Continuity in the Face of Penal Innovation: Revisiting the History of American Solitary Confinement

39Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Solitary confinement has been a perennial tool of control in US prisons, despite its status as a repeatedly delegitimized practice. Although there have been significant changes in punishment over time, solitary confinement has remained, mostly at the margins and always as a response to past failures, part of an unending search for greater control over prisoners. This history raises the question of how a discredited penal technology can nevertheless persist. We locate the source of this persistence in prison administrators' unflagging belief in solitary confinement as a last-resort tool of control. To maintain this highly criticized practice, prison administrators strategically revise, but never abandon, discredited practices in response to antecedent legitimacy struggles. Using solitary confinement as a case study, we demonstrate how penal technologies that violate current sensibilities can survive, despite changing macro-level social factors that otherwise explain penal change and practice, provided those technologies serve prison officials' internal goals.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rubin, A. T., & Reiter, K. (2018). Continuity in the Face of Penal Innovation: Revisiting the History of American Solitary Confinement. Law and Social Inquiry, 43(4), 1604–1632. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12330

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free