berman, 1990). American courts, while recognizing the detrimental psychological effects of the practice, have, never theless, refused to declare solitary confinement as a cruel and unusual punishment within the meaning of that term in the United States Constitution (Goldfard and Singer, 1990). Pres sures for the abolition of solitary confinement, however, con tinue to grow.
The research question investigated in this current study dealt with the relationship between the adverse psychological effects of solitary confinement on prisoners, and the effec tiveness of the punishment as a means of controlling violent inmates, preserving prison order, and maintaining the safety of both prisoners and correctional officers. The research question was stated as follows: Does the value to the prison administration of the use of the practice of solitary confine ment to provide for control, order, and safety in the prison environment offset the harm caused to prisoners subjected to the practice, as a consequence of detrimental psychological effects associated with solitary confinement?
As a Correctional Programs Technician in the County Jail, Orange County, California, and having served previously a both a Correctional Service Officer and as a Correctional Programs Officer in the Maximum Security Unit of the Arizona State Pri son, the researcher was well aware of the problems faced by prison administrators in the management and an increasingly violent prison population. At the same time, the researcher was also cognizant of the psychological harm to prisoners resulting from the use of solitary confinement. By assessing the conflicting demands placed on prison administrators with respect to the use of the practice of solitary confinement, this study contributed to the base of knowledge upon which prison administrations may base future decisions related to a continuation of the use of the practice of solitary confine ment.
The research perf...