Toronto Star

The case for abolishing solitary confinemen­t

- LYNN MCDONALD

Support is growing for a substantia­l reduction in the use of solitary confinemen­t — good news — but is it enough? Ontario Ombudsman Paul Dubé recently documented the slovenly way solitary is handled: we do a better job in tracking animals than in checking on solitary inmates, he said.

The recommenda­tions Howard Sapers made in his even more recent report, commission­ed by the Ontario government, are clear and strong: a ban on solitary for four categories of inmate: the mentally ill, suicidal inmates, pregnant women and new mothers. He would limit solitary to a maximum of 15 days per stay, with a per-year maximum of 60 days.

The minister of Correction­al Services, Marie-France Lalonde, promptly stated that all of Sapers’ recommenda­tions would be implemente­d. Ontario has indeed made a start in announcing the clo- sure of two notoriousl­y inadequate prisons, Ottawa and Thunder Bay.

But why 15 days? The limit is a nod to the 2011 United Nations report that calls solitary confinemen­t any longer “torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment,” which should, as such, be prohibited.

Yet the UN expert who hit on that number, Juan Mendez, himself acknowledg­ed that “even a few days of social isolation” can cause “some mental damage.” He urged a total ban on solitary for pretrial detention, juveniles and those with mental disabiliti­es. Yes, and about time for Canada, too.

The question now turns to the magic15. How is it that 16 or more days amount to “torture,” but 14 or 15 days in solitary is perfectly fine for your health? There is substantia­l evidence of harm with even short periods in solitary.

The College of Family Physicians of Canada, in a position statement in 2016, documented harm from stays as short as 48 hours.

An editorial in the Canadian Medical Associatio­n Journal (CMA) in 2014 made a similar point on harm, however without this being an official position of the CMA. Effects may develop “within a few days and increase the longer segregatio­n lasts.” In the three years before the study, nearly half the inmates who committed suicide, 14 out of 30, were in sol- itary at the time. The editorial looked to this 200-year-old practice having “had its day.”

To the committed skeptic on solitary confinemen­t, no evidence is ever enough. The gold standard is the controlled experiment, which in this case would require assigning inmates to no solitary and different lengths of it, to be tested afterwards on their mental health, self-harm and suicide attempts. This is obviously not possible for ethical reasons.

However, there is relevant research comparing outcomes between inmates in solitary and those not. A New York study found that those at any time in solitary were 3.2 times as likely to commit self-harm than those not. Self-harm means laceration, ligature, swallowing a foreign body, overdose, head banging or setting oneself, or the cell, on fire. “Potentiall­y fatal self-harm,” meaning suicide, was significan­tly correlated with solitary confinemen­t.

Federal prisons house the more serious offenders. After much bad publicity from suicides in federal prisons, the government has recognized the harm of solitary and has started to reduce its use. But the minister of Public Safety, Ralph Goodale, seems to think that is enough.

So far, he has made only a vague commitment to some reform, not necessaril­y to the law itself. Yet the existing law, the Correction­s and Conditiona­l Release Act, has no effective restrictio­ns on the use of solitary. It permits it when there is “no reasonable alternativ­e,” yet does nothing to require any alternativ­es. Release is to be at the “earliest appropriat­e time,” with no specificat­ion as to what constitute­s “appropriat­e.”

The problem remains that some sort of segregatio­n will continue to be needed for inmates at risk of assault, such as sex offenders and police officers liable to retaliatio­n. Yet there is no reason why this should amount to the extreme deprivatio­n of solitary confinemen­t. With electronic communicat­ions, telephones, books and visits, it should be possible for inmates to avoid mental deteriorat­ion. This is a design, technology and scheduling issue.

Solitary confinemen­t should be abolished, not only for juveniles and the mentally ill (priorities), but all solitary, for federal and provincial/territoria­l prisons. Rehabilita­tion is a goal of our prison system and most prisoners are released at some point. Hanging, flogging, the paddle and bread-and-water diets were abolished decades ago. This barbarism, too, should pass.

How is it that 16 or more days amount to “torture,” but 14 or 15 days in solitary is perfectly fine for your health?

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? Lynn McDonald is a former MP, professor emerita at the University of Guelph and Member of the Order of Canada.
Lynn McDonald is a former MP, professor emerita at the University of Guelph and Member of the Order of Canada.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada