Bill Overview
Title: Solitary Confinement Reform Act
Description: This bill establishes standards for the use of solitary confinement at federal prisons. It generally limits the use of solitary confinement to situations that meet certain criteria, including confinement for the briefest term and under the least restrictive conditions practicable. It also limits the use of solitary confinement for certain categories of inmates, including pregnant women and individuals with serious mental illness. The bill requires the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to establish a transitional process for inmates in solitary confinement, provide comprehensive mental health evaluations for inmates in solitary confinement, train employees on mental illness and the psychological effects of solitary confinement, and report annually on the use of solitary confinement. It establishes, within the BOP, an Office of the Civil Rights Ombudsman. Finally, it establishes a solitary confinement resource center within the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance.
Sponsors: Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in solitary confinement
Estimated Size: 160000
- The bill pertains specifically to federal prisons, thereby directly affecting the inmate population under federal custody.
- Solitary confinement reform will primarily impact individuals currently or potentially held in solitary confinement in federal prisons.
- The reform includes provisions for pregnant women and individuals with serious mental illness, indicating these groups will be particularly impacted.
- The Bureau of Prisons, including its staff who will undergo training, are indirectly impacted by changes in how solitary confinement is administered.
- Globally, solitary confinement practices vary, but the bill itself is specific to U.S. federal prisons, so global impact is less direct.
Reasoning
- The policy is targeted specifically at federal prisons, and its primary beneficiaries are inmates, particularly those in solitary confinement. Thus, people interviewed should include inmates themselves or those connected to them, such as family members and prison staff.
- The policy also aims to reform the conditions under which solitary confinement is used, which means that we must consider mental health professionals and corrections officers in our interviews, who will likely see changes in their professional responsibilities.
- To ensure a comprehensive view, individuals not directly impacted by the reform should also be sampled to gauge indirect societal and economic perspectives.
- Given the budget constraints, we need to consider the feasibility and efficiency of the reform; the bill will focus resources on the most critical cases, such as those involving individuals with mental health issues and pregnant women.
- It's important to capture a range of opinions, hence including a mix of common and less common responses allows us to understand both likely outcomes and outlier perspectives.
Simulated Interviews
Inmate (Illinois)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Solitary confinement has been really tough for me, making my mental health worse.
- I hope these reforms would lead to better conditions or at least shorten my time in solitary.
- Having more mental health support would make a huge difference for my wellbeing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Senior Corrections Officer (California)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These reforms seem necessary, many inmates in solitary show signs of severe mental decline.
- Training on psychological effects will help us officers deal better with inmates in solitary.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Mental Health Professional (New York)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen firsthand how detrimental solitary confinement can be on mental health.
- The increase in mental health support is a crucial step towards humane treatment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Associate Director, Bureau of Prisons (Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Implementing these reforms will initially be challenging, but it's the right direction for humane treatment.
- This policy aligns with our duty to provide fair treatment and rehabilitation opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Inmate Advocate (Florida)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've been pushing for reforms to solitary confinement for years.
- It's heartening to see policies finally address the mental health aspects of confinement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Policy Analyst (Washington D.C.)
Age: 52 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The long-term benefits of such reforms outweigh the initial costs.
- We need more oversight and transparency regarding solitary confinement practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Ex-Inmate (Colorado)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 2
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Solitary confinement was the worst part of my sentence, but I survived.
- I hope these reforms stop others from going through what I did.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 2 |
Judge (Ohio)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reforming solitary confinement aligns with justice principles and fair treatment.
- This is a positive step for the penal system.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Federal Prisoner (Nevada)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I spend a lot of time in solitary, and it's incredibly difficult.
- These reforms could bring some hope to guys like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Public Health Researcher (Alabama)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing solitary confinement can prevent severe long-term health issues.
- This reform could be a model for state prison systems as well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $140000000)
Year 2: $115000000 (Low: $95000000, High: $135000000)
Year 3: $110000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $130000000)
Year 5: $105000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $125000000)
Year 10: $95000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $115000000)
Year 100: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Key Considerations
- Initial setup costs for offices and centers will be high but stabilize over time.
- Training and mental health services will be significant ongoing costs but are essential for compliance and effectiveness of the reform.
- Savings from long-term mental health improvements could partially offset initial costs over time.