Inmates and Guards Hassine (Year)

¶ … Inmates and Guards

Hassine (year) describes the changing relationships between prison inmates and guards. Not so long ago, there was a tenuous balance of power between prisoners and guards. Prisoners, desiring special treatment from their guards, maintained a level of civility. Guards, desiring to keep the peace, often looked past minor rule infractions. For the most part, these complimentary needs kept both sides of the relationship in check. However, with the prison overcrowding of the 1980s, this mutually beneficial relationship was destroyed.

Prison guards were allowed to work as much overtime as they desired, leading to tired, irritable guards who were often unfamiliar with the prisoners they were watching during their extended duties.

Without the benefit of an established relationship, trust failed and overworked guards became more strict, further exacerbating the condition. The only way to maintain control was to now rely on the information provided by jail house snitches. Yet, this information was not always reliable, as snitches, looking to serve their own selfish purposes, often altered their reportings or even instigated crimes in order to garner favor with the guards. Couple this with the increasingly violent and self-absorbed inmates still flooding the prisons, and there is little left of the relationships that once existed and kept the peace between guards and inmates.

As Poole and Regoli (1981) note, prison guards serve as social control agents. Their primary duties include custody, discipline, and security, while maintaining a constant vigil, to ensure they are alert and ready for any potential trouble. Yet, guards are perceived as repressors or oppressors by inmates who have open contempt and defiance for authority. The relationship between guard and inmate can be described as one of "structured conflict." "This conflict situation puts emphasis on the anticipation and prevention of discipline problems" (Poole & Regolli 1981).

Because of the threat of danger, there is a naturally occurring defensive posture towards inmates, by guards. Inmates are viewed with a mixture of fear, suspicion and hostility. Because of this tension, there is a psychological segmentation of the guards from the inmate society. This also promotes a protective isolation within their organizational role, as theorized by Poole and Regoli.

This atmosphere of tension and fear has been further exacerbated by institutional policy. Policy changes regarding the handling and control of inmates as well as humanitarian reforms, such as those that limit the use of solitary confinement and establish formal grievance mechanisms, have undermined the coercive control that prison guards have been able to traditionally use. Instead, these changes have allowed inmates to develop considerable countervailing power (Poole & Regoli 1981).

The result has been an increasing reliance on snitches in order to help maintain prison peace and security.

Yet, to become a snitch is not an easy decision for inmates. A prisoner is often trapped between two difficult choices. According to Kupers (1997), snitching is a capital offense, in the prison code.

Snitching is a universally despised activity among offenders, partly because it can be used against them in their efforts to thwart law enforcement and partly because the act is a violation of an urban code that dictates noncompliance with and avoidance of law enforcement as matters of street honor" (Topalli 2005).

However, if a prisoner refuses to snitch once an offense has been found by a prison guard, guards can sentence the refusing inmate to a long stint in solitary confinement, or even take away his prison job, despite reforms. This pressure by guards can lead inmates to endangering themselves, by becoming a snitch.

Even transferring to protective custody does not assure protection against retaliation for snitching (Kupers 1997).

Once a snitch has agreed to give information, even those that seem to be giving it willingly, this information is often unreliable. As noted earlier, it is not uncommon for a snitch to exaggerate information in order to garner favor with guards, for their own selfish purposes. Some prisoners may even instigate criminal activity in order to have information to report. In some instances, the urban code that prevents many from snitching is often employed by snitches as well, in the form of denial of injury, which surmises that no code was broken if the snitch gives information that is either wrong or misleading (Topalli 2005).

Supermax prisons have been implemented as a means of creating a safer environment for both prisoners and guards, due to the decrease in relationships between the two factions and the increase in violent offenders.