The Impact Of Pennsylvania System On The Current Penal System
Pennsylvania system is a penal method that advocates for solitary confinement of prisoners with the aim of contrition and reformation. The cells are sole confinements to prevent prisoners from engaging with other; each prisoner has his/her own room. The prisoners were not allowed to see any person other than occasional visitors and institution officers. The system was however modified to include some work for the prisoners for example shoemaking. Some of the critics however argued that the system was too expensive and had harmful effect on the prisoners’ minds. The system later was outdated by the Auburn system.
Pennsylvania system impacted the current penal system in various ways. It formed basis for correcting and helping criminals to reform in a friendly way without having to punish them brutally. Initially prisoners were imposed hard labor as a way of punishing them without helping them to reform. By containing them in sole cells prisoners were given time to think over, apologize and reform from their bad behavior. This is the system used today; prisoners are not exposed to hard labor so as to punish them rather they are given a chance to reform and they are also offered work programs to empower them with skills. The use of solitary confinement and the rules of its use have changed over time. Initially solitary confinement was used as a way of oppression but officers justified it to be a way of protecting prisoners from their fellows who would be violent. It was however said to cause metal disorders when used for too long on a person. Human rights movements however came up and called for the end of solitary confinement. Prisoner led movements involved the media and publicly condemned solitary confinement. Prisoners also engaged in hunger strikes against the cruel practice. Other parties also went to court to gain their support in bringing this practice down. Experts and bodies at the international level also condemned this practice and demanded for its abolishment as they said it was a human rights abuse. U.N. Special Rapporteur also came up arguing that prisoners who were in solitary confinements ended up being worse that they came. In 2012 the center for constitutional right joined two people in the prisoner human rights movement in challenging the practice of solitary confinement of prisoners in California. This case argued that this practice was inhuman and unconstitutional. In 2015, CCR declared that a settlement had been reached which was to bring solitary confinement to an end. The number of people who were to be put in solitary confinement was to be reduced and those subjected to it were to be taken good care of. Other reforms were to be made in the future including end of unspecified sentences, complete end of solitary confinement, review of major prisoners and change to focus on behavior transformation practices.
Finally the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in support of CCR claims which rules out that all prisoners were first to be given an opportunity to challenge their placement before being subjected to solitary confinements.
The legal impact of abuse is injustice. When one is abused it means that their rights are taken away and therefore an injustice has been done on them. Once an abuse occurs and is reported the abuser faces charges in a court of law where he can be found guilty or free. If the person is found guilty he/she is imprisoned where he is expected to reflect, realize his mistakes and reform to the best. If a prisoner does not reform then the main aim of being in prison is not achieved.
