CRJS 317                                                                                                                               DR. LOMBARDO

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS                                                                                 OFFICE: BAL 909

Summer 2005: TR 7:00-10:00 PM                                                                   PHONE: 683‑3800

E-mail: llombard@odu.edu                                                                                               Office Hrs: M: 4-6PM

Gornto 219                                                                                                                                             W: 4-6PM

                                                                                                                                GENERAL COURSE DESCRIPTION

HONOR CODE: ALL OF YOUR WORK IN THIS COURSE IS SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY HONOR CODE

Many social institutions are clouded in mythology, that is, our general understanding of them is based on imaginary or unverifiable information, or on what we would like to believe, rather than on reality. Some would like to believe that prisons coddle criminals when they argue for greater punishment. Others argue that prisons are chambers of horror and argue for their abolition or reform. These two extreme positions would appear to mask much of the day to day life behind the walls and do not take into account the social, political and historical contexts within which correctional institutions exist and change. In fact, correctional institutions, unlike most social institutions, are built in ways that not only keep prisoners in; they also keep the public out. Surrounded by high walls or barbed wire fences, policed by guards with weapons, correctional institutions present quite a fortress.

During the coming weeks I hope we can penetrate this fortress and began to develop an appreciation and knowledge of the complexity of correctional institutions as places where people live and work, and as social institutions that serve a variety of social and political purposes. Over time these institutions change in some ways, and remain the same in others. By the time you finish this course I hope you are able to understand and discuss the complexity of this topic in a more informed and insightful way than you were able to at the start.

One of the books required for this course is subtitled: 'A Humanistic Approach'. This is the approach I will try to present to you as we go through the materials. As described in that book, "For a humanist, the concern is with action based on understanding" (Toch, p.xiv). As we go through the course I hope you and I can develop some suggestions for action, based on the understanding of the correctional institution that we develop together.

REQUIRED TEXTS:

1.       Lorna Rhodes, TOTAL CONFINEMENT: MADNESS AND REASON IN THE MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISON. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2004. This book is one of the few excellent recent books on the correctional institutions. It integrates the experiences of prisoners, correctional officers and wonderful theoretical insights that help us understand how and why the prisons work the way they do.

2. Ted Conover, NEWJACK: GUARDING SING-SING. NY: Knopf Publishing Group. 2001. A journalist's account of his experiences as a working correctional officer in one of America's most famous prisons: Sing-Sing Prison in New York. [See Review -  http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/forum/f173fa00/c_newjack.html ]

3. Barbara Owen, IN THE MIX: STRUGGLE AND SURVIVAL IN A WOMEN"S PRISON. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1998.

READINGS ON BLACKBOARD: (This list will be updated in before class starts)

I.                    PRISON HISTORY:

A.    Lucien X. Lombardo, "The 'Pen' and the Pendulum", from John Klofas and Stan Stojkovic (Eds), CRIME AND JUSTICE IN THE YEAR 2010. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1995 (pp. 185-204).

B.    "The Invention of the Penitentiary", from David J. Rothman, THE DISCOVERY OF THE ASYLUM. Boston: Little Brown, 1971, pp. 79-108. A look at the "intellectual" beliefs and underpinnings of the beginning of the American penitentiary in post-colonial New England and Middle Atlantic America.

C.    Christopher Adamson, "Punishment After Slavery: Southern State Penal Systems, 1865-1890", SOCIAL PROBLEMS, 30/5 1983, pp.555-569. This article looks at the relationship between penal practices and political and social conditions in the South and the importance of race. Compare Adamson's discussion of "problem populations" with Irwin and Austin's discussion of contemporary prison populations. Demonstrates the diversity of penal practices in different parts of the country.

D.      Nicole Rafter, "The Realization of Partial Justice: A Case Study of the Social Control of Women", from N. Rafter, PARTIAL JUSTICE; WOMEN IN STATE PRISONS 1800-1935. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1985, pp.157-175. This article provides a look at how prisons were used for purposes related to stereotypical views of women's place in society and social class.

E.       "Prison and Execution Films", from Nicole Rafter, SHOTS IN THE MIRROR: CRIME AND FILMS IN SOCIETY. NY: Oxford University Press, 2000 (pp.117-140).

II.            LEGAL PERSPECTIVES ON CONDITIONS OF IMPRISONMENT

The following materials provide a historical and contemporary perspective on legal philosophy as it relates to conditions of confinement. Emphasis is given to the question of the Eighth Amendment's prescription against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment. The articles discuss whether and under what conditions the courts should intervene in determining conditions under which prisoners live.

A.  Susan Sturm, The Legacy and Future of Correctional Litigation,@ UNIVERSITY OF                                                  PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW. Vol. 143, (1993) 639-686.

This article assesses the role of court decisions in regulating acceptable and unacceptable minimum conditions in various aspects of prison life.

B.      Holt v. Sarver 309 F. Supp. 362 (E.D. Ark 1970).  Discusses conditions in Arkansas' prison in the 1960's and the standards by which the Federal courts measured and judged whether or not conditions of confinement meet the eighth amendment standard of Acruel and unusual punishment@. (See the film BRUBAKER that is based on this system).

C.      Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 687 (1978) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=437&invol=678

D.    Hudson v. McMillan 503 US --, 117 l Ed 2nd 156, 112 S.Ct.-- 

        A Supreme Court case that discusses the problem of physical punishment of prisoners.