New York City’s Young Inmates Are Held in Isolation Upstate, Despite Ban

Solitary confinement is generally used as a last resort and rarely for extended periods; and there are appeal processes for any prisoners who believe their rights have been violated. I personally think 30 days of solitary for a first offense is adequate. The thing we must protect inmates against is punitive, indeterminate sentences of a year or more, given out in the heat of anger. No sentence should be given out until anger has abated or been sidestepped. Correction yes; anger no.

Can we please remember that the "children" who are incarcerated and put into solitary confinement are also the "children" who shoot guns off in New York City buses and kill hardworking immigrants, who shoot off guns on the street and kill real children sitting on their beds at night (because the bullet has gone through the siding of the house or the window), who push elderly women down, breaking their hips and effectively ending their lives, who sucker-punch pedestrians on residential streets, who steal cars, lose control, and plow into New Yorkers minding their own business, who . . . . Young men under the age of 21? Don't they take machetes to innocent young men whom they mistake for gang members? Come live in Flatbush. You'll see how the "children" behave on the street corners, at all hours.

As an individual who recently spent two years on Riker's fighting a case for a non-violent crime, that I ultimately was found not guilty for, I had a front row seat to abhorrent spectacles performed by these "children" . I was there when our clueless mayor instituted, yet another, one of his social experiments. This time on the city correctional. To the detriment and disregard for safety for the correctional officers and inmates alike. These so called "children" became instantly aware that they could suddenly do whatever they pleased and that there were zero consequences to their behavior. Before you dismiss this by thinking: But that doesn't call for this. Allow me to enlighten you. For approximately six months I was housed in a facility that housed inmates under 21 as well. During that tenure I was witness to "child" gang members group assault, both with razors and without, multiple times a week. I saw a "child" inmate who was taller than me (5'9" ) physically strike a female correctional officers numerous times in the face before he was restrained. Extortion of smaller inmates. On and on. And the refrain they came to use as they're battle cry to the officers trying to maintain order? "What are you going to do? Nothing! You're not allowed". It's a comforting thought to know that someone decided to be the adult and find a work around the mayor's feckless leadership.

solitary is problematic, guards would never brutalize inmates--- but but a 19 year old who " led an attack in February that left a Rikers guard’s spine fractured" does deserve transfer and some sort of detention that keeps guards safe.

NYC chose its policy. Other areas of NY state have other ideas. Adults who attack corrections officials should be tried and if convicted sentenced to additional time. And if other NY areas want to further punish those convicted of such assaults by a time in solitary that is their right. Not everyone has great sympathy for adult prisoners convicted of assaulting prison officials.

I'm sure there are situations where solitary confinement is necessary for various reasons. In America we have to do something about getting these prisoners rehabilitated. At some pont most will return to Society. If we continue to treat them as second class citizens they will return to crime. I don't have answers but I do know what we are doing now is not helping Society.

The issue is not whether something has to be done to deal with people who attack others in prison. The issue is What? -- question society has to ask because, ultimately, these inmates will come back into society. New York City is not bothering to come up with answers. How is it that the United States is alone among developed countries in using long term solitary confinement? What do other countries do? In the UK, prison authorities decided that prison conditions may be the source of violence and should be changed. They found that “violence became a predictable consequence” wherever conditions “maximized humiliation and confrontation.” Rather than isolation, stable units of fewer than ten people in individual cells minimized the violence-inducing effects of social chaos and unpredictability. And the most dangerous prisoners are held in close supervision centers were they are given more control rather than less over their environment. Prisoners have access to education programs, libraries, mental-health treatment, and exercise. They can earn rights for more phone calls, exercise, and even access to cooking facilities. They are allowed to voice complaints, and individual monthly reports review prisoners’ progress in the units. The use of long-term isolation in England is now negligible. (Quoting from Brown Political Review "Beyond Solitary Confinement" November 2015.

No one in the press or the clergy or Hollywood should be allowed to write these articles unless they have been intimate with the criminally violent in the streets...repeatedly. Otherwise it sounds like the University graduate who always is slightly siding with the criminal....because they never really met one intimately as to their coercive nature. I fought one four years ago and grew up fighting them. Transfer everyone of them that hurts a guard or inmate. Keep those transfer rocking.

It’s sad that there are 18 year olds whose meaningful lives are over and need to be kept in solitary. It’s sad that the corrections department skirts the spirit of the law by finding a way to institute solitary confinement. But I fear that there are some prisoners who require this treatment. The numbers seem low. Could it be corrections is on to something?

As someone who has been in Sing Sing Prison multiple times (as a researcher, not an inmate), I can state unequivocally that there are times when some inmates need to be put in solitary confinement for the safety of the guards, other inmates or themselves. While Sing Sing inmates are considered extreme cases, I think anyone of any age who has led attacks on guards in a jail or prison is also without question a candidate for solitary confinement. So is anyone who poses a threat to guards and other inmates, or may be threatened by other inmates. The "young" prisoners referred to in this article are 18-21 years old, certainly no longer children. In many cases their criminal records are blood-curdling, and I feel safe in saying that NYT editorial board members, writers and readers would never invite these miscreants to come to dinner, spend the weekend, babysit their children or grandchildren--you get the idea. Solitary confinement is generally used as a last resort and rarely for extended periods; and there are appeal processes for any prisoners who believe their rights have been violated. Describing these criminals "young" is merely an attempt to gain sympathy for them. How about some sympathy for their victims?

Who sentenced Nazeem to a year in solitary? People who do these things know they can get away with them as long as they have anonymity.

What are they supposed to do with a prisoner who fractures the spine of a corrections officer? Would you volunteer to guard such a prisoner? There's a point at which the desire to protect the vicious from punishment becomes amoral, because it leads to innocent people being hurt.