Page 12
March 13, 2019
O PINION
Opinion articles do not necessarily represent the views of the Portland Observer. We
welcome reader essays, photos and story ideas. Submit to news@portlandobserver.com.
Stop Putting Juveniles in Solitary Confinement
A reality for
thousands of
adolescents
e Mily r eStivo
A 16-year-old
paces back and
forth. He’s been
locked in a small
room -- complete-
ly alone -- for 23
hours a day for sev-
eral weeks.
This isn’t the opening scene of
a Hollywood thriller. It’s the daily
reality for thousands of American
adolescents who are subjected to
solitary confinement after being
charged with crimes, convicted
and sentenced as adults.
Solitary confinement is dan-
gerous for these youth -- and for
society at large. It causes severe
psychological harm and impedes
reintegration into society. It’s time
by
to put convicted teenagers in cor-
rectional facilities with people
their own age -- and prohibit sol-
itary confinement for those under
the age of 18.
Proponents of solitary confine-
ment claim the practice is
necessary for safety. Isolat-
ing criminals prevents them
from causing trouble in the
prison and protects them
from other violent prison-
ers.
However,
research
shows solitary confinement
does more harm than good. It’s
linked to mental health problems
like anxiety, depression, and psy-
chosis. In some cases, prisoners
commit suicide.
These effects are pronounced in
juveniles because solitary confine-
ment impedes their development
during a critical period of brain
growth. People’s brains don’t ful-
ly develop until their early 20s.
Solitary confinement exacerbates
existing traumas, like the abuse
and neglect that many of these
kids have suffered in the past.
A report from the American
Civil Liberties Union and Human
Rights Watch offers an in-depth
look at the mental damage of ad-
olescents who spent long periods
of time alone in prison. They fre-
quently expressed thoughts of sui-
cide and self-harm, and relayed
stories of hallucination, anxiety,
extreme anger, and traumatic
memories.
Consider the account of one
young woman in Michigan. She
noted that solitary confinement
was like “being banished . . . like
you have the plague or that you
are the worst thing on earth. Like
you are set apart [from] every-
thing else.”
Another girl from Florida said,
“The only thing left to do is go
crazy . . . I catch myself [talking
to the walls] every now and again
. . . sometimes I feel like, why am
I even living?”
Solitary confinement doesn’t
just put these teenagers at risk
-- it endangers society. Prisoners
who spend time in solitary con-
finement are more likely to com-
mit crimes again in the future.
Ninety-two percent of prisoners
who were released from solitary
straight into society reoffended
within three years, compared with
66 percent of prisoners released
from the general population, ac-
cording to a government-com-
missioned analysis of 2001 data
from Connecticut.
For these reasons, all feder-
al prisons already ban solitary
confinement for juveniles. Most
states don’t allow the practice in
juvenile facilities. However, each
year 200,000 children are tried as
adults around the country. Many
are sentenced to time in regular,
adult prisons -- and face solitary
confinement.
A colleague and I recently
completed research on this sub-
ject using data from the New Jer-
sey Parent Caucus. Among juve-
niles sent to adult prisons in New
Jersey, 76 percent spent some
time in solitary confinement. Of
that group, a staggering 31 per-
cent spent more than 90 days in
isolation. Another 16.5 percent
were isolated between 30 to 90
days.
Solitary confinement causes
mental health problems and does
nothing to rehabilitate young of-
fenders. We need to ensure chil-
dren tried and convicted as adults
are placed in juvenile facilities.
Once there, they should be giv-
en opportunities to socialize with
other kids and receive the support
services they need to one day be-
come productive, law-abiding
adults.
Emily Restivo is an associate
professor of behavioral sciences
at New York Institute of Technol-
ogy.
Oregon Should Push Back on Income Inequality
Ultra rich have
never been so rich
d aniel h auSer
J uan C arloS o rdóñez
Oregon’s ultra-rich — the highest-earn-
ing one out of every 1,000 Oregonians
— have never been so rich compared to
the rest of Oregonians, according to new
analysis by the Oregon Center for Public
Policy.
Such extreme income inequality under-
mines the well-being and opportunities of
most Oregonians, while weakening the
economy. Oregon lawmakers should be
doing everything in their power to push
back against growing inequality.
Analyzing recently released data from
the Oregon Department of Revenue from
the 2016 tax year, the income of the aver-
age member of Oregon’s richest one-tenth
of 1 percent was $4.5 million. That was
by
an all-time high even after adjusting for
inflation.
But it was not just the total dollars
earned by the richest Oregonians that set
a new record; it was also in how far the
the top 1 percent — the richest 1 out of
every 100 Oregonians with income of at
least $401,000 — also increased in 2016,
though it still stood below the all-time
high reached before the Great Recession.
and
While observing that income inequality
has been building over the years, the
analysis noted a sharp rebound in
inequality since the end of the Great
Recession.
top-one tenth of 1 percent has pulled away
from middle-income Oregonians. In 1980,
the average income of the highest-earning
1 in 1,000 taxpayers was 26 times that of
the Oregonian in the middle of the income
ladder. By 2016, it was 127 times larger.
The income of the average member of
Still, the top 1 percent together earned
more income than the bottom half of all
Oregonians combined.
While observing that income inequal-
ity has been building over the years, the
analysis noted a sharp rebound in in-
equality since the end of the Great Re-
cession. From 2009 to 2016, the average
income of the top one-tenth of 1 percent
in Oregon increased by about $1.7 mil-
lion, and the average member of the top
1 percent as a whole saw their income
increase by about $167,000. Meanwhile,
the typical Oregonian saw an increase of
just $1,600.
With the Oregon legislative session in
full swing, lawmakers should confront the
problem of income inequality.
We need to make big investments in ed-
ucation, health care, and affordable hous-
ing to ensure every Oregonian can share
in Oregon’s growing economy. And to pay
for these investments, Oregon needs to
ask more from those reaping the greatest
profits from our economy, the rich and the
corporations.
Daniel Hauser is a policy analyst and
Juan Carlos Ordóñez is the communica-
tions director for the Oregon Center for
Public Policy.