How can the USA even begin to reform their penal systems if the psychiatric community can't even agree on their own standards?
There should be NO QUESTION when seclusion of the incarcerated goes over the line. But, the fact wardens turn to mental health standards for their own practices is obviously a counter productive standard.
The chronic re-sentencing of a prisoner over and above the original sentence because of ill behavior while incarcerated is outrageous. It is a form of detention and not incarceration.
There is a lot wrong with the USA penal system, however, it is going to be up to governors to reduce prison populations while enforcing rehabilitation. Perhaps Walmart might hire the incarcerated as their sentences are commuted. Lord knows, the work environment isn't any different.
The review of Existing Guidelines (click here) showed that:
- Definitions vary widely; sometimes, the terms are not defined.
- There is little agreement on appropriate use, although there is general agreement that there should be no inappropriate use.
- The length of time permitted for use varies from guideline to guideline.
- Procedures also vary extensively. Some existing regulations and guidelines are extremely prescriptive; others leave wide latitude for professional judgment.
- Accountability and external monitoring are of interest to all constituency groups. Requirements vary.
- There is general agreement that staff should be trained in the techniques they will be required to implement. However, some guidelines only speak to a general need fortraining, whereas others identify specific educational requirements.
The review of Model Standards also looked at the six parameters noted above, but the individual focus of each model was also addressed. For example, one model includes recommendations for the administrators of juvenile correctional programs; another shows how a hospital’s nursing department developed a standard and a standard care plan related to seclusion and restraint.
