So Sad our Soldiers & PTSD

Mad, Bad, Sad
What’s Really Happened to America’s Soldiers
By Nan Levinson
"PTSD is going to color everything you write," came the warning from a stepmother of a Marine, a woman who keeps track of such things. That was in 2005, when post-traumatic stress disorder, a.k.a. PTSD, wasn't getting much attention, but soon it was pretty much all anyone wrote about. Story upon story about the damage done to our guys in uniform -- drinking, divorce, depression, destitution -- a laundry list of miseries and victimhood. When it comes to veterans, it seems like the only response we can imagine is to feel sorry for them.
Victim is one of the two roles we allow our soldiers and veterans (the other is, of course, hero), but most don't have PTSD, and this isn't one of those stories.
Civilian to the core, I've escaped any firsthand experience of war, but I've spent the past seven years talking with current GIs and recent veterans, and among the many things they've taught me is that nobody gets out of war unmarked. That’s especially true when your war turns out to be a shadowy, relentless occupation of a distant land, which requires you to do things that you regret and that continue to haunt you.

Theoretically, whole countries go to war, not just their soldiers, but not this time. Civilian sympathy for “the troops” may be just one more way for us to avoid a real reckoning with our last decade-plus of war, when the hostilities in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown up on the average American’s radar only if somebody screws up or noticeable numbers of Americans get killed. The veterans at the heart of this story -- victims, heroes, it doesn’t matter -- struggle to reconcile what they did in those countries with the "service" we keep thanking them for. We can see them as sick, with all the stigma, neediness, and expense that entails, or we can recognize them as human beings, confronting the morality of what they've done in our name and what they’ve seen and come to know -- even as they try to move on.
Sacred Wounds, Moral Injuries
Former Army staff sergeant Andy Sapp spent a year at Forward Operating Base Speicher near Tikrit, Iraq, and has lived for the past six years with PTSD. Seven if you count the year he refused to admit that he had it because he never left the base or fired his weapon, and who was he to suffer when others had it so much worse? Nearly 50 when he deployed, he was much older than most of his National Guard unit. He had put in 17 years in various branches of the military, had a stable family, strong religious ties, a good education, and a satisfying career as a high-school English teacher. He expected all that to insulate him, so it took a while to realize that the whole time he was in Iraq, he was numb. In the end, he would be diagnosed with PTSD and given an 80% disability rating, which, among other benefits, entitles him to sessions with a Veterans Administration psychologist, whom he credits with saving his life.

Andy recalls a 1985 BBC series called "Soldiers" in which a Marine commander says, "It's not that we can't take a man who's 45 years old and turn him into a good soldier. It's that we can't make him love it." Like many soldiers, Andy had assumed that his role would be to protect his country when it was threatened. Instead, he now considers himself part of "something evil." So at a point when his therapy stalled and his therapist suggested that his spiritual pain was exacerbating his psychological pain, it suddenly clicked. The spiritual part he now calls his sacred wound. Others call it “moral injury.”
It’s a concept in progress, defined as the result of taking part in or witnessing something of consequence that you find wrong, something which violates your deeply held beliefs about yourself and your role in the world. For a moment, at least, you become what you never wanted to be. While the symptoms and causes may overlap with PTSD, moral injury arises from what you did or failed to do, rather than from what was done to you. It's a sickness of the heart more than the head. Or, possibly, moral injury is what comes first and, if left unattended, can congeal into PTSD.

What we now call PTSD goes way back. In Odysseus in America, psychiatrist (and MacArthur "genius" grantee) Jonathan Shay has traced similar symptoms to Homer’s account of Odysseus’s homecoming from the Trojan War. The idea that a soldier may continue to be haunted by his wartime life has had a name since at least the Civil War. It was called "soldier's heart" then, a lovely name for a terrible affliction.
In World War I, it went by the names “shell shock” and “war neurosis” and was so widespread that Britain devoted 19 hospitals solely to treating soldiers who suffered from it. During WWII, it was called “battle fatigue,” “combat neurosis,” or “gross stress reaction,” and the problem was severe enough in the U.S. Army that, at one point, psychiatric discharges outpaced new recruits. The Vietnam War gave us the term “post-Vietnam syndrome,” which in time evolved into PTSD, and eventually the insight that, whatever its name, it is probably neurologically based.

PTSD’s status as an anxiety disorder -- and as the only mental health condition officially defined as caused by a single, external event -- was established in 1980, when it was enshrined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the bible of psychiatry. The diagnostic criteria have expanded since then and will probably be altered again in next year’s version of the DSM. That troubles many therapists treating the ailment; some don't think PTSD is a disease, others argue that the symptoms are just a natural response to being at war or that, in labeling it a disorder, political and cultural norms are being invoked to reinforce what is considered orderly. As Katherine Boone, writing in the Wilson Quarterly, put it, "If you react normally to trauma, you have a disorder; if you act abnormally, you don't."
Most PTSD is short term, but perhaps one-third of cases become chronic, and those are the ones we keep hearing about, in part because it costs a lot to treat them. For a variety of reasons, no one seems to have an exact number of recent combat veterans with PTSD. The Veterans Administration estimates that between 11% and 20% of the 2.3 million troops who have cycled through Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from it, and the Congressional Budget Office calculates a cost of $8,300 per patient for the first year of treatment. Do the math, and you could be talking about as much as $3.8 billion a year. (What we're not talking about nearly enough is the best way to prevent PTSD and other war-caused psychic distress, which is not to put soldiers in such untenable situations in the first place.)

Since the early days of diagnosis -- when you were either sick with PTSD or you were fine -- the medical response to it has gained in nuance and depth, which has brought beneficial funding for research and treatment. In the public mind, though, PTSD still scoops up everything from risky behavior and aggression to substance abuse and suicide -- kind of the way “Alzheimer's” as a catch-all label stands in for forgetfulness over 50 -- and that does a disservice to veterans who aren't sick, but aren't fine either.
“What you come into the war with will dictate how you come out of war,” Joshua Casteel testified about a soldier’s conscience at the Truth Commission on Conscience and War, which convened in New York in March 2010. He had spent five months as an interrogator at Abu Ghraib shortly after the prisoner abuse scandal broke there. He later left the Army as a conscientious objector after an impassioned conversation about faith and duty with a young Saudi jihadist, whom he was supposed to be questioning, led him to conclude that he could no longer do his job. Casting a soldier’s experience as unfathomable to anyone else was not only inaccurate, but also damaging, he said; he had never felt lonelier than when people were afraid to ask about his life during the war.

Our warriors today are all volunteers who signed up and are apparently supposed to put up with whatever comes their way. As professionals, they're supposed to be ready to fight, but as counterinsurgents they're supposed to be tender-hearted and understanding -- at least to kids, those village elders they’re fated to drink endless cross-cultural cups of tea with, and their buddies. (Every veteran has a kid story, and mourning lost friends with tattoos, rituals, and drunken sorrow are among the few ways they're allowed to grieve publicly.) They're supposed to be anguished when they hear about the "bad apples" who gang-raped, then murdered and set fire to a 15-year-old girl near Mahmoudiya, Iraq, or the “kill team” that hunted Afghan civilians “for sport.”

Maybe it’s the confusion of these mixed signals that makes us treat our soldiers as if they’re tainted by some special, unwanted knowledge, something that should drive them over the edge with grief and guilt and remorse. Maybe we think our soldiers are supposed to suffer.

Jerry Sandusky ~ Guilty Guilty Convicted Monster goes to prison

Convicted Child Molestor aka Chomo

Investigating Prison Abuse - Hints & Suggestions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rtRAtOhKgE&feature=player_embedded

Hostage Taker, Motive, Mindset Consequences

Hostage Taker Part II

The Oath of a Doctor working in Solitary Confinement

A Doctor’s Challenge – the Hippocratic Oath in Solitary Confinement

It has been said by many that the medical field is an honorable profession that has high standards as well as high expectations. There are many ethical values within the trade and those most common are: the patient has the right to refuse or choose their treatment – a practitioner should act in the best interest of the patient – “first do no harm”  - concerns the distribution of scarce health resources, and the decision who get what treatment (fairness and equality) – the patient and the person treating the patient have the right to be treated with dignity – the concept of informed consent has increased -

Doctors who work in public owned prisons face an ethical difficulty every day. Their biggest challenge is working in a dismal environment that seeks loyalty to employers rather than the patients. The prison rules are strict and cruel for those who break the code.

Confronted with daily challenges, doctors and nurses are increasingly stressed to look the other way and mistreat or delay treatment of prisoners housed in solitary confinement. This quandary is most complex and perplexing and not easy to correct without impacting ethic related situations related to the treatment of these prisoners that are isolated from general population and subject to obvious psychological and physical harm while housed there.

It is not easy to define torture yet when the mentally ill are housed here in these isolation cells, every minute they spent there is torture. The substandard living conditions and obvious barriers between patient and provider create deep chasms that are hard to fill despite individual efforts to bring the problems to the surface occasionally without serious harm or consequences. Professional attention is precious as time doesn’t allow much interactions and thorough examination for those housed in solitary confinement.

Solitary confinement has been deemed to be a combination of stress, anxiety, depression and hopelessness. Some claim no harm is done even during prolonged or long term placements but clinical evidence is pointing to a different direction as prisoners deal with constant psychological and physical torture to withstand these stressors and overcome or survive their existence within these darkened corridors and walls.

Many have been locked away for decades and have already submitted to the ever increasing pressure to remain human beings instead of becoming animals. Their mere existence within these isolation cell areas creates violence and more difficult conditions for staff to handle. This is most difficult for medical providers as their safety is never assured when treating one of these isolation prisoners no matter how heavily shackled they are when they arrive at the infirmary strapped tightly onto a steel gurney with straps for the legs, the hands and the head along with spit masks or other protective gear in place to avoid harm.

Strangely enough, such a trip outside of their cell is a luxury many will brag about as they are locked inside their cells 23 hours a day with perhaps 6 hours out for the week based on good behavior or staffing available.  Living inside these small cells for such duration alone can turn any man insane for wanting to claw out of their concrete box called a cell to be free to move around a little, smell fresh air for a quick breath and feel the sunshine on their face for just momentary satisfaction he is still alive.

The adverse living conditions inside solitary confinement are significant factors to recognize for doctors and psychologists assigned there for the purpose of treating the mentally ill and the behavioral disruptive prisoners. They are exposed psychotic episodes, suicides, and much too frequently self-harm gestures or serious unstable where prisoners decompensate because of this isolation creating crisis care almost 24 / 7 seven days a week. Since the option of sending them to a psychiatric hospital is rarely provided, they must move them to suicide watch cells where correctional staff is assigned to watch them and preserve life if possible. Needless to say, the odds of these prisoners getting better are almost nil to say the least.

Medical and mental health providers rarely have the ability to mitigate fully the impact or harm created by isolation. Mental healthcare is limited and only provided as a means to ensure compliance with psychotropic medication that are “watch and swallow” but time does not allow thorough inspections of the “swallow” thus many may “cheek” their meds and trade them for something else.

Exams are rare [ and usually done off-site] and based on critical status rather than preventive or routine. There are no in-cell programs thus the occasional visit by a nurse or doctor is welcomed with numerous complaints of pains, aches etc. just to get the attention of another human being that is standing close to them without the bars blocking their view or even brief contact as they take their vitals and temp to record the visit as being performed.

The use of isolation cells is not the question here. The use of segregation to confine the mentally ill is also not the main interest in this presentation. The main focus of this article is the lack of care provided due to strict physical plant limitations, the non-existence of sound facilities for both medical and mental health treatment services and the lack of adequate staffing to deal with this huge number of prisoners kept in isolation cell areas in many states.

Because of these limitations, many prisoners do not get the required care as needed and are often at risk for complications or infections due to the delay of treatment and the inability to treat them as often as necessary to meet mandated standards of care established for both medical and psychological professionals hired to do the job to take care of prisoners in solitary confinement. These contributors to more dysfunctional and disabled persons inside the isolation cell areas impact preventive care and intervention methods to adequately do their jobs.

Their jobs are difficult by any standard. They work with persons neglected and out of scope of normality thus acting bizarre, annoying or even potentially dangerous as they reach out for help in their own manner or fashion to be treated.

One must wonder if their oath applies when assigned within one of these isolation cell areas and if their ethics can be compromised because of limitations imposed by their employer and the associated budgeting and staffing associated with the delivery of proper care and meeting minimum medical standards of care as established by those who took the oath.

The Light is Shining on Solitary Confinement~~~

This is why the book was written now it is coming to the front pageUS Senate hearings on Solitary Confinement

Channel 5 news interview on prison jobs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJN3ELQTCvc&feature=plcp

Prison Accountability? Re-writing history in AZ?

Poor prison job classification process?

Safety Equipment for Correctional Officers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVKzjrsFAWw&feature=share

Opinion on 3 Strikes and out law in California... other states are paying attention to this

Is state's three-strikes law really the waste that experts claim it is?

Brik McDill

Recent articles and editorials in prominent newspapers argue that California's three-strikes law is a waste of taxpayers' money and a missed opportunity to rehabilitate a criminal wrongdoer. These opinion pieces are rightly based on the annual cost of an inmate's incarceration multiplied by the number of years the inmate is to be incarcerated. The strict economic argument is straightforward, and the math of it is surely pause for concern. Missing from the experts' cost analysis, however, is an important consideration: namely the incalculable costs of the direct and indirect damage the criminals have done to society while they are out collecting their strikes. Through a series of deliberately planned and executed criminal adventures, the third-striker has done to earn his 25-to-life sentence, the hidden costs to society (outside the cost of lengthy incarceration) are typically not factored into the balance sheets.

By the time a criminal is first arrested, typically he has committed scores of unapprehended criminal acts. Moreover, before the first time a criminal is incarcerated he has been given a half-dozen second chances to stop his criminal activities, and has not. To find oneself facing a third incarceration, one has consciously, knowingly, and intentionally molded himself into a career criminal, has spurned a dozen second chances, and has committed scores of unapprehended crimes around convictions No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3. And he stands now before a judge facing a third incarceration.
Consider how much law enforcement, public safety, administration-of-justice time and money this one career criminal has burned his way through getting to his final incarceration. And then consider how much of this time and money will not be burned any more trying to deal with this criminal tucked away where he can do no more harm. Yes, it's expensive to incarcerate a thrice-convicted felon for life. But how much more expensive will it be to keep chasing, catching, arresting, prosecuting (often concurrently defending), trying, convicting and then sentencing him for crime after crime. No one thinks about these hidden costs. Add to those the costs to the victims, businesses, indemnity companies, and all those other people and entities directly (and indirectly) affected by this one criminal.

Experts also leave off the ledger that career criminals rarely change. Can they? Yes. Can rehabilitation work? Again, yes. But only when the criminal sees the need. Career offenders have deliberately chosen their lives of crime, they know the risks, they've had no shortage of second chances, they've been incarcerated twice before, and they've been counseled and warned by everyone who cares that the next strike is it.

They know the drill. Yet they gamble it all, proceed criminally, and get that third strike.

What to do? No one really knows. Not yet, anyway. But we do know that you can't help someone who doesn't want your help, and doesn't want to change.

Now let's turn the three-strikes question around: If you think the cost of incarcerating a third-striker is too great, let's consider the costs of not incarcerating him. Year after year, as described above, through state, county and city taxes, we foot the ever-mounting front- and back-end costs of his crime: law enforcement, parole agents and probation officers, crime prevention and public safety programs and activities, county jails and state prisons, the prosecutor who brings the case, the public defender who defends the criminal, pretrial proceedings, the trial itself, the judge and jury, post-trial business and the multiple thousands of unseen and unsung administrative others throughout the state who support all these efforts. How does one begin to calculate these costs?

In the broader view, $47,000 per year to incarcerate the career criminal might be the better deal, at least until we've found what reliably works in terms of criminal rehabilitation.

Brik McDill, Ph.D., of Tehachapi has spent 40 years in private practice in clinical and forensic psychology.

Letter to US Senate Hearings on Solitary Confinement

June 8, 2012

Honorable Senators of the United States of America:

Part I - Solitary Confinement – Mission Creep –

SHU / SMU concepts are victims of mission creep. The original design has been corrupted by punitive sanctions not originally designed as part of the behavioral modification plan in many prisons. This mission creep has strayed away from the short- term intensively operated concept of remaking a person's actions, train of thought, consequences, incentives and in some cases, reprieve for their negative willful actions that violated institutional rules and regulations.

Arizona and California prison officials would be wise to review, revise and amend SHU policies to allow the basic human rights to be restored lost in mission creep. Officials need to re-instate a legitimate appeal or due process, legitimate gang validation methods void of personal or confidential information that is used to politicize the inmate's status and justify unwarranted long-term placement without recourse.

This is wrong. There should be other options on the table besides debriefing as such a feat in itself is a death sentence or long term protective segregation for the individual. Sound practices can make the SHU useful but the way it is done today, it is wrong and overly punitive in nature to consider humane or even sound correctional practices.

 One more comment - keep the mentally ill out of the SHU and give them treatment - Also - remember the longer an individual is locked up and isolated the more severe the impact of such conditions can create and turn a sane person into an insane person without proper custodial practices e.g. medical, mental health, food, visitation, property and evidence based programs.

 According to a speech made by Professor Craig Haney at the California Assembly Public Safety Committee hearings on August 23, 2011, the California Department of Corrections is out of control in their management of special housing units inside their prison system. Taking notice of what the renowned professor has outlined for all public officials to see and understand are the severe mental limitations that have been imposed on those incarcerated and housed inside such units.

 In short, Professor Haney states that "prisoners in these units complain of chronic and overwhelming feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and depression. Rates of suicide in the California lockup units are by far the highest in any prison housing units anywhere in the country. Many SHU inmates become deeply and unshakably paranoid, and are profoundly anxious around and afraid of people (on those rare occasions when they are allowed contact with them). Some begin to lose their grasp on their sanity and badly decompensate. Others are certain that they will never be able to live normally among people again and are consumed by this fear. Many deteriorate mentally and emotionally, and their capacity to function as remotely effective, feeling, social beings atrophies."

 

Beginning my career as a correctional officer back in the mid 80's in a place called Santa Fe, New Mexico, I was primarily assigned to a new SuperMax unit in called the North Facility that was designed to hold nothing but death row prisoners, disciplinary and protective segregation prisoners and high escape risks. My mentors, training officers and co-workers worked hard to change my mentality when working with these offenders as it was the end of the road for many with nothing else to lose. Most assigned there were serving either death sentences, life without parole sentences or long terms that would ensure they would die inside prison walls at the end.

Rising through the ranks and attaining the position of deputy warden and assigned to these special units, I encountered numerous cultural setbacks that gleaned to me the obvious cultural barriers that exist within these facilities. The problems are endless and personnel conduct is a constant challenge to maintain a peaceful balance in the place. An attitude of "us versus them" dominated the place and was hard to control. I am sure this led to "deliberate indifference" in many cases and "unintentional punishments" for many who were either mentally ill or unable to cope any more under such strict living conditions.

Management's philosophy which was piece meal at best and were based on behavioral modification models or methods not clearly outlined in any formal training or orientation blocks. They changed daily to meet the need accordingly by different individuals or administrators. These tools were provided recklessly and indiscriminately without references of impact or consequences. There were no boundaries to establish precautions, prevention or assessment tools in this solitary confinement concept.

The first major mistake was to house the mentally ill mixed in with lifers, gangsters and death row prisoners. The second mistake made resulted in a conceptual void of professional mental health services provided for prisoners who were suffering from borderline mental issues to cope with this solitary non contact prison world creating a more doomed or hopelessness within the setting. This included treatment and medication needs.

This condition of confinement was based on a day to day routine that had no structural foundation in either written procedures or deliberately ignoring those written procedures. The facts were quickly determined to be an ad hoc operation that required changes and adjustments daily in order to meet the needs to maintain a safe and orderly environment.

Experimental to every extent as New Mexico had never operated a SuperMax before, they copied templates from other states including California. The trend was easy to follow for staff but difficult for the prisoners to anticipate their expectations within such a structural design to create solitary isolation and deprivation conditions to control their conduct.

 From day one they were treated as prawns that had no rights, no feedback on living conditions and no exposure to the outside in order to maintain a tight control over this experiment that was ongoing and flawed with structural guidance or direction. Today these prisoners [special needs, death row and gangsters] are caught in a web of deception, mismanagement and disorder because of the failed foundation that never created a sound baseline for prison management or prisoner expectations.

The fact is, these prisoners are pawns in this process that is rightfully identified as being a failed experiment of society's efforts to reform the incorrigible and labeled "worst of the worst" in public press releases. Thus, having shared approximately 7 of my 25 years of life inside prisons and these special housing units, I can conclude that Professor Haney's evaluation that California's prisons, just as others I worked in Arizona and New Mexico were flawed from the beginning and that " there is now clear and convincing evidence that this misguided attempt at managing California prison gangs simply does not work."

 Part II - My Anecdotal Viewpoint on Solitary Confinement –

 While employed by the Arizona Department of Corrections for approximately 50 months I had the opportunity to ask numerous questions from those who were hired to perform essential duties within a prison setting. This included nurses, psychologists, administrative staff and correctional officers. Given these conditions, I gleaned facts through reviewing incident reports, statistical data, observation, interrogation and interactions with these professionals that allowed me to create an accurate inference of the milieu or workplace, culture and practices.

Although I must admit that this inference was not scientific or clinically attained, it does not preclude any or all my understanding or experience while engaged in the role of being the administrator in charge of many of these functions. I feel however that those who do engage in scientific or clinical practices feel compelled to reject or repeal my own inferences as experienced during the time I spent behind the prison walls.

Taking into consideration decades of training and practicing report writing for public service agencies, it has become a matter of record in the profession of law enforcement, that anecdotal writings serves the purpose of bringing people to trial or disciplinary action based on the writings of those reports and actions documented.

Therefore, it serves a useful purpose but can be discarded at the whims of the executive or others. Today with the addition of forensic evidence gathering this task has allowed us to use these anecdotal writings as the very same guidelines or compass directions to allow forensic to continue their own tasks of validating the information or adding more detail to the evidence already available.

 This is the correct spirit to conduct whenever anecdotal writings are presented.

 Sometimes however, some health providers or executives have gone as far as discredit my writings about the lack of mental health treatment in solitary confinement and reports regarding certain prison conditions as being anecdotal in nature and not scientific. This is true in many cases but the reports or writings are filled with facts that were substantiated or confirmed either on the spot or reported by several witnesses much like those testifying inside a courtroom with no motive to tell anything that is either false or fabricated.

The truth can and is often revealed by person's own observations and can dispute clinical or scientific data resulting in it being credible data and subject to consideration when written in good faith.  Realizing an anecdote is a story written or spoken, in the context of credibility it often relates to an individual's experience with their surroundings or job in this case. It can often illustrate the person's efforts to treat it, manage it or even change it as we find it generally acceptable to do what is best and according to laws, practices and training.

To say that either anecdotal or scientific results are 100 % accurate would be false. So why do certain officials take an anecdotal report less compelling than those scientifically created? What draws their suspicion that the one report [anecdotal] is not accurate and the other report [scientific] must be because it was done scientifically?

The answer is in the reader' ability to sort out the facts through confirmation of the sources and data presented in the report. Now one must ask, why write a report if the confirmation process will repeat the report all over again?

The answer is simple, the confirmation process will not be initiated if the reader likes the content of the report and goes with the content as it is written. However, if the reader disputes the report, another report will be written to counter the original report to please the reader with its outcome.

People are human and humans tell stories. We learn from others and we learn from being exposed to the environment how to make most accurate judgments about the environment as well as how to tell a lie. A lie however, for this purpose does not serve any cause thus we will eliminate fallacy in this matter for the time being. Thus anecdotal writings are not scientific methods but close enough to report a legitimate point of view or concern. As this practice and experience is repeated, the report becomes more credible and the writer's opinion becomes less subjective and more acceptable to the truth.

 When a report is written with the reader's belief that it is accurate, it is difficult to nearly impossible that the matter exists otherwise but one must always reserve the fact that it can be changed with further proof or evidence to support the change of view or fact. It is the way people are structured and wired to comprehend ideologies developed through experience or instinct.

Understanding the prison world through a factual or fictional account of an event or series of events is a good strategy to enlighten others of the environment and create teaching tools along the way to understand the culture and practices in more detail.

Although the discipline of science could be used in such writings, these facts are often gleaned in sterile conditions and untrustworthy of repeating in a report as it may be compromised by the environmental change that took place when the events occurred. Thus approach of such matters determines response to the elements presented either way.

To understand this better, let me illustrate one example. When we write about prisons and solitary confinement, the best subject matter expert is the person experiencing the stress and the pressure of such conditions. Such a person could in fact detail the feelings, the pressures and the impact if asked by someone how they feel and what they think this type of confinement has done to their mind, their body and their spirit. The answer would be pure non scientific but none the less, real to that person.

Now, injecting a mental disability or psychosis to the event, the answer could in fact be challenged scientifically because of the altered state of mind and be rejected as a false inference or statement. This is the problem that exists with our mentally ill persons in prison. They are not believed by the establishment because they are in a neurosis state of mind aka mentally challenged or mentally impaired thus subject to losing all credibility of their problems and issues. Hence the source loses credibility and we are back to square one relying on scientific evidence or data to determine the truth as it is revealed.

After spending 25 years in a prison as an officer, a supervisor, a programs director and a warden, I have acquired information in the area of knowledge and skills related to prison life and their impact on others incarcerated. Never claiming to be an expert, I write about the things I have seen, heard, smelled, touched and felt while being there inside a cultural trap where no normal person wants to live or work unless dedicated enough to endure the trek between sanity and insanity; for prisons are places of insanity and incomprehensible feats or occurrences. It is true my writing may be flawed by personal biases or opinions about the ethics or condemnation of such a place.

 However, they are no less false and no less written out of context as the facts remains that most of what I have experienced was real and not virtual in any sense. There is no make-believe in my writings; it doesn't serve any purpose to do so. Thus classified as anecdotal writings the reader must accept that there is truth contained within the contents.

Scientific flaws contribute to unreliable and controversial reports about solitary confinement and its impact on the human mind and psyche. Taking a battery of tests for evaluating their mental status can only reliable if the same person is tested before entry into the abyss of solitary confinement and after spending a minimum of 2 years inside the walls of these units for I have seen a significant change in the human mind and behavior after 2 years in solitary confinement. Science does not take into account the human element of this placement as it is solely punitive in nature and should never be done for long term purposes.

 The fact remains that no man was meant to be excommunicated from other humans in the manner prescribed by prison isolationists. It their mission is to treat and rehabilitate for an eventual release back into society, these methods do more harm than any good for the only good is to break the person down and make them beg to be humanized again. This strategy is flawed and must be compromised to allow more human interaction to preserve what is rightfully ours from birth, our dignity and self respect to co exist with others even if the rules are so strict that you can't touch one another but you can see, hear, smell and feel their presence near you to make you feel you are not alone wherever you may be situated.

 Anecdotal writing of prison life and its effects are tools of awareness that other can read and heed advice from or take action whichever is most applicable or appropriate. Suggestions to change the way we do things are based on life experiences and consequences of those experiences. Good decisions versus bad decisions, good judgment versus bad judgment all impact the outcome of your life's destiny and purpose.

To finalize my subjective writings to some level of truth or accuracy, we can say that science has a most opportune advantage over anecdotal writers for the data presented can not be challenged by those for two reasons I can think of.

The first part is in the subject of mentally ill persons locked away into solitary confinement, they [the mentally ill prisoner] can't accurately tell you how they feel because of their altered state of mind thus unreliable in content or explanations leaving the impressions documented as fact. It is likely they are placed there for disciplinary reasons they also don’t understand and will continue to misunderstand while in solitary confinement as we assume they are aware and capable of following directions given there by staff with a high tolerance to violence but a low tolerance for patience with these mentally ill.

 The second part  is that dead men tell no tales and can't challenge the content of the reports as being inaccurate or accurate. This part, "dead men tell no tales" is the whole purpose of this writing. Today, too many people are dying in prison and nobody, not even the coroner or the medical examiner can accurately tell you what really occurred at the time of their death AND those conditions that existed before their death that is not consumed, applied or found on their dead body for forensic evidence.  Administrators wipe their hands clean when the coroner writes "natural death" on the death certificate as they are handicapped to learn or expose what could have been done to prevent or preempted the death going back in time to watch the development occur or form.

 To make it clear, it's not the death we are writing about, but rather the conditions that existed before the death occurred. Whether it was poor medical treatment, poor mental health care or inappropriate security management that led to the death will never be revealed as the coroner or examiner had closed the books on any investigation by attaching a label to the body and calling it a "natural death" leaving no legal obligation to proceed any further with this matter.

Poor medical care or poor mental health care for prisoner exists and is not being addressed as urgently as it should be today. Their reports of care should be challenged by those in positions of authority and reveal whether or not their performance inside these prisons are satisfactory or unsatisfactory to the mandated standards of care as there appears to be no benefit of their presence in many cases where death could have been prevented with proper care whether emergency care or standard on going care.

There is a lack of motivation by those professionals who took an oath to preserve life and although I will be challenged by the naysayers and skeptics of these people, the evidence is mounting that too many people are dying by natural deaths and suicides inside our prisons.

Unlike those on the outside, those who receive unfair or inadequate treatment by these professionals do not have a choice in going to another provider to get a second opinion on their treatment.

The third part is the confirmation part where the conclusions are read. This is a twofold situation as two conditions may exist. The first is an attempt to find another side of the facts already presented e.g. a death has occurred. The person reviewing the incident seeks to find the truth of the events told and requests an investigation. The investigation can be performed in two methods. The first is independently without political interference and the second is to write the outcome to suit the needs of the writer or the reader through micromanagement of the matter.

Science uses good clinical trials and measures to derive an outcome or desired product. However, even scientist can manufacture a desired outcome. Based on specific scientific physical evidence or in some cases, psychological evaluations performed by good people [so it is expected] who care about their results in a most good faith and conscious manner. In an anecdotal writing or report the conclusion is also prepared to suit the needs of the writer or the reader with a moral obligation to reveal the results as being truthful and accurate to the extend it is allowed through a non-scientific manner.

Neither reports are unacceptable and in most cases both are allowed for testimony as scientists compete with "experts" on their details and knowledge of the subject matter. Again, since "dead men don't tell tales" they won't be able to testify their own experiences, it is likely that it becomes the responsibility of the reader and the listener to determine what it truth and what is false. Judgments are made and those judgments are made by mankind that serves the purpose of relaying the results of the truth as it was presented or explained by those involved.

What is most interesting is the fact that the scientific community or professionals made up its mind a long time ago to dispute the weaknesses the anecdotal writings contained and the role they play.

Logic and learned lessons of the past are clearly factors of this discussion and should be considered when deciding whether or not one method is better than the other or whether the two can work together and provide the reader with a more complete vision or picture of the subject matter at hand.

I suspect the latter would be most beneficial to anyone in charge of a prison system or any other system that is under scrutiny for various issues at hand. It is the opinion of others and this writer that anecdotes serve a reliable purpose and source. Elimination of personal biases, frustrations, or even anger can clean up a most purposeful mission statement to follow and adhere to.

Both methods can be validated if the reader chooses to do so but in either case, the results can be altered by changing the environment of the subject matter at hand.

Anecdotal writings are not designed to lower the bar on credibility or reliability of treatments or conditions written about. It is merely another tool that can deliver a calculated attempt to broach another view or opinion into the matter of discussion showing other possibilities and experiences that may or may not contribute to the overall evidence of the case. Together with scientific tools, the reader has a better explanation, view or opinion of the matter that is placed before them creating an improved state of affairs for a better decision to be made.

Bob Ortega's reports on Arizona prisons in the Arizona Republic reveals the truth

Bob Ortega’s prison stories has set off a tsunami of events that will require the Director of Arizona prison to explain why the agency is in such a turmoil and bad shape or maybe not if the Governor doesn’t care about how she spends her prison money and constituent’s family members dying at a record rate.

Mr. Ryan, in his traditional mannerism continues to blame the former director for all the “problems with violence” inside his prison system on the former director, Dora Schriro who has been gone now since Gov. Brewer took over as interim governor and appointed Charles L. Ryan as the prison director.

Bob’s reports are an accurate reflection of the truth as it is. He has examined the system’s root problems more so that the director himself who is still in denial there are problems. Mr. Ortega writes “Department of Corrections Director Charles Ryan denies the rising murder and assault rates indicate there's a problem with violence in the prison system. He attributes the increase in assaults, in part, to staffing cuts before he became director in 2009 and to a change in how the department defines them. Ryan says his predecessor recorded assaults only that resulted in injury. The department now records a range of incidents as assaults, from inmates flinging urine or feces at officers through their cell's food slots, to attacks with crude weapons in which inmates or officers are badly injured.”“

Ryan predicted assault rates will remain the same or decline slightly for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30. Having more corrections officers will improve safety for inmates and officers, he said.”Most likely, Ryan offers no explanation or a plan to counter these deaths, assaults and violence related issues any time soon. His response to expensive lawsuits continues his denial of fault and those staff guilty of deliberate indifference. His answer is a partial truth of the past as I was part of the administrative plan to re-allocate correctional staff in a hasty and ill-prepared plan that took officers away from “essential posts” and spread them out too thin around those facilities that had already established a record for the propensity of violence such as Yuma, Tucson, Lewis, Winslow Florence and Eyman. Using this new terminology of "pull posts" and "shutdown" post, he created a method called "shadow posting" where an officer is assigned to the post on paper but is actually doing something else, as a result of the extreme staff shortages on these shifts.

It often left the yard officer by themselves with few as back up and did not provide any support for emergency transports during the shifts or suicide watches at another location leaving the shifts with barebones for an emergency response or at the very least delaying emergency responses by those officers left behind to fend for themselves and no additional resources.

If Mr. Ortega were to pull all staff disciplinary records for the time period of October 2009 through the present he will see how many staff members have been disciplined for failure to perform because of limitations imposed by the central office administration and not the local wardens or unit managers. Mr. Ryan expects staff to be in two places at once and that's how he operates.

Secondly, he robbed Eyman and Florence as well as Lewis of key supervisory staff positions that were vacant and moved those positions to lower custody level units throughout the state leaving these higher custody units without proper shift coverage, guidance and decision-making personnel creating a void in leadership and good prison management.

Although wardens expressed deep concerns with this plan, the choices and decisions were left up to people in central office that had no knowledge of each complex's dynamics and therefore created deep interruptions in the daily operation abilities everywhere.In the meantime, more people will die, hospitalized, assaulted [this includes staff as well] and nothing will be done until Mr. Ryan gets “more boots on the ground” that he says he desperately needs to combat this problem is currently doing nothing about except to blame the former director for skewing her report mechanism to indicate a higher number when in fact, these incidents are real and are happening at a dreadful pace that makes Arizona prison unsafe for employees to work in and threatens public safety in the long run.

I will be the first to admit you can fabricate reports to suit the outcome but in this case, these events already existed and whether or not they were reported accurately has nothing to do with prevention; intervention and reducing them to make prisons safer for all that work there and keep a secure and orderly environment for the prisoners.

Today, Arizona prisons are more deadlier than other prisons because of an era under the current administration and as Mr. Ryan as director that has included poor policy making, poor staffing patterns, poor drug interdiction programs, unaddressed issues on violence and arbitrary enforcement of institutional rules and regulations on the mentally ill that has filled our maximum security units to capacity and showing signs of punitive segregation methods that created deaths and suicides under his term while embracing a culture of brutality, indifference and high tolerance to loss of life inside our prisons.

Surely this is a most difficult working condition to put our correctional officers and employees under and expect successful results. The prison system is in need of new ideas and return back to basic that include sound acceptable evidence based practices instead of these ad hoc procedures implemented under the current regime that has resulted in failure after failure with severe consequences to staff and prisoners.

My recommendation is three-fold - review this administration's performance record and determine successful goals and failures of goals of their strategic plans and address failures (this includes support programming as well as medical and mental health services) - implement an external investigative unit e.g. State Police or DPS as investigative agents to review deaths and assaults - create an oversight committee for policy reviews and consider accreditation by American Corrections Association standard to eliminate the piece meal method used today to promugate poor policies and adhere or follow sound correctional practices already recognized by the ACA and National Institute of Corrections.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/ne...

Drugs inside Arizona prisons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V9Ij8_LWys

Narrated video on sleep deprivation for Correctional Officers...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWa9obbhqqo&feature=plcp

Editorial on video about the Pelican Bay SHU lawsuit filed

Pelican Bay SHU Lawsuit