Alison Liebling

Suicides in prison

Introduction PART ONE: 1. Suicides in prison: Rates and Explanations 2. The prisoner suicide profile 3. Young prisoner suicides and suicide attempts 4. A change of direction PART TWO: 5. Investigating suicides in prison 6. Understanding young prisoner suicides and suicide attempts: in their own words 7. In different words: The gender factor 8. Managing to prevent suicide: Staff attitudes and perspectives 9. Understanding suicides in prison: Vulnerable prisoners in high risk situations

Preventing suicide in prisons, part I. Recommendations from the International Association for Suicide Prevention Task Force on Suicide in Prisons.

In 2000 the Department of Mental Health of the World Health Organization (WHO) published a guide named Preventing Suicide. A Resource for Prison Officers as part of the WHO worldwide initiative for the prevention of suicide. In 2007 there are new epidemiological data on prison suicide, a more detailed discussion of risk factors accounting for the generally higher rate of suicide in correctional settings in comparison to the general population, and several strategies for developing screening instruments. As a first step, this paper presents an update of the WHO guide by the Task Force on Suicide in Prisons, created by the International Association for Suicide Prevention. A second paper, by the same Task Force, will present some international comparisons of suicide prevention services in correctional facilities.

Moral performance, inhuman and degrading treatment and prison pain:

Empirical research on the moral quality of life in prison suggests that some prisons are more survivable than others. Prisoners describe stark differences in the moral and emotional climates of prisons serving similar functions. The ‘differences that matter’ concern interpersonal relationships and treatment, and the use of authority, which lead to stark differences in perceived fairness and safety and different outcomes for prisoners, including rates of suicide. These identifiable differences between prisons in one jurisdiction may provide the beginnings of a framework for addressing the broader question of standards being set by the European Court of Human Rights. Concepts like ‘dignity’ and ‘humanity’ are difficult to operationalize and practise. Prisoners are articulate about them, however, and know the difference between ‘feeling humiliated’ and ‘retaining an identity’. The worlds of ‘moral measurement’ and ‘human rights standards’ in penology should be brought closer together in a way that deepens the conversation about prison life and experience.

Suicides in young prisoners: A summary

Abstract Suicides in prison have been increasing at a rate that is faster than the rate of increase in the size of the prison population. The causes of this increase, and the particular nature of the prison suicide problem, have been poorly understood in previous studies. Most of these studies have been based on recorded information alone. Talking openly and systematically to prisoners and staff involved in suicide attempts in prison provides new and important insights into the development of suicidal feelings in custody. A group of young prisoners who show a marked vulnerability to suicide and suicide attempts can be differentiated from the general young prisoner population by the extent of the background deprivation they report, and by their inability to cope with or make any constructive use of their sentence. It is shown that the most vulnerable inmates can often be found in the worst situations, many having no job or activity in prison, and receiving very little contact from their families. They make...

Distinctions and distinctiveness in the work of prison officers: Legitimacy and authority revisited

The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework for thinking about the work of prison officers. It is a well-known maxim that relationships are ‘at the heart’ of prison life (Home Office, 1984). In this paper, I develop and illustrate this proposition, arguing that the moral quality of prison life is enacted and embodied by the attitudes and conduct of prison officers. There are important distinctions to be made in their work: between ‘good’ and ‘right’ relationships; ‘tragic’ and ‘cynical’ perspectives; ‘reassurance’ and ‘relational’ safety; and ‘good’ and ‘bad’ confidence. These distinctions are largely unseen but are decisive in shaping the prison’s moral and social climate. The best prison officer work can be described using these kinds of distinctions.

Staff culture, use of authority and prisoner quality of life in public and private sector prisons

Drawing on data collected in five private sector and two public sector prisons, this article highlights the complex relationship between prison staff culture and prisoner quality of life. Specifically, it explores the link between the attitudes of prison staff and their behaviour, particularly in terms of their use of authority, and seeks to explain the somewhat paradoxical finding that those prisons rated most positively by prisoners were those in which staff were least positive about their own working lives and most negative in their views of prisoners. The article highlights the importance of experience and competence, as well as attitudes, in determining how authority is exercised and experienced in prison. It also draws attention to the different kinds of staff cultures that exist both between and within the public and private sectors.

Measurement of prison social climate: A comparison of an inmate measure in England and the USA

We review and describe prison climate measurement studies. We compared the factor patterns and stability from three domains of the Prison Social Climate survey (PSC) (Environmental quality of life; Personal well-being; and Safety and security). Stability was compared using randomly split halves of inmate responses from 10 selected US federal prison samples (n = 950): there were no significant differences. Factor patterns on the same instrument were compared between the US sample and an English purposive sample (n = 186) of inmates. There were no significant differences between US and English factor patterns, although at a slightly lower level of factor constraint. Factors as factor-scored according to the US factor pattern showed significant differences between the USA and England on the Environmental quality of life scales and the Personal well-being scales, and significant differences on only two of six of the Safety and security dimensions. Data suggest that the PSC is stable within the US sample, and is also stable in its factor pattern between the US and English samples. Prison climate, as measured by the three domains of the PSC selected, appears a stable measure across similar western penal systems and inmate cultures.

Preventing suicide in prisons, part II. International comparisons of suicide prevention services in correctional facilities.

The International Association for Suicide Prevention created a Task Force on Suicide in Prisons to better disseminate the information in this domain. One of its objectives was to summarize suicide-prevention activities in the prison systems. This study of the Task Force uncovered many differences between countries, although mental health professionals remain central in all suicide prevention activities. Inmate peer-support and correctional officers also play critical roles in suicide prevention but there is great variation in the involvement of outside community workers. These differences could be explained by the availability of resources, by the structure of the correctional and community services, but mainly by the different paradigms about suicide prevention. While there is a common and traditional paradigm that suicide prevention services are mainly offered to individuals by mental health services, correctional systems differ in the way they include (or not) other partners of suicide prevention: correctional officers, other employees, peer inmates, chaplains/priests, and community workers. Circumstances, history, and national cultures may explain such diversity but they might also depend on the basic way we think about suicide prevention at both individual and environmental levels.

Respect in prisons: Prisoners’ experiences of respect in public and private sector prisons

Interpretations of ‘respect’ in prison have tended to be narrow, focusing on courteous and considerate staff–prisoner relationships. In a recent study, we found that respect was defined by prisoners not just in terms of interpersonal relationships but also ‘getting things done’ (what might be called ‘organizational respect’). We expected prisoners in the study, which compared quality of life in public and private sector prisons, to rate private prisons well in terms of respect, due to previous research findings and the history and self-declared values of the companies who run them. The findings from the study revealed a more complex picture. There was mixed support for previous claims that the private sector offers a more courteous prison environment than the public sector, and, among the matched prisons in our study, the public sector establishments were better than the private sector prisons at ‘getting things done’: a distinct component of respect in prison, according to prisoners. These differences influenced prisoners’ evaluations of the ‘respectfulness’ of their treatment in each sector.

Incentives and Earned Privileges Revisited: Fairness, Discretion, and the Quality of Prison Life

An evaluation of the policy of incentives and earned privileges (IEP) in prisons in England and Wales found mainly negative effects on prisoner behaviour and perceptions of fairness and relationships with staff. Some of these negative findings were due to the newly punitive climate in which the policy was introduced and the subsequent ethic underlying new discretionary practices. The evaluation illustrated the significance of prison staff discretion, relationships with prisoners, and fairness, to evaluations of prison life. A key finding of the research was that prison officers deploy their authority through relationships with prisoners. They use the rules when relationships do not work, and this is one of the reasons for the centrality of staff prisoner relationships to prison life. IEP is an important component of contemporary prison regimes but needs to be administered fairly, individually, and constructively. The author concludes that policies shape prison life, often in their impact on sensibilities rather than in intended ways. Certain types of political policy action pose huge risks to prison quality and stability, in ways that Ministers may not realize. Responsible policy‐making is critical in relation to the use of prison and the tone of prison life.