Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Souryal, S. S. (2009). Deterring corruption by prison personnel: A principle-based perspective. The Prison Journal, 89(1), 21-45.

This article discusses corruption in U.S. prison institutions and proposes effective methods to deter its continuance. Unlike other research that has advocated increasing pain and brutality, this article presents a principle-based approach, not weak, spineless, or soft but indeed earnest, steadfast, and well disciplined. It balances the continuum between reinforcing rational and reasonable rules to control the behavior of inmates and mature and professional performance by enlightened correctional officers. This article is based on a solid assumption: The more civil the correctional institution is, the more civil, and the less violent, its residents will be. It questions the traditional belief that most prison inmates are subhumans who can be controlled only by violence, understand only the crunch of force, and detest the universal norms of fairness, dignity, and humanity. This article concludes by presenting a few practical propositions to better assist prison administrators in performing their duties more effectively and civilly.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. What is Professor Souryal’s proposal for creating a “civil” prison environment which he theorizes will lead to lower rates of corruption by correctional personnel?
2. What are some of the corruption “indicators” of which the prison management group should be aware?
3. What sorts of anti-corruption programs does the author suggest?

***

Bonner, R. & Vandecreek, L. D. (2006). Ethical decision making for correctional mental health providers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33(4), 542-564.

Clinicians who practice correctional mental health care face a number of unique ethical challenges as the result of the correctional environment. Each mental health care profession has a code of ethics to help guide clinicians in practice, but correctional mental health clinicians have sometimes concluded that the ethics codes of their associations provide insufficient guidance for their unique challenges. The American Correctional Health Services Association and the American Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology have developed codes of ethics, which provide mental health care providers a well-balanced, clinician-derived guide for ethical clinical practice in corrections. These specialized codes complement existing general ethical principles in decision making for correctional mental health providers. The major principles of welfare of the client, informed consent, competence, dual relationships, confidentiality, and social responsibility are reviewed, and case examples are provided to illustrate the ethical decision-making process.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. Discuss the two competing models that correctional mental health providers can embrace.
2. Of the many ethical codes, which should be used?  Explain your answer.
3. What ethical issues do correctional mental health providers face?

***

Stohr, M. K., Hemmens, C., Marsh, R. L., Barrier, G., & Palhegyi, D. (2000). Can’t scale this? The ethical parameters of correctional work. The Prison Journal, 80(1), 56-79.

As most correctional institutions have retained their paramilitary structure, the power differentials and communication lines continue to favor concentration in the top echelons of the organizations. Yet, power and communication are regulated and delimited informally by the actions of middle-level managers and lower level workers, and by subcultural influences within the organization. Because of these attributes, correctional work is characterized by discretionary decision making, particularly when the matter is minor, hidden from view, and sanctioned by the subculture. Acting in an ethical manner (i.e., doing the right thing) in such a closed, structured, but informally functional environment requires a recognition and appreciation of the complexity of the milieu along with a willingness to forge ahead. This article explores the ethical parameters of corrections work in a typical medium-security prison. In an effort to determine what the correctional staff regarded as ethical behavior, the authors administered a questionnaire to them using a newly developed ethics instrument.

The authors endeavor to identify the major attributes of ethical work in prison and to establish the heuristic value of the instrument for future research.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. What were the main issues faced by the researchers in the findings of their instrument analysis?
2. How can successful future research in this area impact ethics in corrections?

***