In contemporary American corrections, extended solitary confinement (ESM) as a management tool has emerged as a strategy for avowedly controlling the most violent individuals and, in so doing, creating a safer prison system. We theorize that the emergence of this unique form of housing may also be viewed as a signal of prison system failure. To advance this argument, we identify how different theoretical perspectives can be used to anticipate the effects of ESM on prison system violence and order and then investigate the plausibility of this account by grounding it in analysis of qualitative data from a study of one state’s prison system. The analysis suggests theoretical and empirical warrant for both views of ESM—as an effective tool and as a symptom of system failure. Implications of the study research and policy are discussed.

In recent decades, long-term solitary confinement has become a mainstay of prison systems. Critiques and research of this confinement typically have focused on its potential harms. Few studies have examined the range of harms to those placed in it; fewer still have examined solitary confinement’s potential benefits or sought insight from those who work with them. Guided by Sykes’ deprivation theory, we draw on focus groups and interviews with 144 correctional personnel to examine their perceptions of incarcerated individuals’ experiences with, and responses to, deprivations of solitary confinement. We show that staff view the pains of imprisonment as potentially increasing or decreasing in solitary confinement and that they view incarcerated persons as adapting to such confinement in different ways.

The punitive era in the United States and other countries has included reliance on long-term restrictive housing (LTRH)—consisting of solitary confinement with few privileges—as a means of managing violent and disruptive individuals in prison. We examine how work in such housing may influence how personnel, including officers and staff, view individuals in prison and assess two hypotheses. First, those who work in LTRH will be more likely to hold a dehumanized view of these individuals. Second, the theoretical mechanisms through which such a view may arise involve brutalization, organizational context and culture, role conflict and distancing, and empathy fatigue. We assess these hypotheses using a mixed-methods study, analyzing data from a large-scale prison personnel survey ( n = 9,656) and qualitative focus group and interview data ( n = 144). Implications of the study’s findings for theory and research on restrictive housing, corrections, and the punitive era are discussed.

Drawing on qualitative data from focus groups with correctional personnel in one of the nation’s largest women’s prisons, this study examines staff perceptions of how incarcerated women cope with long-term solitary confinement. We find that women’s strong ties to other women and their prison pseudofamilies may influence the behaviors that explain their placement and stays in solitary confinement. We find, too, that women are perceived to go to extreme lengths to build and maintain relationships with other women. The findings showcase unintended consequences of solitary confinement, raise questions about its effectiveness, and highlight the limits of institutional control.

Restrictive housing substantially limits inmate movement and privileges. Proponents argue it creates safer prison systems, while opponents claim it does not and harms inmates. However, few studies have systematically examined restrictive housing through the perspective of those who work in prison systems or scrutinized the diverse dimensions relevant to its appraisal. This study addresses this gap by drawing on qualitative data to examine how such individuals view the housing, its operational challenges, effectiveness, possible improvements, and potential alternatives. We present findings along each of these dimensions and then discuss their implications for research and policy.