Reforming Mental Health Laws and Public Safety

Mental Health Reforms ~ Long Overdue

By Carl R. ToersBijns

 

Arizona lawmakers should heed the warning of the recent Newtown shooting and take immediate proactive steps to avoid such a mass shooting by a mentally ill person in our schools or other public places. The solution to this problem is multi-fold but we must be convinced by now  those persons identified to be mentally disabled or ill must receive better treatment and this process must be addressed in a most effective and expedient manner.

This should be identified as a two step healing process and will require legislative reforms in order for the process to be effective and applied to those severely mentally ill persons that live in our communities and prisons, yes prisons.

The first step is the prevention of crime by convicted felons released from prison and not tracked or clinically maintained to be stable law-biding citizens so they don’t pose a threat to our communities and their families.  

The reason this is the first step is based on the fact legislators have more control over legislation covering convicted felons than free citizens within our community. They can in fact mandate certain procedures and process a convicted mentally ill felon much like they can a sex offender under Megan’s Law and require them to register and maintain a treatment plan according to their parole conditions and release.

The second step is to address the void of severely mentally ill persons neglected or not placed within a therapeutic or clinical environment such as private or public funded outpatient treatment clinics, admission to the state hospital or other referred treatment based on professional diagnoses and treatment needs.

This will be more tedious in nature as it requires the commitment of community resources in the mental health field as well as the involvement of many groups of mental health advocate groups may recommend treatment alternatives to the legislative committee that in turn can pass legislation with minimum standards or treatment conditions to the mental health courts or superior courts for behavioral management purposes.

So ask the question – Where should the mentally ill be placed? Today most severely mentally ill persons that run afoul of the law are committed to state prisons.  Society has released this responsibility to the prisons rather than mental health courts and every study made has revealed the mentally ill do not belong in prisons just because there is no other place to put them. Severely mentally ill (SMI) persons do not cope or function very well in prisons and often get worse because of lack of mental health services available or provided in most populations.

These SMI persons often become targets or predatory non-mentally ill persons and abused and assaulted repeatedly without any relief or protection from the prison system.

Therefore they become more traumatized than when they entered the prison system and less likely to recover from such conditions resulting in suicides and other self-harm acts that puts them in a high risk classification.

There are other negative factors of putting SMI persons into prisons.  Arizona has limited bed space for such SMI persons and must choose which SMI are housed within these diminutive treatment centers and which ones are ignored. It has been projected up to 24 per cent of our prison population is in need for mental health treatment programs, medication and treatment needs.

These persons are subjected to lack of therapeutic environments that fosters healing and stabilization. They will risk being out of compliance of their medication because the side effects are detrimental to their coping skills and never talk to anyone about their choices or decisions thus basically left alone to cope the best they can.

They are often misunderstood by poorly trained correctional staff and classified to be behavioral misfits and placed into segregation for long periods of time while receiving either no treatment at all or worst, chemically restrained by psychotropic drugs that put them in a state of suspended functioning for the remainder of their time to serve until released from prisons. 

Then upon their release date they are given a 30 day blister pack of medication and put out in the street or with families that have no meant either financially or socially abilities to maintain such medication or treatment needs.  One must realize there is strong evidence of the large crossover between mental illness, criminal behaviors, incarceration and treatment.

Today the SMI persons in our community do not received adequate services or treatment as they require thus are stigmatized by society for being abnormal and thereby cast into prisons.  This makes it society’s problem and often left unresolved because of funding or lack of services available in the demographics involved with such needs. Thus we have to ask a few more questions and glean the answers.

• Why severely mentally ill persons aren’t hospitalized or offered outpatient treatment through the mental health court systems?
• Where do these criminal behaviors originate and what preventive measures are available within the community to help them?
• Where do these SMI persons obtain the guns they use to commit crimes and what are the traditional barriers of such activity?
• Are the laws in tune with our socio-political, economic and environmental systems functional or are there dire changes needed?
• What prompts the mass shooting mentality and where are the loopholes, the communication breakdowns and observation reports?
• Who is responsible for this problem; society, policy makers or lawmakers?
• When an SMI commits a crime, what do we do with them and what options does society have to avoid criminalizing the mentally ill persons?
• Can the courts order medication involuntarily and do we need to revisit the forced medication procedures to include more mandatory treatment inside our communities and keep them outside our prisons?

The problem has long been discussed and looked at for the past 40 years. Ever since the courts ruled an SMI had the right to refuse his medication. The problem is then multiplied by the number of mentally ill roaming the streets without medication. Not all are violent in nature but the fact is many do have drug or substance abuse addictions that exasperate their mental illness.

Thus the bottom line was the mentally ill persons were criminalized by their own means and the lack of protection for society by the laws passed and has withstood time after time tests in court to be upheld. The homeless become victims of crime as they try to survive the environment without their treatment or medication needs. 

 

Not all SMI persons are homeless or have alcohol or drug abuse habits. However, they are all stereotyped and classified into the same group regardless of their social backgrounds. Society has stigmatized them severely. The laws, in order to offset this stigmatizing created another factor that also added to the criminalization of the SMI.

Under the HIPAA Act, the government passed privacy laws restricting medical records. This has severely impaired the process of allowing this vital information to be recorded in the National Criminal Information System for firearms background checks. Thus the passage of the HIPAA Act basically thwarted this information to be made available to law enforcement or the licensed gun dealers that submit the forms for background checks.

Lawmakers must make a decision quickly how to handle the severely mentally ill persons within our community. The current process of sending them to jail or prison is not working and leaves one important fact in place. We would serve ourselves well to re-evaluate the way we deal with the mentally ill from beginning to end. It must make delicate decisions between the right of others and the rights of the SMI when it comes to treatment, incarceration or other preventive measures.

We must not take away someone’s freedom just because society doesn’t want to deal with the problem and thereby casting them into prisons with an out of sight, out of mind mentality. They are, after serving their time, released back into the community in a worst condition than when they were incarcerated. The cycle returns them to a life of crime, sometimes violent and they are returned to jail and eventually prison.

December 29, 2012

Arizona Suicide Watches

Gaps in Arizona prison suicide watches

By Carl R. ToersBijns

 

Since prison director Charles L. Ryan took over in February 2009, Arizona inmates have taken their own lives at a record pace with no change in the future horizons. Although it is claimed that the agency is doing a good job in suicide prevention methods, the realistic accounts of those experiencing suicide ideations and attempts have demonstrated just the opposite.

It has become appearant that suicide watches are not as effective as they could be as the agency continues to report suicide deaths with no additional preventive measures in place to reduce such incidents.

If one was to take an account of these suicides and look closer at the systems in place, they would find two common denominators. The first being the lack of mental health attention provided for stabilization and treatment and the second being poorly conducted suicide watches that do little to prevent deaths or self-harm efforts by incarcerated persons.

One solution is the resurrection of attitudes and practices that embrace stabilization and treatment by mental health providers.  It is suspected that more than half of the severely mentally ill persons incarcerated are not getting the proper screening by a registered nurse or mental health professional.
This is most disturbing for the public and families of incarcerated persons and should be addressed immediately as the Arizona Department of Corrections contracts out such critical services with Wexford which is responsible for properly documenting such actions related to potential suicidal inmates.

This often results in a disastrous situation and hopeless situation as the inmates will find a way to kill themselves and place heavy burdens on responding correctional officers to resuscitate or apply first aid to them under very stressful conditions that are rarely successful in preserving life.

This process of properly documenting suicidal inmates is influenced by a “deliberate indifference culture” that tolerates prison related deaths and mentally ill inmates killing themselves creating deliberate and avoidable gaps in their treatment and prevention procedures.

Rather than finding occasional lapses in their service, the cultural tone consistently creates huge gaps that are often filled too late to save a life at the time the inmate is left along long enough to commit suicide. One would think that this high number of suicides would give the administration a “red flag” suggesting they have a “ticking timebomb” on their hands and is in need of dire attention. Instead, it is business as usual and nothing is being done to reduce these mental health problems within our prisons.

The second denominator is the quality of these suicide watches inside our prisons. Placing inmates on a suicide watch is merely a gesture for taking action. The inmate does not receive any treatment while on a watch and is observed and kept in isolation for purposes that resemble and exacerbate their existing conditions by pushing them further beyond the edge of insanity but beyond those already experienced leaving nothing but doom and darkness to cope with during that time.
Back in 2009, Charles L Ryan terminated a suicide awareness aide program that allowed inmates watching other inmates on suicide watches and reports to mental health their observations. It allowed a peer to peer relationship that was better than the inmate to staff relationship. 

No reason was given for such termination of the program and no mention of reviving this program has been announced.  This concept is evidence based effective and was instrumental in the past for saving lives.

Suicide watches are punitive in nature and treated accordingly. Staffs do not want to sit there and observe an inmate not worthy of staying alive as the culture has marginalized the value of inmates inside Arizona prisons.

This task is most resentful and boring and is often neglected by leaving the area where the inmate is housed and ignoring their duties to check on them every ten minutes, thirty minutes or constantly as the mental health assessment form dictates the watch to be conducted.

The majority of the times, inmates are stripped of their clothing, bedding and other personal items that can be used for self harm or hanging. They are often kept under such duress for more than three days and quite frequently more than ten days depending on their behavior while on the watch.

What is not documented is the constant egging and badgering that staff performs to provoke or create a hostile relationship between inmates and the officer assigned to watch them.

Rather than placing suicidal inmates in a therapeutic environment conducive to treatment and stabilizing them they are placed in areas isolated from general population but shared with other “crazies” around them or worst, behavioral misfits in their proximity that encourage destructive behaviors as they impose peer pressure to go through with the suicide and motivate to do something negatively to themselves.

Under these conditions, a suicide watch is most ineffective and serves no purpose what so ever except to punish the mentally ill person or suicidal inmate for taking their time away from doing another job and restricted to movement and creating attitudes with staff that see no value in such a service.

They watch the inmate for 24 hours or more throughout their entire shifts and instead of making the climate more therapeutic in nature, they are subjecting the inmate to more distress as they know that the officers do not want to be there watching them and taking it out on them.

It is likely Director Ryan will decline to comment or deny these conditions exist within his prisons. In the meantime, he has ordered a re-invented [designed] pseudo suicide prevention training program that has the same content extended for eight hours rather than the formerly three hours it was in the past. This has done more harm than good as staff becomes bored and frustrated with this repetitive and redundant training curriculum that does nothing to change the culture or value of inmate lives inside Arizona prisons.

Perhaps it is time for a legislative oversight committee or a human rights commission to visit this practice and recommend and implement new measures to reduce suicides inside Arizona prison and comply with sound correctional practices that are placed in the written guidelines of relevant policies but are circumvented and ignored in all practical aspects of the suicide watch creating serious gaps in the prevention and preservation of human life.

December 24, 2012

A laundry list of prison failures

By Carl R. ToersBijns, former deputy warden, ASPC Eyman, Florence, AZ

 

Ever notice how the director of the Arizona prison system always declines to appear on television to refute or deny any wrongdoings reported by the media in the last three years?

Do you think that this is a deliberate tactic to assassinate the public confidence in our prison system?

Knowing how arrogant and tenured this man is, I am surprised he has not taken advantage of his public image to respond to the number of failures occurring while under his watch. It almost appears as if he has waved the white flag of surrender or pushing the fact that he doesn’t care enough about these flaws to respond to them in a most constructive and competent way. As it is, he is the only man in Arizona that can actually tell all of us the truth and what is really being advertised as a failed prison system today.

That being said, you must be aware of the impact of such an apathetic attitude and how this is impacting his credibility and leadership qualities. His refusal to address all matters in a public forum is one of his basic calls as a public leader and explain the appropriate action is being taken to correct all these flaws.

Perhaps he is relying on the department’s actions to speak for itself, however, that would be a fatal mistake for the public perception and opinion of his leadership has been dwindling quickly over the years.

It is logical this era must end soon. It is also rational that mistakes have to be corrected and failures must be reversed into success stories. It seems today, everything is wrong with Arizona prison management as the list is too long to print and historical data is revealing failure after failure since 2009.

Subvertly, he has eluded that things are wrong but refuses to address them specifically and publically. Shifting his policies constantly to address these shortfalls, his reactive approach is being noticed by lawmakers and law breakers.

Today his challenge should be clear. Repair those issues on this lengthy laundry list that need fixing.

This is our challenge for the next two years he should focus on:

• Controlling spending and stop private prison growth in Arizona
• Reduce the prison population and make the officer to inmate ratio safe again pre-2007
• Take proactive assessments to protect the public from escapes, disturbances, excessive liabilities and needless costs incurred because of negligence or poor performance
• Focus on staff safety and public safety and make them priority one
• Restore staffing patterns and correctional officer positions in maximum custody lost since he took over in February 2009
• Cut the political power, intimidation and fear factors of his administrators and reduce the administrative size of his agency
• Reduce prison deaths and suicides as well as natural deaths
• Restore sound and practical medical and mental health care in practice and delivery of services
• Reduce prison bed expansion growth and false bed space projections for more maximum custody beds in the future
• Restore the classification system for inmates to be housed in their appropriate custody levels and limit overrides to accommodate bed space and eligible transfers to private prisons
• Restore the promotional and disciplinary policies for all employees to allow career growth and opportunities
• Restore the human resource policies that allows employees to remain classified under grade 20 and not uncovered making them subject to willful termination or dismissal for political reasons
• Open up a respectful and meaningful relationship with the media and allow transparency to exist to demonstrate compliance with rule of law and departmental policies and procedures
• Open up a respectful and mutual relationship with organized labor and allow input and feedback to be included in executive decision making
• Expose detrimental practices that incur the loss of life, limb or danger to all that work or live inside a prison

There are other actions required to bring these failures to the front of the agenda. He must work with the legislature to develop and organize an independent oversight committee to track prison business and transactions as well as changing these corruptive policies in place today.

He must turn the tables on the politics and tacit approval that exists within this culture of death now infested inside this prison system and take the opportunities for these “lessons learned” and turn them around.

He can do all this and still turn loose the dogs and appropriate use of force on those that challenge his changes in every way possible. Eradicate the gang controls that exist today and make prisons safer than ever before.

 

December 6, 2012

Working with SMI inmates

Inmate Self-Harm Behaviors for Correctional Officers

By Carl R. ToersBijns

 

For all practical purposes the biggest difference between prisoners and correctional officers is the fact that prisoners are incarcerated subordinates to the correctional officer’s directions and orders while under the supervision of the Corrections Department.

In layman terms, the officer has to constantly struggle and be cognitive of the prisoner’s behaviors including the fact they may possess a learning disability or mental illness that may impede their ability to communicate effectively. This makes perceptions biased as the officer attempts to help the prisoner with his problems but are often challenged to correctly understand their message as it is either emotionally or mentally impaired.

There appears to be a discussion ongoing whether the officer has the willingness to help and doing the right thing when he or she does offer the prisoner assistance with their problem especially to those related to self harm or suicides. The officer has to determine rather quickly if the gesture is genuine or whether the problem is manipulated and a petty opportunity to get some attention from the officer.

This is a very important key to communicating and helping with the problem of self-harm and suicides as each method has motivating factors that determine serious or non-serious actions to be taken and relayed to mental health and supervisors.

Most officers do not possess the ability to determine serious from non-serious thus the risks are high that a sign or awareness level may have been missed and create a situation for the prisoner to actually harm himself severely or commit suicide within short periods of time. Ignoring a response based on a wrong evaluation or assessment can lead to creating a tenser situation from the start.

A lack of response by the officer that ignores or minimizes the prisoner’s behavior is likely to be demonstrated in an animated and aggressive like manner and brings to the confrontation anger, disgust, and frustration by the prisoner as well as a feeling of ridicule by the officer that believes the prisoner tried to play headgames and results in a provocation of anger by the officer towards the prisoner escalating the situation severely.

Therefore, it is important that the officer takes the time and reads and assesses the prisoner’s behavior appropriately and accurately to avoid a critical incident from developing and prevent or intervene in a severe psychological episode by the prisoner and taking the appropriate steps to secure his safety and wellness immediately for the sake of preserving human life.

The officer must be properly trained how to read the motivating conditions, environmental factors or circumstances that triggered the prisoner’s request for interaction or attention so that the proper care can be provided by mental health providers available to treat and stabilize such individuals. In theory, the better the relationship is between officer and prisoner, the better the communication is and the better they understand each other at the time.

This is where the ability to empathize and observe and listen for clues of behaviors is important. Empathy is not sympathy. It is merely the ability to understand another person’s feelings or needs through comprehension of behaviors, feelings and words spoken. Sometimes it takes someone to put themselves in the other person’s place and try to see and hear what they are seeing or hearing to understand the message spoken.

Certainly the officer must understand the reason for anger if the prisoner’s actions or behaviors are ignored or minimized as it draws anger and the feeling that they are alone.

It is important that officers don’t stereotype prisoners and believe that they are all the same and that they might react the same way under most circumstances.

Officers must take into account if the prisoner was:

• Unable to cope effectively
• Depressed
• Under the influence of drugs
• Stressed because of changes in environment
• Family turmoil or problems
• Frustrated by recent disciplinary or negative prison factors
• Being bullied by others
• Recent loss of loved one
• Impulsive in nature

Once the officer has taken these factors into consideration then another evaluation must be made related to the threat made or actions pending such as cutting or hanging himself and decide if this act is:

 

• A cry for help
• Hoping to gain attention
• Overwhelmed by emotions
• Taking control of the situation
• Avoiding others perceived to be a threat or risk to him
• An act to get a high
• Actual act intended to commit suicide

The fact remains that the officer can’t be certain which reason or motive is correct and must treat the situation with care and determine how to ensure the prisoner’s safety as he makes his notifications and arranges for mental health care providers to see the prisoner as soon as possible and play out this critical incident in a manner that does not empower the prisoner to manipulate others but rather focus on the reality that he is asking for help and needs to talk to someone who specially trained and skilled to obtain an accurate assessment of his needs.

Every agency should take into consideration the need for specialized training in self harm signs and suicide awareness. They should be considerate of those factors that are created by the environment could and can cause additional personal distress and vulnerability that creates harmful behaviors to appear as well as suicide ideations.

Agency staff should realize that reducing the prisoner’s distress level can help reduce self harm and suicides effectively and need to upgrade their training for staff so they can work with these special management prisoners effectively and safely.

December 13, 2012

Leadership versus Dominance - the struggle for Power

Leadership versus Dominance of Mankind

By Carl R. ToersBijns

 

 

“Leadership is not domination, but the art of persuading people to work toward a common goal”– Daniel Goleman

 

Traditionally speaking, men are social creatures in a most complex social world. What we do and how we do it based on numerous factors that make us a different kind of animal apart from the others in this world. Human beings are in many ways, smarter than most members of the earth’s inhabitants but for some reason, have engaged in continued conflict at the fundamental domestic levels or fighting wars with each other that will eventually decide the fate of their survival.

 

We must all admit there is a hierarchy and a pecking order in this world we live in that is undisputable a daily influence of our lives. We organize our social skills, needs and desires based on social influences along with cultures, traditions and customs.

 

The pecking order can be based on many factors that maintain a class order as well. These factors are well known but center on intelligence, strength, wealth and social position in society or government. Regardless of intent, the pecking order is established for one reason, protection; protection from others as well as themselves. Protection designed to provide either a means to be self-sufficient and independent or to avoid an unbalanced dependence on others.  Thus we have what is commonly known as a predator and prey situation.

 

Is such a pecking order appropriate or is it flawed? What is the basis of such a concept and what establishes the rules of engagement to make it orderly and fair or does it have to be fair. Is the pecking order consistent or is it open for a competitive comparison of nature thus competing with other force that coexists in the same dimension or continent? The answers aren’t clear without looking at this a little bit deeper.

 

Does the order posses aggression as a means or a tool? It appears that every pecking order has a balance of “master and subordinate” concepts. This is the key to the organizational purpose of a society.

 

How it functions, copes and manages daily living is based on a master and subordinate concept that develops other elements needed to stabilize this process. Once can say that differences in cultures or ideas will create different societies established with different rules as well as customs and traditions to meet their statutory and religious based views.

 

Thus this social arrangement becomes another reason to divide the human race into smaller groups or interactions setting up its own pecking order and reasons for dominance. As such society becomes a complex system of building blocks with each a different set of rules and social expectations.

 

So how does dominance play into societal development? Observations of human being has confirmed there are at least three types of people within a social organization, the leaders, the workers and the followers alas another hierarchy in place to establish order.

 

Dominance is a prevalent factor in many different scenarios in life. The fact is that when you observe humans you will observe this quality of dominance frequently as it plays a significant and prominent part of any social organization or setup. Therefore, it is fair to say that both the hierarchy and the act of dominance are relevant to our society.

 

Another relevant fact observed are the traits of leadership and dominant functions of humans that are observed taking a lead in an assignment or role within our societies. Therefore one may ask is leadership a major characteristic of being a dominant character or is this assumption that is flawed in some manner.

 

Dominance can be divided into several groups within society and within the human interactions as well. Dominance can police behaviors or resolve or create personal strife or stress. It can take charge of most decision making processes that include where you live, what you do for a living, who your sex partner is and whether you remain single or married with children. It also determines whether you are aggressive or passive and other personal traits well accepted to be human behaviors and characteristics.

 

These are all human developments of domestication and impact daily life to the fullest and are in constant need for guidance and quality of life decisions that impact all those decisions and lead a reasonable safe and comfortable quality of life. There is a need to prevent looseness or direction within the group(s).

 

Hence we identify the word leadership and its purpose within our social structures but part of the problem is that leadership in its own definition is vague and can be broken down to several types of concepts. However, for this purpose, we will focus on social leadership.

 

For example, social leadership can be defined as maintaining law and order between individuals within a group providing protection for some when faced with a threat or predation. It is this type of leadership that is most commonly identified with the concept of leadership or leaders.

 

Leaders that are either appointed or self appointed to provide control, management or guidance of those things that are important to use whether tangible or intangible items within our world. Along with this leadership must come a careful balance to avoid a volatile vision of being master and slave relationships within the social groups.

 

Leaderships must be composed of mutual relationships such as partnerships sharing the burden and maintaining control over those social interests within each group. It must rely on social input and diverse thinking to seek what is best for the group and not individuals.

 

Leadership can develop during critical responses or daily and routine tasks and functions of society.

 

Thus it is fair to say that leadership is prompted by the need for an initiative or action to do something to either protect someone or maintain control or acquire something that is needed to exist, to survive or to manage in order to maintain the most human needs of our lives.

 

It could be concluded that leaders do not have to be dominant or sitting at the head of the table type of positions but rather, a characteristic that is mutually and co-operative in nature and acceptable in all social formats that exist at the time of need or purpose.

 

 

December 11, 2012

Hoarding Power - Charles L Ryan

Arizona Corrections ~ Ryan, Hoarding the Power

By Carl R. ToersBijns

 

 

If we were to look into the future and look back how the Arizona prison system grew and floundered under the leadership of Charles L. Ryan you will undoubtedly find a conclusive description of what can be said is a compulsion to hoard power and build a base of power within that resembles a dictatorial and adversarial method of prison management. Unfortunately, he did this for the sake of evil rather than the good for many. Surely this qualifies him to be unprecedented in such accomplishments of power grabbing everything within his reach or span of control.

 

This is happening as the criminal justice system is cycling hundreds and even thousands of prisoners through its prison system without any inquiries or curiosity by elected officials nobody is asking how this agency spends its billion dollar budget.

 

Daily, he seeks ways to set up control within every aspect of the agency’s individual departmental responsibilities that ranges from custodial care to medical and mental healthcare provisions ruled under one man and one rule.

 

In other words, Mr. Ryan makes decisions for every aspect of custodial, medical and mental health care as well as contractual services rendered and prison policies. He is the sole decision maker that writes his Director Executive Orders whether he is qualified to make these decisions or rarely seeking advice from others more qualified in such special areas.

Working with what can be described as an unprecedented amount of money provided by the legislature and the governor, Ryan has managed to set up a power base that spans from controlling and expanding public prison beds, commissaries, food and medical contracts to private prison beds and other profit making schemes. One would think this strategy was done for the best interest of the state but rather the opposite is true.

 

The public has been hoodwinked into thinking their prison system is well and intact but in fact it is dilapidated and in dire need of attention. Nobody has noticed the growth as they feel it is just and unworthy of criticism as well as oversight.

Ryan has hired and re-hired former colleagues and hand-picked friends to control the tight niche circle of power as well as maintaining a silent and firm control on all internal environmental issues with effective damage control at the correctional officers’ expense through unwarranted discipline and compromising their safety.

 

As their staffing patterns dwindle, their bed capacity increased. Double bunking without adding staff is a dangerous practice especially at level 5 units where the propensity of violence and misconduct is the highest.

Mr. Ryan has abandoned all practical and safe correctional practices for the sake of expansion and more prison money allocated to a system that is already demonstrated to be weak in security and public safety. Specific by-products of this management style are more violent offenders, higher death rates, increased suicide risks and continued staff assaults with and without weapons.

 

Correctional best practices are waning as a thing of the past as good security is now rare and vanishing quickly. Today, the prisons are run by those in orange jumpsuits rather than those wearing the badge, the brown khaki shirts and BDU pants.

 

His latest project of expanding maximum custody bed to construct a Special Management III in the Lewis prison complex is the latest example of his expansion plans.  Asking the governor for $50 million dollars to build a complex for Level 5 inmates is hardly necessary if Ryan would allow the prison management team to do what is called the inmate classification process. Meddling with the risk assessment tool, he has altered the entire population by ignoring risks and threats within.

Since day one he took over, he has focused on locking up and locking down prisoners with discretionary powers to hold them at the higher levels for reasons that are based on repetitive misconduct charges that elevates the custody score and increases risk to the general population setting.

 

He has effectively manufactured a higher risk group through administrative means and justifies asking for more Level 5 beds through his own self fulfilling prophecy of increasing detention beds and max custody beds over the last three and a half years.

 

He accomplished this plan by executing a three stage process that first included segregating all severely mentally ill prisoners at a higher custody level mixing them with anti social behavioral prisoners so that the chaos and violence would increase and the justification would show good reasons for such placements thus justifying the means at the end. This method allowed him to classify Arizona prisoners as more violent than ever before.

 

Second he destroyed the inmate employment program and reduced both work hours and wages through an austerity program leaving thousands of inmates idle and without a job to earn their commissary or other costs. In other words, he effectively destroyed the prison economy and created the same conditions that exist in the free world where crime is based on the need or the greed of individuals with a criminal mind. These created an unbalanced and predatory living environment to cope within as it became the “only the strong survive” culture and the weak pay for protection.

 

Lastly he eliminated self help programs and substance abuse studies that effectively created an uncontrolled drug infested prison environment unprecedented in modern penology and Arizona prisons and allows the presence of drugs to maintain the instability to keep the prisoners divided and the staff in danger. This created a drug infested culture that became more violent and more addicted than ever before posing threat to the staff that work there and the public safety.

He has facilitated this growth in drugs through his permissive attitude of allowing prison gangs to exist. He has forsaken good and effective searches to find the drugs and has basically allowed the “inmates to run the asylum.” This reduction in the inmate’s income resulted in more misconduct that included theft, assaults, gang violence, extortion and other criminal behaviors.

 

His goal is simple; infuse more money giving him more power. No matter. The taxpayers are picking up the tab for this most volatile environment as the prison system, although not managing what they already have, keeps growing and becoming more unstable in unbelievable epic proportions statewide.

 

Taxpayers have no idea how these “covert” ideas has fragmented the agency and don’t seem to care how their tax dollars are being spent. In fact, it is safe to say even the legislators haven’t the faintest idea what it actually costs to accommodate Ryan’s plan and the governor isn’t interested in asking either.

 

In the meantime, you pocketbook will continue to write blank checks and receive nothing in return.

At a cost of over one billion dollars, you would think that somebody in Phoenix government would be keeping an eye on how this money is spent and how many lawsuits have been paid out to avoid bringing this horrific prison management situation to the attention of the public.

 

December 11, 2012

Crazy as Hell in Arizona Prisons

 

 

Crazy as Hell in Arizona Prisons

By Carl R. ToersBijns

 

After my arrival inside the Arizona prison system in 2005, there was one obvious flaw immediately detected. It was the lack of mental health care and awareness that allowed the prison environment to be a hellish place to be for those severely ill and without proper coping and functional skills to survive this hell hole.

It was without reservation that I was introduced to this horrific system as the doors swung wide open for all to see these flaws that provided nothing but traumatic and senseless conditions for those suffering with the numerous disabilities related to mental illness and its symptoms.

Shortly after my arrival, I was assigned to the maximum custody unit where these severely mentally ill persons were being kept and housed with hardly any treatment whatsoever. Although those mental health providers working there cared and wanted to do something good, it was designed to be a likely failure to do so under the circumstances designed by those assigned to Central Office and authorizing these illegitimate housing transfers to these isolation units in Florence Arizona.

The staffs assigned were good staff. They did the job to their best of ability and with the minimal tools and resources given sparingly by those in charge. Watching them work day in and day out, it was with admiration and respect to see them perform so diligently without so much a helping hand from above.

On a daily basis they endured unwarranted assaults as the prisoners heaved human liquids and fecal materials in their direction as they walked the cell front to ensure that preservation of life is still intact. Darted by sharp object and wearing stab vests with metal trauma plates and eye protection to protect them from harm, they sweat in this oven created by poor ventilation and darkness.

The place was horrific. It was filthy dirty and smeared with feces and urine on the walls. No wonder that MERSA and other staph related infections were as common as the place was in worst shape than anyone could ever imagine. This description applied both cosmetically and psychologically as the disarray of mentalities strewn throughout the housing areas reflected chaos and disorder in the most extreme and harmful way.

Walking the darkened corridors that led to these smelly and ill maintained dungeons it reminded me of what I had seen in medieval movies where the prisoners were kept and nothing was done to keep them out of harm’s way. The staff, trying to overcome this madness was driven to extremes that created their own mentalities completely different than those they were in charge to keep.

This chasm of misunderstanding created voids that could never be filled by those in charge or those working these men made hell-hole conditions. It was something difficult to describe unless you lived it.  Standing inside this hell hole was the most horrific experience anyone could imagine but realizing it was real, it plays mind tricks and challenges your survival against all odds.

There, inside this prison unit, was a three dimensional world here that was hidden from the public and those that make the major decisions on life and death inside prisons.

The first dimension was the leadership lacking to make a change to the way things were inside this unit. Their arrogance and their unwillingness to walk these same beats for more than one hours created vast differences in how to handle the problems and how to manage these severely mentally ill prisoners hidden away behind these large and sturdy concrete walls where the sun rarely reached their saddened eyes and touch their ever pale human skin.

The second dimension was the perspective of those in charge and responsible for the daily functions that are often impaired or impeded by emergencies of life and death as another prisoner attempts to take his life or another staff member has been struck with a sharpened object and needing medical care. There wasn’t enough time in the day to take care of these basic functions as staff was sparse and resources to handle the ever growing population were dwindling.

The third dimension was the ability to treat and program these crazies as there was no proper space available to treat them out of sight from others. Sparingly, these providers walked a fine line that was often broken by those that made this environment intolerable to live or work in and resulted in broken promises even in the middle of the night. The dispensing of medication became a dreadful task as they had to walk among the filth and dangers of the cell front and bringing these crazies  to the dispensary was impracticable as time and sufficient manpower to do this  was not on their side to get this done.

The scenes observed were behaviors that staff described as “fruitcakes and crazies” giving them a realistic idea what craziness was all about. No doubt misunderstood in their behaviors, these prisoners were subjected to the most inappropriate responses from unlearned and ill trained staff that created more harm than good inside these torture units.

It was a form of genuine torture but not necessarily physical torture because there was a human language difference that hardly everyone there misunderstood. What was hard to translate was the mannerism used by the prisoners to convey their own needs and their own messages as these ill prepared staff members tried to decipher what they were asking but rarely hit their mark and missed more than ever hitting the target in order to help them cope with the environment as it stood before them.

Although it must be said without hesitation that there was a form of physical  or unintentional torture ever present as no prisoner left their cells without first being stripped, shackled and put on a gurney to be seen by medical or admin for reasons they hardly ever understood and saw this as additional punishment for being crazy.

 This inability to communicate with these severely mentally ill persons created negative impressions that could not withstand cultural indifferences and personal opinions that these persons were crazy, violent and dangerous at all times.  The fact that they were acting out of norms and bizarre was most misunderstood by many. The fact that their means to ask for help was to force human contact through an altercation rather than words that would never be understood.

There were no straightjackets present but chemical restraints seemed to work very well. Slurred in speech the prisoners tried to convey their needs but found nothing but deafened ears and silenced mouths.  Most just slept their lives away defecating in their prison orange uniform and not asking for a change out when laundry day came. They would rather remain in their own filth than to ask a prison caretaker for help or new set of clothes.

This led to desperation that was often communicated in attempted suicide acts or self harm injuries again misunderstood but nevertheless bringing them to the attention of the mental health providers that struggled daily to meet their caseload and see every patient on time.

Working inside this hell hole and watching the devil sit there on his throne, the minds of those that work there transforms a new mentality as it meets and adapts the mind to the surrounding that consume them from the moment they entered these dungeons.  They develop a new set of morals and what was once evil is now a virtue. The exchange of morality and indifferences set apart those crazy and those insane. The crazies being those that are locked up and stowed away from others and the insane taking care of them carrying out their custodial responsibilities in the best way they can.

These crazies are a menace to themselves as well as others.  Although in dire need for treatment, they receive none as the numbers avail the ability to take care of all of them.  Thus neglect and abuse become commonalities that are acceptable under the present circumstances and become the norm. Values and humanity have changed.

Persons dying, bleeding and death has taken its toll inside this unit and nobody has the answer how to end it all.  Humanity has forsaken those behind these huge and thickened walls as it insulates the guilt and evil that hides there every day of week, night or day without any help or chance in sight today in Arizona.

 

 

 

Overcompensation - The Bluff??

Is Overcompensation Confidence or is it Arrogance?

By Carl R. ToersBijns

 

It has been said often there is a thin line between being confident and being arrogant. Although the differences may be hard to tell you have to look closely to find what you are seeing is either overcompensation of feelings, ideas or tones and volumes motivated for a real unwarranted and raw materialistic or emotional power grab for control.

Some behaviors for example describe confidence such as being loud, expressive and in your face attitudes seem to reflect for many positive attributes of a person’s personality, characteristic or confidence.

Conversely, some feel that people who demonstrate their will, intelligence and voice silently, and in a cooperative manner can also display confidence but in a lower key manner that can be described as being aloof or other stereotypical comments that describes people.

The fact is that both are broad generalizations and must be applied to different situations. The main issue is whether or not either style attempts to draw a response of the subject at hand thus approach might deliver the desired response.

There is nothing mysterious about tone or volume associated with communication and behaviors. There are those persons who have a quiet confidence and there are those that possess a loud arrogance. The message is delivered in the manner desired for the situation.

Thus it is important to be able to distinct the different behaviors for different situations and conclude the difference between confidence and arrogance.

Realizing that some people can go about and take care of business in a quiet diligent manner yet draw the appropriate response and respect is another way to seek the proper attention for the occasion. Thus we have a quiet type versus the all mouth that is often described as being “all mouth and no action.”

Interestingly, people in general, either through their own social skills or indoctrinations or educational levels will resort to some sort of adjustment of approach to maintain an objective mechanism and control of the subject discussed or debated. This is where you need to have the ability to observe and look for superficiality and relate to the person’s motive or desire in such occasions.

So you must always ask a few questions about the situation as you wonder; are controlling people overly dominating because they actually feel out of control of the thing/person they are trying to control? Does this thing/person that they are trying to control scare them a little bit? Is this a matter of insecurity rather than being confidence or arrogance? You have to figure out just what the real deal is here so you can adjust your situational assessment and maintain control of what you want to say or do in such instances.

There is one rule a person must never forget. Whenever a person feels they are at a distinct or known disadvantage, they make try to manipulate the situation and overcompensate and become a little bit assertive, aggressive, more innovative or creative in their mannerism or approach.

My point is to simply be aware of such conditions as they may play into the part or act being performed to influence a desired outcome. This is most commonly known as a bluff.

When people feel they are being backed against the wall or cornered into a situation to fight or be controlled, it causes them to compensate for the occasion and may actually exceed and successfully deceive their personal capabilities to defend themselves effectively. Hence, when a person is at a disadvantage, this may motivate them to perform better and higher than ever before giving them the energy and drive to make things happen with unexpected results and successful conclusions.

Situational control is a very delicate process. It involved every capable human intelligence resource available to overcome either a physical or mental disadvantage and allows people to be smart enough and brave enough to try what was once impossible for them to think or do.

Thus it is fair to say that confidence and arrogance work hand n hand to accomplish personal feats when challenged and give them the desire to overcome personal barriers and be successful in the end. Another important lesson learned on human behaviors.

 

December 1, 2012

Why I can't walk the line

Why I can’t walk the line

By Carl R. ToersBijns

First and foremost let me say that I am trying to be a good person and tell the truth as I believe it is to the best of my ability. I know my writings or a word piss some people off and helps others understand the problem or matter more clearly. But this is done or accomplished not without some kind of rub or wrong feelings why it was said or done that way. Either way, it’s a no win situation as controversy only breeds contempt or dissatisfaction for some and informational insight to others.

I have mentioned several times that being a critic has no personal rewards nor does it warm up people to stand along side of you. You struggle through most of it alone and like anyone else doing what they think is the right thing to do, you suffer consequences in social content and contact that may impair your feelings for the moment but makes you realize your actions caused others to think and express what they feel about the issue at hand opening up their minds and thinking free or independently from others.

Everybody struggles with controversy. It’s usually divided between the good and the bad as well as the right and the evil way of doing things in life. I have and been living a worldly lifestyle that is expressing my thoughts and ideas via the social media as well as the news media. For that I will not apologize for as I believe in awareness makes things better and allows for change to occur. I want to bring change and this is how I stacked my tool box to do so.

Walking between the chasms of good and evil takes it toll and isn’t easy. Conflict is a hash and mean spirited thing when it attacks your heart, your soul and your mind, bending you one way or  the other making you wish you had conformed to walking the line and not stirred up such a mess. I’m sure there are others that feel this way but in all reality, it’s not for me. I don’t want to walk the line and conform; I want to move that line in one direction or another to make it better.

It is with great certainty that my works, my thoughts and my memory will be eclipsed once I die. I am hoping that some of my words bring happiness to some and resolution for others. I believe I will be forgiven for my sins done and for not walking the line. As for me to tow this line of neutrality cannot and will not be done in this lifetime.

I will not succumb to surrender or the silence it requires to be politically correct walk the line. It is not that I like to live on the edge of life but rather I resent and resist elements of evil men or groups menacing people’s rights and the distribution of sinful temptation to do nothing or just follow  and go with the flow.

I will behave according to my spirit, my soul and my values of life and its ethical content. I will work hard to repress regret and lost friendships but I will be overly empathetic to those who are impacted by the negativity in their lives, their workplace or their hearts. 

My thoughts are ambiguous to some and clear to others. That’s the reality of controversy or crisis management as it stands. I don’t think I am right all the time and I certainly don’t think I have all the answers but one thing I do know and that is to stand still, remain silent and do nothing is not something I could accept nor do I wish others do so as well. 

My tone may be subvert and loud and uninvited. I challenge the fact that not everyone wants to hear or deal with other people’s thoughts or ideas and refuse to listen or deal with the problems discussed or recited. That is just one of those things we do when we decide to be passive or aggressive in the manner we stand up for ourselves or others.

People must know I take risks and live in a state of jeopardy as there may be a time where a fanatical interpretation of my ideas or thoughts becomes offensive enough to act out on and deliver a blow to freedom of speech or freedom of the press.

Sometimes I act foolish to draw out the heat and sometimes I play coy to see what you are thinking. Either way, it’s my way to learn more about people and how they act, learn and play this game of life.

Neither tricking nor manipulating the outcome, my voice only speaks what needs to be said. Everything else is irrelevant and left unspoken.

Lastly, I am not a divided man. I am not torn between right or wrong or good or evil. I call it as I see or feel it and that’s my right to do so. How I feel about some things may not mean to much to others but when you look at the big picture, it may in fact impact others in one way or another. I have and will never stray from my personal responsibility. I mean what I say and I say what I mean. I retract when I am wrong and I embrace it when it’s the truth.

Walking the line is not for me. I can’t tell you how I feel but this phrase means nothing to me except that I am completely happy and satisfied with myself and know that no matter what you think of me, I don’t see two faces in the mirror when I awake as I address the morals in our society and workplace each day.

If there is one thing I would or might regret is that I can’t write too much about the good times. It seems that the bad days dwell over the good things like a dark cloud in the sky covering what needs to be seen.

I don’t throw rocks or stones at people but criticize their strategies, management principles and mostly perceived or inferred erroneous ways to do things. This unfortunately focuses on the bad times much more than those that are good like we want them to be.