Introduction
The issue of prisoner sexual assault persists as the number of people locked up in the United States reaches unprecedented highs. No inmate is entirely safe from assault, but some factors make certain prisoners more likely to be targeted (Kowalski et al., 2020). Most of those who work in corrections would never engage in such conduct, but a tiny but significant group has caused significant injury to prisoners. Because of the hostile and isolating nature of the prison setting, the lines between personnel and prisoners may often get blurred (Levenson & Willis, 2019). The paper argues that sexual misconduct is an ethical issue facing U.S. correctional facilities, and even with strategic surveillance cameras and increased supervision, the problem remains rampant.
Identification
Sexual victimization has been an issue of great concern over the years. Thousands of adult male convicts in U.S. correctional facilities were sexually victimized between 2016 and 2018, with many assaults occurring between inmates and corrections officers (Buehler, 2023). There are a tiny handful of male correctional employees who pose a significant threat of sexual harassment to women in confinement through the use of fear, revenge, and repeated victimization (Abdollah, 2022).
A Senate probe that included Democrats and Republicans uncovered pervasive maltreatment of female inmates by male guards and volunteers. Two-thirds of the government facilities that detained women during the past decade had evidence of sexual assault, according to the research (Johnson, 2022). These are staggering statistics by any standards, showing the level the problem has reached.
The cases identified mainly link the employees in these facilities. Over 80% of the documented sexual rapes and sexual assaults of offenders in 2016–18 were full-time employees, while 17% included contractors (Buehler, 2023). Most staff-on-inmate events were committed by correctional officers or supervisors, constituting 64% (Buehler, 2023). In contrast, those committed by facility support or maintenance personnel included 13% and 10% of the reported cases committed by medical or healthcare workers and were less common (Buehler, 2023).
One thousand five hundred ninety-eight employees were responsible for sexual misconduct, while another 716 were responsible for sexual harassment (Buehler, 2023). Sixty-seven percent of employees who committed sexual misbehavior were women, while only 33 percent were men (Abdollah, 2022). Staff members who harass others sexually were more likely to be men (69% versus 31%) than women (31% versus 69%) (Abdollah, 2022). Although almost all (99%) cases of sexual assault by staff members did not result in any physical harm to the inmate, 10% of cases involving sexual harassment and 26% of cases involving sexual misbehavior resulted in the victim being taken to the hospital for evaluation (Abdollah, 2022). This represents just how far and normalized the issue has become.
Evaluation
Sexual violence in prisons is deeply rooted in the social hierarchy and rituals of the gangs that exercise total authority within the prison’s confines. Sexual assault is commonly used to categorize new inmates into rings, and forced sexual connections are an integral aspect of gang hierarchy (Kowalski et al., 2020). Although it’s commonly assumed that the widespread sexual assault in these prisons is motivated by sexual enjoyment, research suggests it’s actually about power and control. Since convicts have few opportunities to influence one another within the confines of these facilities, many resort to utilizing sex as a means of exerting power over their fellow inmates (Brömdal et al., 2019). Victims of prison violence are sometimes misidentified as female by both their other convicts and the staff, even though they were initially male in the case of the LGBTQ scenarios.
Most victims of sexual assault in prisons do not come forward. This is because they fear retaliation from other inmates, do not believe authorities will believe them, or think that if the truth were to come out, they would be subjected to more risks, if not outright attacks, themselves (Kowalski et al., 2020). When an inmate is sexually mistreated, they rarely have many choices for reporting it to the prison administration.
Sometimes, it’s disturbing to learn that prison staff aid in or even commit sexual abuse against convicts, and then they laugh at the victims’ pleas for help and give the perpetrators a pass (Ahlin et al., 2019). Unfortunately, many prisons and jails don’t have systems to deal with inmates who commit such acts. Instead, they prefer to bury them in layers of bureaucracy that are nearly impossible for inmates to navigate without becoming so frustrated that they give up and keep their complaints to themselves.
Several inmates have reported engaging in sexual activity while incarcerated because they had access to items and services they otherwise would not have had. Involvement in homosexual activity among inmates was attributed to playing games, economic manipulation, isolation, and a need for intimacy (Ahlin et al., 2019). While “social capital” is often used for family dynamics, its relevance may be translated to convict conduct, particularly about the motivational power of friendship. Neither the convicts nor the jail system can be trusted.
Yet social capital and trust are essential for convicts to develop ties with other offenders (Stringer et al., 2020). To recap, when we account for sex differences, the function of connections like females and pseudo-families may shift. Even if relationships between convicts are based exclusively on acquiring access to resources that might not otherwise be gained, inmates still depend on social capital.
Discussion
Strategic surveillance cameras in the facilities are used to monitor the activities of the inmates and staff members. The constant installation of surveillance cameras is mitigating blind spots in apartments, focusing on regions with a high propensity for violence, suicide attempts, and sexual harassment (Day et al., 2022; Lawrence et al., 2022). In addition to gathering evidence for regular audits, the cameras may keep tabs on how employees behave. Every event is evaluated from the previous month’s tape, and a random month’s footage is checked monthly for extra safety.
Improving physical supervision is also another measure. Inmates could commit acts of violence and other misconduct because prison personnel were not always there to prevent them. The facility’s layout has hampered officers’ ability to engage with detainees, and there is no way to guarantee that they made their rounds at the required intervals (Stringer et al., 2020). In response, the prison administration strategically put sensor buttons so police could log their rounds using handheld devices. Sergeants check each shift’s data to ensure accountability. The idea is that convicts would think twice before attacking their fellow inmates if they know they are more likely to be caught by cops making rounds, thanks to the monitoring device.
Analysis
However, the strategies barely work based on the available information. According to a 2019 report by the House Subcommittee on National Security, authorities at all levels of the federal prison system consistently concealed or overlooked widespread misbehavior, including sexual harassment and misconduct (Dickerson & Schukar, 2018). The research also concluded that due to the relaxed rules, lower-ranking staffers were often subjected to sexual assault and harassment from both inmates and higher-ups. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in 2021 that sexual assault complaints had increased by 14% between 2015 and 2018 (Abdollah, 2022). Nevertheless, the study only included “substantiated” instances, incidents for which sufficient evidence could be gathered via an investigation.
Even though there is surveillance and supervision in prison, not all areas are covered. The lack of complete or adequate video monitoring in prisons and jails makes it easier for inmates to victimize other inmates. Half of all staff-on-inmate sexual and inmate-on-inmate assaults occurred in locations without video monitoring (Stringer et al., 2020).
In some cases, not many convicts are content to look. Furthermore, they expose themselves, grope other people, and make threats (Ratkalkar & Atkin-Plunk, 2020). What’s worse is that male coworkers may promote such conduct, which undermines the leadership of female officers and puts their safety at risk, as shown by the testimony, court records, and interviews with female prison personnel (Stern, 2019). In addition, other male workers participate in the harassment.
Conclusion
Despite installing strategic surveillance cameras and more excellent monitoring, the article maintains that sexual misbehavior is still a widespread problem in American prisons. Sexual violence in prisons is closely tied to the power structures and rituals of gangs that dominate life behind bars. Many victims remain silent, fearing retaliation from fellow inmates, doubting that authorities will take their claims seriously, or believing that disclosure would only expose them to greater danger and possible attacks. Some prisoners admit to engaging in sexual acts during incarceration in exchange for goods or privileges they would not otherwise receive. Attempts to curb the problem through surveillance cameras and enhanced supervision have proven largely ineffective.
References
Abdollah, T. (2022). Famed federal women’s prison under investigation as 5th worker charged with sexual abuse of inmates. USA Today. Web.
Ahlin, E. M., & Hummer, D. (2019). Sexual victimization of juveniles incarcerated in jails and prisons: An exploratory study of prevalence and risk factors. Victims & Offenders, 14(7), 793-810. Web.
Brömdal, A., Mullens, A. B., Phillips, T. M., & Gow, J. (2019). Experiences of transgender prisoners and their knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding sexual behaviors and HIV/STIs: A systematic review. International Journal of Transgenderism, 20(1), 4-20. Web.
Buehler, E. (2023). Substantiated incidents of sexual victimization reported by Adult Correctional Authorities, 2016–2018. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Web.
Day, A., Newton, D., Cooke, D., & Tamatea, A. (2022). Interventions to prevent prison violence: A scoping review of the available research evidence. The Prison Journal, 102(6), 745-769. Web.
Dickerson, C., & Schukar, A. (2018). Hazing, humiliation, terror: Working while female in federal prison. The New York Times. Web.
Johnson, C. (2022). Male prison employees assault women in at least two-thirds of U.S. prisons. NPR. Web.
Kowalski, M. A., Mei, X., Turner, J. R., Stohr, M. K., & Hemmens, C. (2020). An analysis of statutes criminalizing correctional officer sexual misconduct with inmates. The Prison Journal, 100(1), 126-148. Web.
Lawrence, D. S., Peterson, B. E., Robin, L., & Shukla, R. (2022). The impact of correctional CCTV cameras on infractions and investigations: A synthetic control approach to evaluating surveillance system upgrades in a Minnesota prison. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 33(8), 843-869. Web.
Levenson, J. S., & Willis, G. M. (2019). Implementing trauma-informed care in correctional treatment and supervision. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 28(4), 481-501. Web.
Ratkalkar, M., & Atkin-Plunk, C. A. (2020). Can I ask for help? The relationship among incarcerated males’ sexual orientation, sexual abuse history, and perceptions of rape in prison. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(19-20), 4117-4140. Web.
Stern, E. M. (2019). Accessing accountability: Exploring criminal prosecution of male guards for sexually assaulting female inmates in U.S. prisons. The University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 167(3), 733-773. Web.
Stringer, K. L., Marotta, P., Goddard-Eckrich, D., Akuffo, J., Richer, A. M., El-Bassel, N., & Gilbert, L. (2020). Mental health consequences of sexual misconduct by law enforcement and criminal justice personnel among black drug-involved women in community corrections. Journal of Urban Health, 97, 148-157. Web.