home / subscribe / about us / books / archives / search / links / feedback

 

New Print Edition of CounterPunch Available Exclusively to Subscribers: Cockburn on Howard Dean, Serf of Capital: Look Before You Leap; St. Clair on the Crimes of Boeing: Make Shoddy Planes, Lie to Regulators, Discriminate Against Blacks and Women, Get Billions in Contracts; Peter Linebaugh: The Blitz and the Rosenbergs: How I Came to Oppose the Death Penalty; Christine TenBarge: A Report from Chicago on the New Peace Movement; Fowl Reports: 60 Minutes Gets Egg on Its Face Over Terror Chickens. Remember, the CounterPunch website is supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide web audience is soaring, with more than 60,000 visitors a day. This is inspiring news, but the work involved also compels us to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe Now!

Or Call Toll Free 1-800-840 3683 or write CounterPunch, PO BOX 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Coming Soon!
From Common Courage Press

Recent Stories

June 27, 2003

Jason Leopold
CIA: Seven Months Prior to 9/11 Iraq Posed No Threat to US

David Lindorff
The Catch and Release of "Comical Ali"

Ray McGovern
Cheney, Forgery and the CIA

June 26, 2003

Sen. Robert Byrd
The Road of Cover-Up is a Road to Ruin

Jason Leopold
Wolfowitz Instructed the CIA to Investigate Hans Blix

Paul de Rooij
Ambient Death in Palestine

Chris Floyd
Mass Graves and Burned Meat in Bush's New Iraq

Elaine Cassel
Wolfowitz as Lord High Executioner

CounterPunch Wire
Musicians Unite Against Sweatshops

Sheldon Hull
Squatting in Mansions

Ben Tripp
A Guide to Hating Almost Anyone

Uri Avnery
The Best Show in Town

Steve Perry
Bush's Wars Web Log 6/25

Website of the Day
Ordinary Vistas:
The Photographs of Kurt Nimmo

 

June 25, 2003

Bruce Jackson
Buffalo Cops Wage War on Pedal Pushers

Mickey Z.
The New Dark Ages

David Lindorff
Indonesia's War on Journalists

Dan Bacher
Butterflies and Farmworkers Confront USDA and Riot Cops

Adam Federman
"Success is Not the Issue Here"

Elaine Cassel
"Ain't No Justice": Fed Judge Quits, Assails Sentencing Guidelines

Bill Kauffman
My America vs. the Empire

Steve Perry
Bush's Wars Web Log 6/25

Website of the Day
You Are Being Watched:
Elevator Moods

 

June 24, 2003

Elaine Cassel
Supreme Indemnity
Holocaust Denial at the High Court

Roya Monajem
A Message from Tehran: Is It Worth It to Risk One's Life?

John Chuckman
The Real Clash of Civilizations

David Lindorff
WMD Damage Control at the Times

Steve Perry
Bush's Wars Web Log 6/24

 

June 23, 2003

Marc Pritzke
Washington Lied: an Interview with Ray McGovern

Conn Hallinan
The Consistency of Sharon

Wayne Madsen
Commercials, Disney & Amistad

Edward Said
The Meaning of Rachel Corrie

Steve Perry
Bush's Wars Web Log 6/23

June 21 / 22, 2003

Alexander Cockburn
My Life as a Rabbi

William A. Cook
The Scourge of Hopelessness

Standard Schaefer
The Wages of Terror: an Interview with R.T. Naylor

Ron Jacobs
US Prisons as Strategic Hamlets

Harry Browne
The Pitstop Ploughshares

Lawrence Magnuson
WMD: The Most Dangerous Game

Harold Gould
Saddam and the WMD Mystery

David Krieger
10 Reasons to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Avia Pasternak
The Unholy Alliance in the Occupied Territories

CounterPunch
Summer Reading:
Our Favorite Novels

Todd Chretien
Return to Sender: Todd Gitlin, the Duke of Condescension

Maria Tomchick
Danny Goldberg's Imaginary Kids

Adam Engel
The Fat Man in Little Boy

Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Albert & Hamod


June 20, 2003

Walter Brasch
Down on Our Knees

Robert Meeropol
The Son of the Rosenbergs on His Parents Death and Bush's America

Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman
Grannies and Baby Bells

Norman Madarasz
Pierre Bourgault: the Life of a Quebec Radical

Gary Leupp
Bush on "Revisionist Historians"

Steve Perry
Bush's Lies Marathon: the Finale

 

Hot Stories

Wendell Berry
Small Destructions Add Up

CounterPunch Wire
WMD: Who Said What When

Cindy Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter I Can't Hear From

Elaine Cassel
Civil Liberties Watch

Michel Guerrin
Embedded Photographer Says: "I Saw Marines Kill Civilians"

Uzma Aslam Khan
The Unbearably Grim Aftermath of War: What America Says Does Not Go

Paul de Rooij
Arrogant Propaganda

Gore Vidal
The Erosion of the American Dream

Francis Boyle
Impeach Bush: A Draft Resolution

Click Here for More Stories.

 

 

Subscribe Online


Search CounterPunch

 

June 28, 2003

Rehnquist Family Values

Barbarity as Normalcy in America's Prisons

By JOANNE MARINER

With prisons filled to overflowing, it's no wonder that state governments are seeking to cut costs. The goal of rehabilitation was long ago replaced with that of warehousing, and now the only real goal is to warehouse cheaply.

The Michigan prison system is a microcosm of national problems. Holding fewer than 19,000 inmates in 1986, it confined more than double that number in 1995. It was in that year, as prisoner numbers continued to swell, that the state corrections department instituted strict new rules to reduce the number of visitors that prisoners received. Visitors, the department claimed, were overwhelming the prison system's resources.

A federal district court struck down the most restrictive of the new regulations, in a ruling that an appellate court unanimously affirmed. Chiding the corrections department for having implemented "a series of haphazard policies" that violated inmates' rights to family contact, the court found that the department had utterly failed to justify them.

Last week, the Supreme Court disagreed. Although the Court issued three opinions - we might call them mean, meaner, and meanest - its judgment was unanimous. A more callous and short-sighted ruling is hard to imagine.

Fewer Visitors, Less Work, Better Security

Under the reasoning of last week's ruling in Overton v. Bazzetta, state corrections departments are almost entirely free to restrict or deny prisoners' visiting privileges. Because, in the Supreme Court's view, regulations meant to reduce the number of prison visitors serve the goal of promoting prisons' internal security, they merit only the most deferential scrutiny.

Upheld in the Overton case was a regulation that barred prisoners who had twice committed drug infractions from receiving any family visits, including non-contact visits (where inmates see their relatives through a reinforced glass window). Other regulations that were sustained prevented inmates from receiving visits from their siblings, nieces and nephews under age eighteen, and from minors who are not accompanied by an immediate family member or legal guardian.

In its decision, the Court stopped just short of ruling explicitly that prisoners have no right at all to intimate association - in other words, no right to family contact. Its reasoning, however, was broad enough to relegate any residual right to insignificance.

"Alternatives to Visitation Need Not be Ideal"

How would you react if you were told that you could no longer see your children, but, not to worry, you could still write them letters? And if you were told that if you - like some 40 to 80 percent of Michigan inmates - were functionally illiterate, or if your children were too young to read, you still had the option of short phone calls, at least a few minutes long?

The Overton case was, in part, based on the judgment that while such options may not be optimal, they are nonetheless sufficient. "Alternatives to visitation need not be ideal," the Court emphasized, "they need only be available."

In other words, it doesn't matter if prisoners spend years without ever seeing their children. Because allowing greater numbers of visits might require "a significant reallocation of the prison system's financial resources," it's enough to grant prisoners access to letters and phone calls (calls that are charged at exorbitant rates, one should note).

Increasing Recidivism and Harming Children

The Overton ruling might be a relief to financially-strapped prison systems, but its long-term costs are likely to be heavy. The social impact of limiting inmates' family visits - measured in higher recidivism rates and in damage to children's lives - is unquestionably negative.

According to unrefuted evidence admitted at trial, visitation with family and friends is the single most important factor in ensuring a prisoner's successful return to society. Prisoners who maintain continuous, quality contact with three people while they are incarcerated, for example, are only one-sixth as likely as others to be back in prison a year after their release.

Children, too, need contact with their incarcerated parents. According to Denise Johnston, a national authority on the psychological and developmental implications of parental incarceration, parent-child visits improve children's emotional well-being and may prevent or mitigate negative behavior.

If other states were to follow Michigan's example, the impact could be enormously damaging. An estimated 1.5 million children have a parent behind bars in the United States, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Indeed, researchers estimate that over 10 million children have undergone the imprisonment of a parent at some point in their lives.

Justice Thomas's Reminiscences

One would be remiss to discuss the Overton ruling without commenting on Justice Clarence Thomas's separate opinion, so successfully does it caricature the decision's flaws.

Reviewing the history of American prisons through the nineteenth century, Thomas describes prison regimes built around solitary confinement, stringent regimentation, and frequent humiliation. "No reading materials of any kind, except a Bible, were allowed inside," he notes in describing Sing Sing circa 1840.

Does Thomas mention such conditions in order to condemn them, or to underscore how far the country's prison have come? Hardly. Not only is his tone entirely unjudgmental, he writes, if anything, with a certain wistfulness. Although he acknowledges that states are free to grant increased constitutional rights to prisoners, he never suggests that this would be a good idea.

Thomas's callousness toward prisoners is especially striking in light of the enormous racial disparities in the nation's prisons and jails. As of June 2002, 884,500 of the country's two million prisoners were African-American. Among males between the ages twenty-five and twenty-nine, 12.9 percent of blacks were incarcerated, compared to 1.6 percent of whites.

Rights "of Basic Importance to Our Society"

It was not that long ago that the Supreme Court ruled that associational rights pertaining to "marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children" were "of basic importance to our society." Such rights, the Court emphasized, should be "sheltered against the State's unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect."

In Overton v. Bazzetta, a ruling likely to accelerate the disintegration of families, the Court signally failed to heed its own advice.

Joanne Mariner is a human rights attorney and regular CounterPunch contributor. She is the author of No Escape: Male Rape in US Prisons published by Human Rights Watch. An earlier version of this piece appeared in FindLaw's Writ. She can be reached at: mariner@counterpunch.org.


Weekend Edition Features

Alexander Cockburn
My Life as a Rabbi

William A. Cook
The Scourge of Hopelessness

Standard Schaefer
The Wages of Terror: an Interview with R.T. Naylor

Ron Jacobs
US Prisons as Strategic Hamlets

Harry Browne
The Pitstop Ploughshares

Lawrence Magnuson
WMD: The Most Dangerous Game

Harold Gould
Saddam and the WMD Mystery

David Krieger
10 Reasons to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Avia Pasternak
The Unholy Alliance in the Occupied Territories

CounterPunch
Summer Reading:
Our Favorite Novels

Todd Chretien
Return to Sender: Todd Gitlin, the Duke of Condescension

Maria Tomchick
Danny Goldberg's Imaginary Kids

Adam Engel
The Fat Man in Little Boy

Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Albert & Hamod

 

Keep CounterPunch Alive:
Make a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!

home / subscribe / about us / books / archives / search / links /