Media Response: The Standford Prison Experiment

Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice

Joycelyn M. Pollock

9th EDITION

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now

Chapters 12 & 13

Common across all ethics codes:

Integrity

Respect for and protection of individual rights

Service to the public

Importance and sanctity of the law

Prohibition against exploiting professional authority for personal gain

Oregon DOC:

Code of Conduct

http://www.oregon.gov/doc/OC/docs/rules_policies/20.1.3.pdf

Code of Ethics

http://www.oregon.gov/doc/OC/docs/pdf/IB-23-Mission-Vision.pdf

Formal Ethics for Correctional Professionals

Ethics Training Program

Treating all staff fairly and impartially

Promoting based on true merit

Showing no prejudice

Leading by example

Developing a clear mission statement

Creating a positive code of ethics (a list of do’s, rather than don’ts)

Creating a culture that promotes performance, not seniority

Soliciting staff input on new policies

Being respectful

Letting the word out that upper management cares about ethics

Jail Officers

In many respects, local jail officers have more difficult responsibilities than state prison officers.

Jail population is transitory and often unstable.

Offenders may come into jail intoxicated, suffer from undiagnosed diseases or psychiatric conditions, or be suicidal.

Visitation is more frequent, and family issues are more problematic.

The constant activity and chaotic environment of a jail often create unique ethical dilemmas.

Treatment Staff

The professional goal of all treatment specialists is to help the client.

This goal may be fundamentally inconsistent with the punitive prison/jail environment.

A dilemma of treatment programs is deciding who is to participate.

Psychiatrists in corrections may feel they are being used more for social control than treatment.

Most news items and academic articles describe misconduct in prisons by correctional officers, but there are instances where counselors and other treatment professionals also engage in misconduct.

Most common issue is not providing the services that inmates are legally entitled to.

Treatment Professionals

Correctional Officers

Correctional officers (COs) are similar to police officers (uniform = authority).

Sometimes correctional professionals have the power to do things that they don’t have the legal authority to do.

It is impossible to effectively depend on the authority of the uniform to get tasks accomplished (must earn respect and authority from personal reputation).

Changing goals in the 1970s and 1980s created role conflict and ambiguity for the correctional officer. Other factors include unionization, professionalism, and diversity.

Power and Authority: Controlling the Inmates

Hepburn (1985)

Catalogs five forms of power:

Legitimate power

Coercive power

Reward power

Expert power

Referent power

Lombardo (1989)

Also developed typography of guard authority, comprising personal authority and legalistic authority:

Personal authority

Legalistic authority

Battle for Compliance

According to one study, prison officials see themselves in constant battle for compliance with inmates (Sykes, 1999)

Close, intimate relationship and association between guards and prisoners gave rise to relationship of reciprocity

Guards could not remain distant from inmates or completely withdraw from them

Guards evaluated on ability to control inmates

Discretion

Correctional officers have a full range of control, including denial of liberty and application of physical force.

Discretionary powers include charging an inmate with a disciplinary infraction or a verbal reprimand.

Disciplinary committees also exercise discretion when making a decision to punish an inmate for an infraction.

Treatment professionals have discretion in writing parole reports, making decisions on classification.

Corruption of Authority

Refers to practice by guards of deliberately refraining from enforcing prison rules and regulations

When guard decides how and when to enforce rules, decision is often seen as corruption of authority (Lombardo 1989)

Deciding not to enforce rules is considered necessary to gain inmate cooperation

Crouch and Marquart (1980)

Summarize two other forms of potential corruption

Loss of authority occurs when guards become too friendly with inmates and fail to maintain appropriate social distance

Handing of tasks over to inmates creates situation in which guards may become dependent on inmates

Hepburn (1989)

Discusses role ambiguity and custody and treatment roles

Misconduct and Corruption (slide 1 of 3)

McCarthy details the following:

Accepting gratuities for special consideration for legitimate purposes

Accepting gratuities for protection of illicit activities

Mistreatment/harassment or extortion of inmates

Mismanagement (e.g., prison industries)

Miscellaneous abuses

Misconduct and Corruption (slide 2 of 3)

Typology of corruption as falling into the following categories:

Misfeasance – abusing authority for personal gain (extortion, smuggling, theft)

Malfeasance – acts that violate authority

Nonfeasance – acts of omission such as ignoring rule violations

Malicious or purposeful abuse: excessive use of force; rape and sexual harassment; theft and destruction of personal property; false disciplinary charges; intentional denial of medical care; failure to protect; racial abuse and harassment; excessive and humiliating strip searches.

Negligent abuse: negligent denial of medical care; failure to protect, lack of responsiveness; negligent loss of property or mail.

Systemic or budgetary abuse: overcrowding; inadequate medical care; use of isolation units

Misconduct and Corruption (slide 3 of 3)

Unethical Situations: Corruption

In 1995 study, McCarthy examined 122 cases of alleged corrupt practices in a state department of corrections

Study revealed four major offense categories and miscellaneous category comprising theft, embezzlement, trafficking, and misuse of authority

Theft made up one-quarter of all cases

Types of corruption:

Petty theft

Trafficking (smuggling contraband)

Contraband

Embezzlement

Misuse of authority

Responses to Corruption

Generate a strong anti-corruption policy to include:

Proactive measures such as mechanisms to investigate and detect wrongdoing

Reduced opportunities for corruption

Screening of employees using state-of-the-art psychological tools

Improved working conditions

Providing good role models in the form of supervisors and administrators who follow the appropriate code of ethics

Whistle-Blowing in Corrections

Hamm (1995)

Provides several case studies that had positive effect on correctional organization (see Case Study 8.8)

Whistle-blowing operates s form of oversight of prisons but in U.S. there is little systemic oversight of prison conditions and operations

In U.S., judiciary has been primary oversight mechanism

Federal Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) of 1995

Gave state and local governments right to end judicial oversight of correctional facilities

Katzenbach Commission (2006) drew attention to lack of oversight and public monitoring of prison system

Individual Explanations

Correctional managers attribute misconduct to low pay and poor screening during hiring.

Another individual explanation of misconduct is PTSD.

Many slide into corruption because of a lack of organizational support for ethical behaviour.

The personal lives of correctional officers influence their professional ethics.

Officers who are stressed and burned out may be the most vulnerable to ethical relativism and bad decisions.

Explanations for Misconduct

The Correctional Officer Subculture

During training, guard recruits socialized to guard subculture

Motivation for joining corrections may contribute to socialization

Kauffman (1988)

Found occupation appealed to unemployed or those from communities that valued state jobs

Those giving motivation as desire to become law enforcement seemed to be one most attracted by power and authority enjoyed by guards

Most new recruits showed approval for guards acting sympathetic towards inmates

The Correctional Officer Subculture

Kauffman (1988)

Found guards tended to appropriate values of prison over own established behavioral norms

Was considerable dichotomy between formal training program guards had undergone and on-the-job training received

New recruits found themselves in state depression about institution and inmates

Some unable to vary behavior towards inmates

Some of these suffered complete isolation from fellow guards

Those unable to adapt were ostracized, harassed or assigned to outermost bounds of prison

The Correctional Officer Subculture

May consider inmates, superiors, and society in general as “the enemy”

Accepts use of force as a routine job element

Shows a tendency to redefine job roles to meet minimum requirements only

Shows a willingness to use deceit to cover up wrongdoing by staff

The Correctional Officer Subculture

Kauffman (1988)

Identified five types of guards:

Pollyannas

Cared about colleagues but were critical of manner in which they dealt with inmates

White hats

Guards holding positive attitudes towards inmates but negative attitudes towards their fellow guards

Hard asses

Antithesis of white hats, showing hostility towards inmates but identifying closely with fellow guards

Burnouts

Displayed negative attitudes towards both fellow guards and inmates, and were able to cope with prison experience only barely, if at all

Functionaries

Coped with prison by closing their minds to it, including both inmates and guards

Maintaining Morality in Prison

Correctional officers report that they experience a great deal of stress and stress-related illnesses

hypertension

alcoholism

divorce

Maintaining morality in a coercive environment is no easy task

Need for a strong moral and ethical code

A good officer exhibits consistency, fairness, and flexibility.

Relationships with Inmates

Both guards and inmates prefer to live in peace.

Both feel they must take sides when conflict occurs.

Reciprocity: Officers become dependent on inmates for completion of important tasks.

In return, officers may overlook inmate infractions and allow a degree of favoritism.

Relationships with Inmates

Officers have the power to make life difficult for inmates they do not like.

If officers become personally involved (e.g., sexually), their professionalism is compromised.

An alliance sometimes forms between guards and inmates that is not unlike foreman-employee relationships.

Officers insist that “you can be friendly with inmates, but you can never trust them.”

Mature officers learn to live with this inconsistency.

The Zimbardo Experiment

In the 1970s, a mock prison was set up in the basement of a building on the grounds of Stanford University.

College men were arbitrarily assigned to be guards or inmates.

Many of the “guard” subjects became brutal toward the “inmate” subjects.

Many of the “inmate” subjects became docile and submissive.

Behavioral changes in both groups were so profound that the experiment was canceled after six days.

The study illustrates the profound effect of a prison experience.

Organizational Explanations

Abu Ghraib like misconduct:

Gladiator fights in Corcoran Prison

The “Tucker telephone” in Arkansas

Using “dog boys” as live quarry for Texas dog handlers

Beatings and the use of dogs on prisoners

Looking the other way while inmates beat and raped a victim

Inmates being forced to wear pink underwear as punishment

Inmates being stripped as punishment

Inmates being made to wear black hoods

Societal Explanations

The community helps to create the correctional environment by their tacit or direct endorsement of the informal subcultural norm that inmates deserve less due process and legal protection than the rest of us.

When criminal correctional officers are not prosecuted and simply fired, this provides a message that there are few costs involved in such misconduct.

Prisoner “Power”

Some activities on part of inmates can be viewed as attempts to gain power or resist guard power

Kauffman (1988)

Points to upsurge in prison litigation during1960s and 1970s as instances of inmate “power” that counterbalanced administration power over inmates

One study (Light, 1991) found majority (26%) of assaults of officers by prisoners were random acts of violence

Second most frequent (13%) reason for assault was response to a direct order from a guard

Corrections Duties

https://www.correctionsone.com/corrections/videos/7591891-Just-another-day-at-work-for-a-CO/

The Experience of Guarding

Number of authors have pointed to common characteristics in those choosing career in corrections

About one-third of guards interviewed by Lombardo (1989) explained most dissatisfying parts of job were danger and mental tension

Guards often experience personal challenges from inmates

Concern for security and order cause guards to be suspicious of any events that interrupt prison routines

One tenet of guard work taught to new recruits is need to maintain social distance from inmates (Crouch & Marquart, 1980)

Also concerned about lack of understanding from administration and inmates

Guarding Ethically

Modern era of corrections brought ethical standards for corrections officers and management

Specific rules prohibit corruption in form of personal gifts, personal privileges and conflicts of interest

Staff also obligated to report corrupt or unethical behavior

Commentators also have opinions on ethical behavior of correctional officers:

George A. Vose Jr. (as cited in Carroll, 1998)

Contends that in order for offenders to learn to become responsible citizens, they must be treated civilly by guards

Guarding Ethically

Kleinig (2001)

Singles out issue of punishment as central

Emphasizes incarceration itself is punishment

Purpose of incarceration is not to administer punishment additional to inmate’s deprivation of liberty

Specifies that inmates do not forfeit essential humanity

Lippke (2007)

Suggests need for normative theory of imprisonment

Argues many countries imprison offenders under conditions that cannot be morally justified

Makes case for “minimally restrictive and reasonably humane prison conditions” (p. 104)

View is that inmates should receive basic prisoner welfare

Guarding Ethically

Kleinig (2001)

Suggests correctional ethic should also take into account roles played by guards

How they interact with co-workers

Way in which work is coordinated with others employed in prison system

Connections they make with administrative structure

Will also be ethical considerations in relation to larger society and institutions like legislatures

Smith (2001)

Argues that “inextricable brutalities that inhere in the practice of imprisonment” (p. 30) make it extremely difficult to establish any moral basis for role of prison guard

Calls attention to failures that have occurred within system as whole

Use of Force

Physical force is often necessary in prison situations.

Prior to the 1980s, overt physical force was used routinely in U.S. prisons.

“tune-ups”

Tucker telephone

Hudson v. McMillian

Today, the incidence of excessive force is less common, but it is still used in some institutions.

Inmates have more to fear from each other than from correctional officers.

Unethical Situations: Use of Force

Many situations within prison environment might provoke use of force by guards in attempt to control inmates

American Correctional Association Code of Ethics stipulates members of ACA must respect “dignity and individuality of human beings” and must be committed to “professional and compassionate service”

Kauffman (1988)

Research found most guards were horrified at extent and nature of violence within prison

In coping with ethical dilemmas, many guards attempted to avoid actions that would injure inmates by refusing to carry out certain duties

Unethical Situations: Use of Force

Some become more socialized within subculture, however, ability to abstain from morally questionable acts weakened and they began to construct prison as separate moral realm and to perceive their dealing with prisoners as outside of common ethical norms

Less experienced gradually became inured to violence, got used to it, and said they were no longer bothered by it

Some rationalized changes by stressing difference between prison and outside world

Kauffman (1988)

Constructing separate moral world within prison and living in that world as well as in “normal world” can provoke behavioral conflicts

Unethical Situations: Use of Force

Generally, guards’ use of force in prison takes place within formal structure and framework of prison rules and regulations designed to control prisoner conduct

Unethical Situations: Use of Force

Marquart (1986)

Identified number of forms of coercion

Counseling or tune-up

Ass whippings

Severe beatings

Concludes instances of violence were illegal in both civil and criminal terms and certainly violated prison rules and policy

In context of guard subculture fighting inmate seen as expression of guard masculinity and machismo

Found informal structure of prison seemed to be predominant method used for managing prison

Unethical Situations: Use of Force

Exercise of violence by guards not intended as symbol of power, rather reflection of sense of vulnerability

Guards often dissatisfied about official punishments and sought own form of justice

Kauffman (1988)

Justifications for using violence:

Means of controlling inmates

Violence deterred inmate violence against guards

Means of preventing future assaults and punishing past ones

Guards define self-defense very broadly

During 1970s Massachusetts prison system relied on brutality and physical coercion

Unethical Situations: Use of Force

Kauffman (1988)

Concludes use of physical coercion failed at Walpole and other Massachusetts prisons

Argues use of coercion as technique was failure because it could not be applied to inmates generally

Another difficulty was use of coercion required staff to constantly increase severity of sanction if they were to be useful over long term

Walker (1996)

Notes over past few decades, courts have limited such force, but guards still given more latitude than police officers in use of deadly force

Unethical Situations: Use of Force

Walker (1996)

Presents analysis of policies in four states on acceptable use of deadly force

All policies explicitly authorize use of deadly force to prevent escapes

ACA suggests policy on deadly force should be more specifically related to institution inmate is escaping from

Federal Bureau of Prisons explicitly limits deadly force by prohibiting use of firearms in minimum security prisons in ordinary circumstances

State policies vary widely

All have policies regarding use of warning shots

Use of Force

https://www.correctionsone.com/corrections/articles/1842431-Factors-that-influence-the-use-of-force-in-a-correctional-institution/

https://www.correctionsone.com/column/articles/8662055-6-use-of-force-facts-that-will-keep-officers-and-their-jobs-safe/

Use of Force Scenarios

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBuO99GUxZY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uqgMc1A86U

Cynicism towards clients

Lethargy from heavy caseloads and poor pay

Individualism: an officer running his or her caseload in the manner he or she sees fit

The Probation/Parole Officer Subculture

Caseload Supervision

Discretion exists not only at the recommendation-to-release stage but also throughout supervision.

Decision to file a violation report and make a recommendation

Personal relationships of any type–romantic, platonic, or financial—are simply not appropriate.

Parole Officers

Supervision of parole officers is stronger than probation officers. The parole officer usually manages a caseload of older and seasoned offenders.

67.8% of released inmates were charged with at least one serious crime within three years.

Studies indicate that the rate of recidivism is worse than it was twenty years ago.

Men, blacks, and young people are the most likely to recidivate.

Those who participate in property crimes are most likely to return to criminal behavior.

Ethical Issues in Probation and Parole

Probation remains widely employed sanction within U.S.

Over time, workload of officers has dramatically increased with rise in intensive probation supervision

Ethical issues center on tensions between role of parole or probation as treatment or as punishment

Supervisory role brings conflict between treatment and control functions

Abadinsky (1982)

Proposes typography of probation officer styles

Law enforcement model

Therapeutic model

Synthetic model

Ethical Issues in Probation and Parole

Been trend over past decade toward making probation tougher

Like corrections officers, probation and parole officers faced with decisions about whether to emphasize protection of society or to aid offender

In most states today, role of officer gained new law enforcement emphasis

Probation officer identified more closely with law enforcement agencies

Now common for officers to be more proactive in enforcing probation conditions

Common condition is probationer agrees to waive Fourth Amendment rights

Ethical Issues in Probation and Parole

Major ethical debate within probation field concerns issue of arming probation officers

Debate on either sides of issue

American Correctional Association’s view on issue is there should be demonstrated need for firearms, and once need is clear, adequate and ongoing training in use must be provided

Traditional tensions between treatment and control have been affected by increased focus on dangerousness, risk, and criminality

Result is treatment is de-emphasized, and security tends to be stressed

Associated problems are increased demands for an time constraints in preparing presentence reports

Ethical Issues in Probation and Parole

Most recent ethical issue affecting probation is granting contracts to private companies to supervise

Claimed private probation industry marks return to debtor’s prisons of times past

Trend is not just in U.S.

Issues relating to parole include treatment programs available to those needing them

Most officers focus efforts on surveillance rather than rehabilitation

Safety and security now issues with parole services

Some states have significant numbers on parole

Some see a revolving door issue

Ethical Issues in Probation and Parole

Many states have laws allowing for sentences of life without parole (LWOP)

Many now argue these sentences raise questions about human dignity

Argued such sentences often regarded as worse than death setnences

Graham v. Florida (2010)

Over past several years, tensions between treatment and control roles for parole officers appear to have been resolved in favor of control

With movement towards parole officers as police, some argue these powers are making officers a “walking court system”

Media Response: The Standford Prison Experiment

Save your time - order a paper!

Experience

Our mission

Latest Posts

Talk to us...