america in lockdown

This story was first published on the website openDemocracy on September 6, 2010.

For Nelson Mandela it was the most forbidding aspect of prison life. When he looked back on the 27 years he spent as a political prisoner in his memoir, The Long Walk to Freedom, Mandela remembered solitary confinement as the experience that came nearest to breaking him.

“There is no end and no beginning; there is only one’s mind, which can begin to play tricks,” he wrote. “Was that a dream or did it really happen? One begins to question everything.”

The harmful effects of locking someone up in isolation have long been known about. As far back as the mid-19th century medical reports observed the impact. Between 1854 and 1909 there were nearly 40 reports in Germany alone, all of which identified solitary confinement as the major factor in the development of psychotic illness among prisoners.

In 1850, doctors in England were noting the high proportion of inmates that had to be removed from cells in Pentonville prison on the grounds of insanity – 32 out of every 1,000.

It was this body of evidence that played a key role in the gradual unravelling of the system of large-scale solitary confinement in the late nineteenth century. In America too, where the system had its roots among the Quaker communities of Pennsylvania, who believed that silent reflection in separate cells was the best way for criminals to do penance (hence, the penitentiary), it came to be recognised that isolating prisoners for long periods was both inhumane and ineffective. In 1890, the United States Supreme Court came close to declaring the punishment to be unconstitutional.

A century on and the lessons from history have either been forgotten or they are being wilfully ignored. In America, its use in a burgeoning prison system has increased dramatically in the last 20 years.

This increase has coincided with the growth of the so-called supermax prisons, a new generation of high security jails designed to keep social contact between inmates to a minimum.

The US now holds more people in solitary than anywhere else in the world. An accurate figure is almost impossible to come by, since the population within the punishment blocks of general prisons, known as Special Housing Units (SHUs), is too transient to monitor. Even so, observers estimate the numbers somewhere between 25,000 and 80,000.

At the Federally-run supermax prison in Florence, Colorado, inmates considered to be the greatest security risk are kept in conditions of extreme isolation that would leave even the Pennsylvania Quakers in awe.

High profile prisoners like Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, and Arab terrorists convicted of arranging the 1993 World Trade Center bombing are kept in rooms constructed of poured concrete and steel for 23 hours a day. The windowless cells are illuminated day and night and are heavily insulated so that the inmates are denied either the sight or sound of other human life.

One inmate held in Florence is Tommy Silverstein. He has been kept in solitary for 27 years now, longer than anyone else in the Federal prison system. Silverstein was made the subject of a “no-human-contact” order by a judge after he murdered a prison guard in 1983. For much of his isolation he was held in a specially built unit — known as the Silverstein Suite — at a prison in Kansas where he had his own exercise yard. This meant his only human contact was with the guards or via the occasional visit, where a thick layer of plexiglass maintained his isolation. He has referred to his existence as “a slow, constant peeling of the skin.”

Laura Rovner, a law professor at Denver University, represents Silverstein, 58, in his case to have his isolation ended. Rovner wants the courts to recognise his treatment as “cruel and unusual punishment,” and therefore unlawful under the eighth amendment of the US constitution.

It is the same argument put forward by activists in Louisiana on behalf of the Angola three, a trio who between them have spent over a century in solitary. Two of the men, Herman Wallace and Albert Woodfox have been nearly 38 years in isolation. A third man, Robert King was kept there 29 years before he was released in 2001 after a series of appeals.

Much of Rovner’s case is concerned with laying bare the harmful psychological effects of Silverstein’s condition. There are a number of contemporary studies of inmates in isolation and, just like their 19th century predecessors, most express grave concern.

“What you see when reading these studies is the same constellation of symptoms coming up in different cases, and they’re simply too common not to be a pathology arising from the isolation,” said Rovner.

That constellation of symptoms includes agitated and self-destructive behaviour, anxiety and hypersensitivity, auditory and visual hallucinations and, in some cases, a permanent intolerance to being around others.

Rovner said the impact of his lone existence was evident during legal visits with Silverstein. “At the start of our meetings with him just an hour spent with us would send him into a tailspin for a couple of days, needing to sleep for 15 or 16 hours at a time.”

Professor Craig Haney, a psychologist at the University of California who evaluated over a hundred supermax prisoners and who has compiled a report for Rovner on Silverstein, wrote that “many of those subjected to it (solitary confinement) are at risk of long term emotional and even physical damage.”

The only one of the ‘Angola three’ at liberty, Robert King, said his ability to see distance was permanently altered by his years alone in a cell. “I had no concept of how you actually looked further, as a result of living in such a small space,” he said.

King now campaigns for the release of Woodfox and Wallace. The men’s isolation stems from their conviction for the killing of a prison guard, found stabbed to death in the early seventies in Louisiana State Penitentiary, also known as Angola.

Wallace, 68, and Woodfox, 63, have always denied the killing and insist their convictions and continued isolation are punishment for their political views. At the time they had started a chapter of the Black Panthers at the prison.

The men’s case gained international recognition in recent years thanks in part to the efforts of Anita Roddick, the late Bodyshop founder. Roddick’s involvement inspired her friend, British filmmaker Vadim Jean to make a documentary about the case called In the Land of the Free, and released earlier this year.

Rovner said the publicity surrounding the Angola three was part of a growing clamour for the US to change its approach. The legislature in Maine recently considered an amendment aimed at abolishing the use of solitary in the state. Meanwhile, a ruling in July in the European Court of Human Rights upheld a complaint by four British nationals facing extradition to the US on terrorism charges that they faced having their human rights violated if, as was likely, they were transferred to solitary at the supermax unit in Florence.

Yet in spite of this, there is no end in sight for Silverstein, as well as Woodfox and Wallace. All of whom had their recent appeals turned down.

“Sadly, the overwhelming public sentiment here is that they are getting what they deserve,” said Rovner. “The irony, however, is that if you asked anyone in long-term lockdown they would freely tell you they’d prefer the death penalty to what they’ve endured.”

a slow, constant peeling of the skin (part 3)

The United States holds tens of thousands of people in long-term solitary confinement, but the case of Tommy Silverstein is perhaps the most extreme. He has been kept in isolation for the last 27 years, more than anyone else in the federal prison system. Laura Rovner, a law professor at Denver University, represents Silverstein, 58, in his case to have his treatment recognised as “cruel and unusual punishment” under the US constitution. (All the drawings here are by him.)

As part of your information gathering you conduct interviews with clients about their condition. Do you have ethical concern about making them reflect on a situation that is so obviously traumatic?

Rovner: I can see it going both ways. It varies from person to person. We have other clients in Supermax prisons in conditions of solitary not as extreme as Tommy, but they are still extreme. For some it’s a strategic mechanism that they’ve adopted to get through this, to not focus on it. So to be put in a position of talking about it can be painful, it can be unraveling, it could disturb whatever balance they have struck.

For others it’s helpful to talk. One of the things that Professor Haney discusses is the idea of “meaning making” in the world, of how a lot of people need others to do that. You know, you need to be testing out your reactions against others — do you hear that, did you see that –, and without that things fall apart.

How have you addressed this with Tommy?

Rovner: We have to talk about his condition because it’s relevant to his lawsuit. We have built up a relationship of trust with him but it’s not always easy for him.

What are the most common reasons for prisoners being isolated?

Rovner: There are two main ones: Either it’s because of violence within the prison or it’s for inmates convicted of terrorist-related crimes, and most of this second group are Arabs and Muslims. Three of our clients were convicted of crimes related to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and were serving sentences in regular facilities and, basically, two hours after the second tower came down on September 11 all of them were rounded up from their respective facilities and ultimately transferred to the Supermax. There’s no indication that they had any involvement with September 11 or anything else but it was just this idea that the terrorist threat needed to be contained somehow, and this was the way to do it.

In some other rare cases they are isolated because of their original convictions: the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, for example.

How many inmates are currently being held in solitary in the US?

Rovner: The range that I’ve seen is from 25,000 to 80,000. Part of the reason it’s so difficult to figure out is because inmates who are subject to further discipline are sent to Special Housing Units (SHUs), which are sort of prisons within the prison. Inmates can be placed in these units for a few days or for half a year and the movement in and out of the SHUs is very fluid. So it’s hard to collect accurate data. But certainly within Supermax prisons you’re talking about 20,000 plus.

How obstructive are the prison authorities towards your work?

Rovner: They are fighting the case very hard. They believe very strongly his case does not constitute a violation of the eighth amendment. In terms of justifying their treatment of him, they say that this was a person who was convicted of some very serious crimes – one of which was the killing of a correctional officer. So from their perspective he’s simply too dangerous to release into the prison population. But the question of how they are making this assessment 25 years later to a man who is nearly 60 years old, that is a question to which we’ve not received a satisfactory answer.

What drew you to this work?

Rovner: When I was a law student there was a death penalty lawyer who came to talk to us. He made the point that we are all much more than the worst thing we’ve done, and that idea has always stayed with me. I think that as a society, what we do to the terrorist or the child-molester, says a lot about us.

Sadly, the overwhelming public sentiment here towards people like Tommy is that they are getting what they deserve. The irony, however, is that if you asked Tommy or anyone else in long-term lockdown they would freely tell you they would have preferred the death penalty to what they have endured.

a slow, constant peeling of the skin (part 2)

The United States holds tens of thousands of people in long-term solitary confinement, but the case of Tommy Silverstein is perhaps the most extreme. He has been kept in isolation for the last 27 years, more than anyone else in the federal prison system. Laura Rovner, a law professor at Denver University, represents Silverstein, 58, in his case to have his treatment recognised as “cruel and unusual punishment” under the US constitution. (All the drawings here are by him.)

As his lawyer, what contact are you allowed to have with Tommy?

Rovner: Because he’s our client we are allowed both to be with him in person, talk to him on the phone, as well as have written correspondence with him.

When we meet with him in person though our visits are non-contact. What that means is we sit with a piece of glass between us. He’s shackled, and there are little holes in the glass for sound to pass through.

When he was first put into isolation he wasn’t allowed any visits at all. Our constitution requires that he be allowed to meet with a lawyer, and in theory there are no limits on how many times that can happen. He’s permitted to see his family but with the same type of limitations put on those visits. There’s never any physical contact. He can meet other people cleared by the prison but those have to be people he knew before his incarceration generally, and he’s been incarcerated 35 years.

Can you describe going to visit Tommy?

Rovner: The Federal Supermax has in large part denied reporters the ability to see it, the ability to talk to prisoners. We were allowed in by virtue of this piece of litigation. We were shown the cells where Tommy was held originally in the more isolated part of the prison and another cell like the one he is held in at the moment.

But when you go to see him it’s very anxiety-producing. You don’t meet him where he lives. The visiting area looks like an office building, there’s a receptionist. You are taken down some stairs and there are various gates that are clanging behind you as you go through.

They take you to a very narrow booth and he is in another booth facing us. He’s in a white jumpsuit.

When we first started visiting him they would lock us in. There are cameras in both of the booths and guards behind him and down the side. So you have a real sense of surveillance.

Some of his artwork has appeared on websites and blogs. I understand he was being denied access to drawing materials for a while. Is that still the case?

Rovner: He has his art supplies now. For a long time he was being denied it. That was very painful for him because art is a real form of therapy and he is very talented. In my office I have a drawing he did for me with just the inside tube of a Bic pen, since the staff take away the plastic shell. It’s really extraordinary.

Visiting with Tommy, do any of the characteristics associated with prolonged isolation come across in his behaviour or demeanour?

Rovner: Certainly memory loss and a difficulty with concentration. There’s also quite a lot of evidence to show that those subjected to prolonged isolation eventually become intolerant of human contact. For example, with Tommy’s they couldn’t get accurate blood pressure readings because just the physical contact of someone touching him to take the reading once a year would cause his blood pressure to skyrocket.

Equally, at the start of our meetings just an hour spent with us would send him into a tailspin for a couple of days, needing to sleep for 15 or 16 hours at a time, that kind of thing.

What contact is he now able to have with other prisoners?

Rovner: For the longest time he had none. Even the exercise yard he went to was in an adjacent cell where he couldn’t see anyone else. Now when he’s taken out for his hour a day he goes to a ten by ten feet cage where there are cages alongside and he can see and chat with other inmates. He’s at least aware of other human life. Some of the places he was kept in before were completely soundproof. If someone was taking a shower overhead or a toilet was flushing or someone was shouting down the range, you wouldn’t hear it.

Reading some of the measures to isolate Tommy and listening to your own descriptions, it’s hard not to think that there is a deliberate attempt to test the sanity of prisoners held in solitary.

Rovner: I have to be careful about what I say. But yes, it’s hard to believe that some of the stuff done to them is by accident.

a slow, constant peeling of the skin (part 1)

The United States holds tens of thousands of people in long-term solitary confinement, but the case of Tommy Silverstein is perhaps the most extreme. He has been kept in isolation for the last 27 years, more than anyone else in the federal prison system.

He is currently being held in Florence, Colorado, in one of the generation of high security federal prisons known as Supermax. The institution houses a number of well-know criminals including Muslim terrorists and Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber.

The lights are always on, and visits with his family and lawyer are conducted through Plexiglas. Silverstein – in isolation for murdering a prison guard — has referred to his existence as “a slow, constant peeling of the skin.”

Laura Rovner, a law professor at Denver University, represents Silverstein, 58, in his case to have his treatment recognised as “cruel and unusual punishment” under the US constitution. She has visited with him a number of times and keeps a drawing he made for her on the wall in her office. (All the drawings here are by him.)

Can you tell me about Tommy’s case?

Rovner: Even in the context of the Supermax system where the conditions are incredibly isolated, his situation is well beyond that, to a level that’s truly extraordinary.

He’s now in a position of being somewhat less restricted, but he’s still in that Supermax facility, in lockdown, in a cell by himself 23 hours a day. All the regular features of solitary confinement still exist. The cell is made of steel and poured concrete. The bed, the desk, the seat are poured concrete and there’s a sink-toilet combination that’s steel.

You have been working to reduce his isolation, and you say his conditions have improved in recent years. Is that thanks to your advocacy?

Rovner: (Laughs) That depends who you ask. He was in isolation 25 years and then we filed this lawsuit and his conditions changed. But if you asked the Bureau of Prisons they might not admit of any cause and effect.

Can you tell me about how the term “cruel and unusual punishment,” taken from the eighth amendment of the US constitution, has been used to try to end solitary confinement?

Rovner: What various courts and jurisdictions have decided is that if you take people who the prison knows are already vulnerable in some ways (people with mental illness, juveniles) and you put them in extended solitary confinement then that will, in certain circumstances, rise to the level of cruel and unusual punishment under the eighth amendment.

What is fuzzier is what happens when you take people who don’t start out in one of those vulnerable places and subject them to long-term isolation. But an overwhelming body of mental health research suggests it does have a really bad effect on people in ways that endure for long periods of time.

One of the things that interesting about our legal system is that it looks to an evolving standard of decency. So that things that were deemed okay by society 20 years go may start to change. That’s how we ultimately came to get a ban on executing people with mental retardation.

My sense is that with solitary confinement we are going through that process right now. The public profile of cases like the Angola three (see earlier blog entry: making candies in solitary); the fact that certain states like Maine have gone through some processes looking at whether it should be abolished; the fact that the European Court of Human Rights has recently come out with a decision that expresses concern at the practice.

There’s been a confluence of events. So I think it is now ripe for that kind of consideration and Tommy’s case presents one of the most extreme examples of it, both in the degree of isolation and the period of time.

At what stage is your legal case on behalf of Tommy?

Rovner: What happened so far in the case we filed is that it went before the government. They ruled that everything we said was true but that, cumulatively, it did not add up to a case of cruel and unusual punishment. The case has not been thrown out. Instead, they said we should go away and gather more evidence and that’s the stage we are at right now.

Presumably much of your evidence gathering involves assessing the psychological impact of his confinement?

Rovner: That’s right. We’ve been helped in this by Professor Craig Haney — a psychologist at the University of California. I’d say he is one of three people in the country who have devoted the most time into researching this question. He wrote a very detailed report into Tommy’s case after being with him, and after seeing the conditions where he has been held.

The overwhelming majority of studies come to the same conclusion. (There is only one that says otherwise and there are serious flaws with it.) What you see when reading these studies is the same constellation of symptoms coming up in different cases, and they’re simply too common not to be a pathology arising from the isolation.