctional centers, it has been found that some of them have long-lasting effects on the victims. Florida prisons have been listed as one of the correction centers that have widely adopted the use of chemicals (Sorensen and Cunningham, 2010). The worst part of the practice is that the chemicals cause severe burns to the victims. The correction officers have viewed this as a way of punishing those inmates who are found to be misbehaving. The utilization of the chemical sprays has been rampant in correction centers believed to be harboring the worst inmates. The inhuman actions had risen to above 50% in the year 2001 compared to the past years. However, correction officers have collectively defended the use of chemical sprays in the centers because it enables them to subdue the inmates without having a physical contact. However, the officers fail to see the dangers that they are exposing their victims to and the negative impacts it may have on them. The chemical spray that has been widely used in the correctional centers is a purified product obtained from cayenne pepper (Briggs and Castellano, 2003). According to a research done by Donald Hess, a doctor in Pennsylvania, chemicals cause harm to the victims. He says that the exposure of the skin to pepper spray causes burns to the skin of the victims. He maintained that if the chemical sprays are administered in large doses, they can cause respiratory distress. In 2000, the case of Jeremiah Thomas, an inmate at Florida State Prison attracted a lot of attention. He had refused to stop banging the door to his cell (Calzavara et al., 2003). As a response to his action, the officer on duty sprayed him with pepper. The action resulted in blistering and burns on his back, buttocks, and abdomen. The effects of the spray were brought to light by pictures taken by attorneys three weeks later. It showed the long-lasting effect the chemicals have on the inmates. Therefore, it can be proved that the practice is inhumane and a violation of the 8th amendment.
On the other hand, it must be noted that not all measures taken by officers in the correctional centers amount to a violation. At some point, it is necessary that the officers employ some force to control inmates. According to the 8th amendments, a court must be able to scrutinize the reason for the use of force (Awofeso, 2010). The action involves determination as to whether the application of such measures was made in good faith. The issue may include the efforts of the officers to restore or maintain order among the inmates. The court must also be able to determine whether the purpose of the measures taken by an officer was sadistic and malicious. The determination includes ascertaining that the harm caused was intentional. In the process of deciding on whether there was a violation of rights, the authorities must look at the magnitude of the injury. The reasons that necessitated the use of force must also be considered.
In conclusion, the violence that the inmates face in the correction centers as a result of the actions of the officers is a violation of the 8th amendment. The abuse is not in line with the protection of human life. The action does not promote respect for the freedom of inmates. The 8th amendment bill outlines illegal practices when handling the inmates which are yet to be met. Therefore, the state must come out and give a direction on the matter. Those officers found to have violated this bill must be held accountable and stern actions taken against them. Only after effective reforms have been made in the correction centers will they efficiently perform the functions they are meant to fulfill. Close monitoring of the conduct of the correction officers must be done. The move will put in check those officers found to lose respect for the international human rights. A committee must also be instituted to keep records of all the activities in these centers. The action will help the state in ensuring that the inmates are protected from uncouth officers.
References
Awofeso, N. (2010). Prisons as social determinants of hepatitis C virus and tuberculosis infections. Public Health Reports, 125(4_suppl), 25-33.
Bottoms, A. E. (1999). Interpersonal violence and social order in prisons. Crime and justice, 26, 205-281.
Briggs, C. S., Sundt, J. L., & Castellano, T. C. (2003). The effect of supermaximum security prisons on aggregate levels of institutional violence. Criminology, 41(4), 1341-1376.
Caldwell, M. F. (2010). Study characteristics and recidivism base rates in juvenile sex offender recidivism. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54(2), 197-212.
Calzavara, L. M., Burchell, A. N., Schlossberg, J., Myers, T., Escobar, M., Wallace, E., ... & Millson, M. (2003). Prior opiate injection and incarceration history predict injection drug use among inmates. Addiction, 98(9), 1257-1265.
Freudenberg, N. (2001). Jails, prisons, and the health of urban populations: a review of the impact of the correctional system on community health. Journal of Urban Health, 78(2), 214-235.
Gaes, G. G., Wallace, S., Gilman, E., Klein-Saffran, J., & Suppa, S. (2002). The influence of prison gang affiliation on violence and other prison misconduct. The Prison Journal, 82(3), 359-385.
Garau, J. (2014). Violence in Juvenile Prisons. Esprit, (6), 122-124.
Hare, R. D. (1999). Psychopathy as a risk factor for violence. Psychiatric Quarterly, 70(3), 181-197.
Hassine, V., Bernard, T. J., McCleary, R., & Wright, R. A. (1996). Life without parole: Living in prison today. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Company.
Mahan, B., Moynier, F., Beck, P., Pringle, E. A., & Siebert, J. (2017). A history of violence: Insights into post-accretionary heating in carbonaceous chondrites from volatile element abundances, Zn isotopes and water contents. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 220, 19-35.
McCorkle, R. C., Miethe, T. D., & Drass, K. A. (1995). The roots of prison violence: A test of the deprivation, management, and "not-so-total" institution models. NCCD news, 41(3), 317-331.
McIlwain, G. (2004). Professional misconduct between inmates and non-custodial staff: A study of Queensland's correctional centres (Doctoral dissertation, Ph. D. thesis, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia).
Penn, J. V., Esposito, C. L., Schaeffer, L. E., Fritz, G. K., & Spirito, A. (2003). Suicide attempts and self-mutilative behavior in a juvenile correctional facility. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(7), 762-769.
Sorensen, J., & Cunningham, M. D. (2010). Conviction offense and prison violence: A comparative study of murderers and other offenders. Crime & Delinquency, 56(1), 103-125.
