UPI Study › Courses › Criminology › Free lessons › Lesson 20.5 Free with a free account
Solitary Confinement and Its Psychological and Legal Implications
Criminology · Chapter 20: Corrections: Punishment, Probation, and PrisonsSection 20.5 · lesson 87 of 91video coming soon
← U.S. Inmate Populations: Demographics, Characteristics, and TrendsNext lesson: The Death Penalty: Constitutional Debates, Historical Shifts, and Contemporary Arguments →
In this lesson
Forms, purposes, evidence, law, and the reform debate.
- Describe the forms of restrictive housing and the purpose given for each.
- Summarize the evidence on the effects of prolonged isolation.
- Explain the legal framework governing placement and conditions.
- Evaluate reform mechanisms and the administrator's position.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,528 words). Read along, or search it.
Opening Question
Can Safety and Harm Both Matter?
A corrections administrator must keep an institution safe. Advocates say isolation causes harm. Can both be right? Let's find out how to weigh it fairly. This lesson closes our chapter on corrections with one of its most contested practices. Solitary confinement, more broadly called restrictive housing, removes a person from the general population.
Roadmap
How the Lesson Weighs Each Side
We begin with the terms, because the names carry different stated purposes. Then we look at why national figures on its use are hard to pin down. We weigh the purposes given for it, and the objection to each. We review the evidence on psychological effects, described in general terms, with its limits. Then we cover the legal framework, the reform movement, and the position of correctional administrators. Throughout, we present each side's arguments fairly, without taking one.
Definitions
Solitary, Administrative, and Disciplinary Segregation
Several related terms describe housing that removes a person from the general institutional population. Solitary confinement is the general term for housing that isolates a person from regular contact with others. Administrative segregation is placement based on an institutional judgment about risk, and it does not depend on any specific rule violation. Disciplinary segregation is placement imposed as a sanction for a specific rule violation.
Definitions
Protective Custody and the Umbrella Term
Protective custody is placement meant to protect a particular person from harm by others. And restrictive housing is the broader umbrella term that covers all of these categories. Each label signals a different reason for the placement. As we will see next, though, a different reason does not always mean a different experience.
Key Insight
Labels Describe Justification, Not Experience
A significant observation runs through this terminology. Each category is defined by a different stated purpose. Yet the actual physical conditions of confinement can be substantially similar across categories. In other words, the label describes the institution's justification, not necessarily a different lived experience. This matters directly for evaluating reform. Imagine a reform that addresses only disciplinary segregation. If administrative segregation and protective custody stay unchanged, most people in similar conditions may be entirely unaffected. So any comprehensive reform must consider all of the categories together. Focusing only on the category with the most public attention can miss most of the people involved.
Measurement Problem
Why National Figures Are Approximations
How widely is restrictive housing used? Its scale is documented by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and by independent correctional research organizations. But a genuine measurement difficulty complicates precise national figures. Jurisdictions use inconsistent definitions of what counts as restrictive housing. They also differ on how long a placement must last before it is counted at all. And states vary in both their practices and their reporting. So any single national figure is an approximation, not a precise count. That is a useful habit to carry forward. Before trusting a figure, ask how the thing being counted was defined.
Purposes and Objections
Punishment, Order, and Protection Challenged
Three purposes are given for restrictive housing, and each faces a specific objection. Punishment justifies disciplinary segregation as a sanction for a specific rule violation. The objection is that extended isolation may be disproportionate to the violation, particularly a non-violent one. Institutional order justifies administrative segregation, as necessary to manage risk within the institution. The objection is that broad administrative criteria can sweep in people who do not actually pose that risk. Protection of the individual justifies protective custody, as necessary for a specific person's safety. The objection is that protective custody often imposes conditions similar to punitive isolation, on someone who has done nothing wrong. That raises a fairness concern of a different kind from the other two. In protective custody, the person isolated is the one at risk, not the one posing it.
Evidence
Associations With Psychological Distress
We describe the evidence on psychological effects in general terms, with its sources named. Research on prolonged isolation documents associations with elevated psychological distress. In some studied populations, it also documents more serious mental health deterioration. These findings appear across correctional health research, and are cited in litigation over restrictive housing conditions.
Research Limits
Separating Isolation From Prior Conditions
The research faces a real methodological difficulty. People placed in restrictive housing may already differ from the general population, in ways that independently affect measured outcomes. So separating the effect of isolation itself from prior conditions is genuinely hard. The literature shows areas of both agreement and disagreement. There is broad agreement that prolonged isolation is associated with negative psychological outcomes, for at least some populations. The disagreement is over the precise dose-response relationship, meaning how severity of effect changes with duration.
Vulnerable Groups
Mental Illness, Youth, and Reentry Concerns
Two populations draw particular policy concern. People with existing mental health conditions are documented to face elevated risk of deterioration in restrictive housing. That risk is measured relative to the general incarcerated population. Young people placed in restrictive housing also draw particular concern. That concern rests on documented developmental considerations that differ from those applying to adults. Research also looks at what happens after release. It documents associations between restrictive housing, especially extended placement just before release, and less favorable reentry outcomes. That finding has shaped several of the reform proposals we will examine. We state all of these as documented policy considerations, without clinical detail.
Legal Framework
Conditions Standards and Wilkinson v. Austin
Restrictive housing is governed by a specific legal framework. First, the conditions standard from lesson twenty point three applies here too, including deliberate indifference. Second, due process attaches to the placement decision itself. In Wilkinson versus Austin, decided in two thousand five, the Supreme Court addressed placement in a highly restrictive prison. It held that conditions imposing an atypical and significant hardship, relative to ordinary prison life, create a liberty interest, which triggers due process protection. The Court upheld informal procedures that gave notice of the factual basis for placement, and a fair opportunity for rebuttal. Those procedures also included several levels of review, and periodic review of continued placement. Finally, guidance from international bodies holds that isolation beyond a specified duration should be prohibited. That is a stated international standard, not binding domestic law.
Comparison
Administrative Versus Disciplinary Segregation Compared
Let us bring the forms together. Administrative segregation serves institutional order and risk management. It is authorized by an administrative determination of staff, with periodic review, as in the procedures upheld in Wilkinson. Disciplinary segregation serves punishment for a specific violation. It runs through a disciplinary hearing process, for a fixed term tied to the disciplinary finding.
Comparison
Protective Custody and General Category Authorization
Protective custody serves protection of the individual. It rests on an administrative determination of risk to that person, with periodic review of whether protection is still needed. Restrictive housing as a general category varies by the specific form applied. Its authorization and review vary correspondingly, but always subject to due process minimums.
Reform Levers
Duration Caps and Categorical Exclusions
Several reform mechanisms have been proposed and adopted in various jurisdictions. Duration caps limit how long a placement can last. Some evidence links shorter caps with reduced documented harm, but rigorous large-scale evaluation remains limited. Categorical exclusions bar placement entirely for groups such as young people, or people with serious mental illness. The evidence suggests reduced harm for the excluded group, but there is little data on system-wide effects.
Reform Levers
Step-Down, Alternatives, and Evidence Ranking
Step-down programs gradually return a person to general population conditions. Some evidence associates structured step-down with better outcomes than an abrupt transition. Alternative behavior management tries to achieve institutional order without isolation, and its evidence is still developing. Next, an illustrative ranking of the four by strength of evidence. Step-down programs come first, then duration caps, then categorical exclusions, then alternative behavior management. That ordering is not a precise measure, and evidence on all four remains an active area of research.
Administrator View
The Order Management Problem
Correctional administrators face a genuine order management problem, and reform proposals must reckon with it. Administrators argue that some mechanism for managing serious institutional risk is necessary. They argue restrictive housing serves that function when properly limited in scope and duration. And they note that alternative approaches, while promising, need significant staffing and training investment. Not every institution has that investment available today.
Advocate View
A Values and Resource Trade-Off
Reform advocates argue that the documented harms justify prioritizing that investment, even at significant upfront cost. This is best understood as a genuine values and resource trade-off. It is not a dispute where one side simply has the facts and the other does not. Both can be right about their own concern at the same time. So a fair evaluation of any proposal keeps both concerns in view, rather than treating one as a refutation of the other.
Practice
Classifying Placements and Comparing Reform Levers
Now try these on your own. First, practice classifying placements by form. A placement after a formal disciplinary finding is disciplinary segregation, while one requested for personal safety is protective custody. Second, for each reform lever, state what it changes and the operational objection raised against it. Third, decide which levers need the least, and the most, added staffing. Rules like duration caps and exclusions mostly change eligibility, while programs like step-down and alternatives demand staff and training.
Quick Check
What Was Owed Under Wilkinson?
Finally, the reverse problem: staff move a prisoner into a highly restrictive unit on a staff decision alone. What was the person owed under Wilkinson? Pause, and decide. Under Wilkinson, the person was owed notice of the basis for placement, and a fair opportunity to be heard.
Key Takeaways
Closing Chapter Twenty: Main Points
Let's pull it together. Many labels cover similar conditions. Figures depend on how restrictive housing is defined. The evidence of harm is real, and so are its limits. And Wilkinson requires notice and a fair chance to respond. This closes chapter twenty.
About Criminology at UPI Study
Criminology (Criminology 150) is a self-paced online course of 91 video lessons in 21 chapters, from classical criminology and crime data to theories of crime, victims, policing, courts and corrections. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Criminology with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Criminology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Solitary Confinement and Its Psychological and Legal Implications
What is the difference between administrative segregation, disciplinary segregation, and protective custody?
Does solitary confinement cause psychological harm, and how strong is the evidence?
What did Wilkinson v. Austin decide about placing prisoners in solitary or supermax housing?
Why is it hard to say how many people are in solitary confinement in the United States?
About the Criminology course
How many college credits is Criminology?
How much does Criminology cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Criminology take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Criminology.
91 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →