COVID-19-The Case for Rethinking Health and Human Rights in Prisons

"Feeling Trapped in Prison" Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perceptions and Practices among Healthcare Workers and Prison Staff from a Brazilian Maximum Security Unit

The COVID-19 pandemic had several repercussions on prison staff, but the currently available evidence has mainly ignored these effects. This qualitative study aimed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on the prison system through the narratives of health and security professionals, using the methodological framework of the constructivist grounded theory proposed by Charmaz. The sample included 10 healthcare workers and 10 security professionals. Data collection took place between October and November 2022 through individual in-depth interviews. The data were analyzed using the MaxQDA software. Three categories of interrelated data emerged: (1) "Confrontation and disruption" caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in the prison system; (2) "Between disinfodemic and solicitude" referring to the tension between information management and the practice of care centered on the needs of inmates; and, finally, (3) "Reorganization and mitigation strategies during the fight against COVID-19". Continuous education and the development of specific skills are essential to enable professionals to face the challenges and complex demands that arise in prison contexts. The daily routines professionals had previously taken for granted were disrupted by COVID-19. Thus, investing in adequate training and emotional support programs is crucial to promote the resilience and well-being of these professionals, ensuring an efficient and quality response to critical events.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychosocial rehabilitation of forensic psychiatric patients in Austria

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to increased psychological distress and far-reaching restrictions of freedom. In March 2020, Austrian penal authorities enacted various safety and protection measures to mitigate the propagation of COVID-19. While infection rates in penal institutions were low, restrictive conditions of detention limited the forensic care of offenders. This retrospective longitudinal observational study aimed to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the psychosocial rehabilitation in forensic psychiatry. Administrative and clinical data obtained from 97 males treated at an inpatient forensic mental health institution were compared before (January 2019 - mid-March 2020) and after (mid-March 2020 - May 2021) the enactment of pandemic-related restrictive measures. The study outcomes related to rehabilitative activities, social contacts, psychopathological stability, and compliance with institutional regulations. During the pandemic, a decrease in individual one-day temporary releases (64 vs. 3, p < .001) and one-day group excursions (103 vs. 10, p < .001) was observed. Likewise, visits by relatives (1440 vs. 429, p < .001) and legal guardians (286 vs. 130, p = .009) decreased. Regarding compliance with institutional regulations, illegal activities decreased from 27 to 8 after enactment of restrictive measures (p = .024). In contrast, long-term temporary releases (122 vs. 188 weeks, p = .131) and admissions to the acute ward (141 vs. 143, p = .712) remained unchanged. Overall, this study demonstrates the substantial impact of COVID-19 on the psychosocial care of forensic psychiatric patients and implies the necessity for guidelines to uphold an appropriate standard of forensic rehabilitation during future pandemics.

Rethinking standards on prison cell size in a (post)pandemic world: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To describe the current international, regional and national standards on prison cell spatial density and the evidence for the association between COVID-19 transmission and prison crowding measures to provide recommendations on prison cell spatial density standards for a (post) pandemic world.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, ProQuest, Informit, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Google were searched up to November 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Guidelines were included provided they described standards of prison accommodation with respect to prison cells. Studies were included provided they examined an association between COVID-19 cases and a crowding measure.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted by one reviewer and cross-checked by another. Quantitative and qualitative data on prison cell standards and characteristics of studies examining an association between COVID-19 and prison crowding were collected.Findings were synthesised qualitatively.

RESULTS

Seventeen reports and six studies met eligibility criteria. International and regional standards on cell spatial density were mostly qualitative, with two quantifiable international standards located (3.4 m² and 3.5 m² per person for multiple occupancy cells), and two quantifiable regional standards located (4 m² per person (Europe) and 5.75 m² or 4 m² per person (Australia and New Zealand)). Country-based standards varied substantially, ranging from 1.25 m² per person (Pakistan) to 10 m² per person (Netherlands). Consideration of airborne transmission of disease in prisons were mostly overlooked or absent to rationalise standards. There was consistent evidence that prison crowding measures were associated with COVID-19 transmission/cases.

CONCLUSION

Considering the physics of respiratory emissions, we recommend prison cell spatial density standards be updated to reflect graded levels of risk that consider other factors that combine to inform airborne transmission risk. Decarceration strategies should be considered and become vital if standards are not met.

Sex differences in pre-incarceration mental illness, substance use, injury and sexually transmitted infections and health service utilization: a longitudinal linkage study of people serving federal sentences in Ontario

BACKGROUND

People who experience incarceration have poorer health than the general population. Yet, we know little about the health and health service utilization of people during the critical period prior to their incarceration, relative to during incarceration and post-release. In this study, we conducted a longitudinal cohort study of 39,498 adults in Ontario, Canada between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2011 using linked administrative health and correctional data to describe mental illness, substance use, injury, sexually transmitted infections and health service utilization of men and women in federal prisons in the 3 years prior to their incarceration, compared to a matched group.

RESULTS

We found that, in the 3-year period prior to their incarceration, men (n = 6,134) and women (n = 449) experiencing their first federal sentence had poorer health across all indicators examined (e.g., psychosis, drug/alcohol use, and self-harm) and higher outpatient psychiatric and emergency department visits, compared with the matched group. Women in the pre-incarceration group exhibited a higher prevalence of self-harm and substance use, relative to women in the matched comparison group and higher relative prevalence to that of men in the pre-incarceration group, compared to their matched counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities in health and health service utilization are gendered and exist prior to incarceration. The gendered nature of these findings, specifically the significantly higher prevalence of poor health among women across several indicators, necessitates a focus on the social and systemic factors that contribute to these disparities. Gender-responsive and trauma-informed primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention strategies, alongside transformative approaches to justice should be considered in addressing the health needs of men and women who experience incarceration.

COVID-19 Preventive Measures in Northern California Jails: Perceived Deficiencies, Barriers, and Unintended Harms

Background

Carceral facilities are high-risk settings for COVID-19 transmission. Little is known about the hidden burden of infection or practical barriers to infection control in these settings, especially in jails. There is also limited research on the mental health impacts of the pandemic among people living and working in carceral facilities.

Methods

Between July 8, 2020 and April 30, 2021, we performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antibody testing and administered a questionnaire among residents and staff of four Northern California jails. We utilized multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for demographic and carceral characteristics, to analyze factors associated with prior infection, including perceived likelihood of prior infection and access to new masks. We additionally assessed the implementation of, perceptions toward, and impacts of COVID-19 policies in practice. We engaged stakeholder representatives, including incarcerated individuals, to guide study design, procedures, and results interpretation.

Results

We enrolled 788 jail residents and 380 jail staff. Nearly half of residents and two-thirds of staff who were antibody-positive had not previously tested positive for COVID-19. Among residents without a prior COVID-19 diagnosis, antibody positivity was significantly associated with perceived likelihood of prior infection (adjusted OR = 8.9; 95% CI, 3.6–22.0). Residents who had flu-like illness in jail cited inadequate responses to reported illness and deterrents to symptom reporting, including fears of medical isolation and perceptions of medical neglect. Residents also disclosed deficient access to face masks, which was associated with antibody positivity (adjusted OR = 13.8, 95% CI, 1.8–107.0). Worsened mental health was pervasive among residents, attributed not only to fear of COVID-19 and unsanitary jail conditions but also to intensified isolation and deprivation due to pandemic restrictions on in-person visitation, programs, and recreation time.

Conclusion

Carceral settings present significant challenges to maintaining infection control and human rights. Custody officials should work diligently to transform the conditions of medical isolation, which could mitigate deterrents to symptom reporting. Furthermore, they should minimize use of restrictive measures like lockdowns and suspension of visitation that exacerbate the mental health harms of incarceration. Instead, custody officials should ensure comprehensive implementation of other preventive strategies like masking, testing, and vaccination, in conjunction with multisector efforts to advance decarceration.

The Risk of COVID-19 Infection in Prisons and Prevention Strategies: A Systematic Review and a New Strategic Protocol of Prevention

Health risks within prisons are well known and have worsened with the 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), becoming a public health emergency. To date, there are more than 10 million inmates in the world; in most cases, conditions are bad and health care is scarce. A SARS-CoV-2 outbreak inside a prison is extremely rapid. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze all possible prevention techniques to reduce the risk of COVID-19 related infection within prisons. A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar were used as search engines from 1 January 2020 to 1 November 2021 to evaluate the prevention of COVID-19 in prisoners. A total of 1757 articles were collected. Of them, 486 duplicates were removed. A total of 1250 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria. In conclusion, 21 articles were included in the present systematic review. From this analysis, it emerged that the most common COVID-19 prevention methods were the screening of the entire population (prisoners and workers) inside the prison through swab analysis and the reduction in overcrowding in prisons. Few studies concerned the prevention of COVID-19 infection through vaccination and the implementation of quarantine. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review that evaluates the prevention of COVID-19 within jails and the real effectiveness of all possible methods used and published in the literature. Finally, a very useful strategic protocol is provided to reduce the incidence of infection and to control and manage COVID-19 in prisons.