Cargando…

The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement

Solitary confinement is not cruel and unusual punishment. It is cruel and unusual if one or more of its accompanying material conditions result in a wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain upon an individual. This requirement is met when such conditions involve a “deprivation of basic identifiable...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Coppola, Federica
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6813937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31666968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsz014
_version_ 1783462928216752128
author Coppola, Federica
author_facet Coppola, Federica
author_sort Coppola, Federica
collection PubMed
description Solitary confinement is not cruel and unusual punishment. It is cruel and unusual if one or more of its accompanying material conditions result in a wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain upon an individual. This requirement is met when such conditions involve a “deprivation of basic identifiable human needs” to an extent that they inflict harm or create a “substantial risk of serious harm” and they are enacted with “deliberate indifference” by prison personnel. With limited exceptions, the Supreme Court and lower federal courts have perpetuated a narrow application of these standards. In particular, Courts have often discounted the generalized mental pain caused by extreme isolation. Accordingly, Courts have often neglected the duration of solitary confinement as an autonomous aspect of constitutional scrutiny. Growing neuroscientific research has emphasized that social interaction and environmental stimulation are of vital importance for physiological brain function. It has further highlighted that socio-environmental deprivation can have damaging effects on the brain, many of which may entail irreversible consequences. Drawing on these insights, this article suggests that solitary confinement is in and of itself cruel and unusual punishment even under the current standards. Avenues for a profound rethinking of solitary confinement regimes are presented and discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6813937
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68139372019-10-30 The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement Coppola, Federica J Law Biosci Original Article Solitary confinement is not cruel and unusual punishment. It is cruel and unusual if one or more of its accompanying material conditions result in a wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain upon an individual. This requirement is met when such conditions involve a “deprivation of basic identifiable human needs” to an extent that they inflict harm or create a “substantial risk of serious harm” and they are enacted with “deliberate indifference” by prison personnel. With limited exceptions, the Supreme Court and lower federal courts have perpetuated a narrow application of these standards. In particular, Courts have often discounted the generalized mental pain caused by extreme isolation. Accordingly, Courts have often neglected the duration of solitary confinement as an autonomous aspect of constitutional scrutiny. Growing neuroscientific research has emphasized that social interaction and environmental stimulation are of vital importance for physiological brain function. It has further highlighted that socio-environmental deprivation can have damaging effects on the brain, many of which may entail irreversible consequences. Drawing on these insights, this article suggests that solitary confinement is in and of itself cruel and unusual punishment even under the current standards. Avenues for a profound rethinking of solitary confinement regimes are presented and discussed. Oxford University Press 2019-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6813937/ /pubmed/31666968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsz014 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Duke University School of Law, Harvard Law School, Oxford University Press, and Stanford Law School. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Original Article
Coppola, Federica
The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement
title The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement
title_full The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement
title_fullStr The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement
title_full_unstemmed The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement
title_short The brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement
title_sort brain in solitude: an (other) eighth amendment challenge to solitary confinement
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6813937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31666968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsz014
work_keys_str_mv AT coppolafederica thebraininsolitudeanothereighthamendmentchallengetosolitaryconfinement
AT coppolafederica braininsolitudeanothereighthamendmentchallengetosolitaryconfinement