By Douglas P. Wilson
Following the John Geoghan murder at the Souza-Baranowski super-maximum security
prison in Shirley, the Massachusetts Department of Corrections (DOC) pledged to
modernize its policies and management structure to meet the needs of the 21st
century. However, all the public comments made by DOC officials and those
currently investigating some of the DOC’s most dubious actions have failed to
address a segment of the inmate population that has suffered extraordinary
indignities on a daily basis as a result of the archaic policies and overly
authoritarian management of the department. These silently suffering inmates
are afflicted with learning disabilities.
The DOC has shown complete indifference to the special needs of inmates with
learning disabilities. The DOC’s reaction may be predicated on the recent penal
philosophy of punishment instead of rehabilitation, longer prison sentences, and
an expectation of more severe treatment while incarcerated. This correctional
ideology is often referred to as the “warehousing method,” since its
implementation has caused prison overcrowding and less inmate supervision post
release.
The treatment of inmates with learning disabilities has evaded public attention
for a number of reasons. First and foremost, the inmates with learning
disabilities have been kept silent by existing DOC policies that prevent them
from receiving the technical accommodations that would enable them to
communicate their unique difficulties to the public, government agencies, the
courts, and even DOC administrators. Another problem is that government
agencies, charged with the duty of protecting the disabled, turn a blind eye to
claims made by inmates.
Without accommodations, inmates with learning disabilities such as dyslexia are
less likely to participate in prison educational programs or remain in contact
with family and friends. Studies suggest that even the most basic educational
opportunities and community support while incarcerated can lower prisoner
recidivism rates[i].
Inmates who lack accommodations often depend on other inmates to provide
services like letter-writing for them. This situation humiliates and frustrates
disabled inmates. Dependency on other inmates also puts disabled inmates at a
greater risk of being victims of violence, extortion, or being forced to perform
favors in return.
In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed by Congress.
This law was designed to move society toward removing the barriers and
inequities faced by individuals with disabilities. Disabled inmates who were
denied equal treatment or access to activities and programs due to their
disabilities filed civil litigation to force correctional institutions to make
reasonable accommodations for their disabilities. A number of landmark cases by
the US Supreme Court, such as Pennsylvania Dept. of Coorections v. Yeskey,
118 S.Ct. 1952 (1998), held that disabled inmates are protected from
discriminatory actions under the provisions provided pursuant to the ADA. This
was a leap forward for corrections. However, the civil actions brought before
the court concerned only physical disabilities. Therefore, correctional
institutions made little to no progress toward bringing about changes to benefit
inmates with learning disabilities.
The Massachusetts DOC has been particularly aggressive in warding off
modernization, denying learning disabled inmates access to accommodations while
refusing to provide the medical examinations required to identify learning
disabilities. A recent civil action illustrating the above, Wilson v.
Matesanz, Norfolk Superior Court, CA No. 02-00007, prompted one Superior
Court Justice to issue this scalding comment as part of a larger ruling: “If we
are to have any faith in the rehabilitative powers of incarceration, our penal
institutions should encourage, or at least not discourage, educational efforts
by inmates.” (Ed. note. The author is the plaintiff in the fore mentioned civil
action, the defendant the Superintendent of Norfolk MCI.)
A recent U.S. Department of Justice survey found that 10% of inmates report
having a learning disability[ii],
although this figure is likely to be misleading, since many inmates are unaware
of their medical conditions given their lower economic state prior to
incarceration. Frank Wood, a professor of neurology at Wake Forest University
and expert in the field of learning disabilities, asserts that individuals with
dyslexia are overrepresented in prison populations[iii].
Studies proving that 50-75% of prisoners are functionally illiterate[iv]
seem to corroborate Dr Wood’s claim.
The time is ripe to bring public awareness to the silent victims of the DOC’s
outdated policies and discriminatory actions. Through public support and open
scrutiny of the DOC, the institution can be strengthened and guided toward
fulfilling its charter of public safety, while offering dignity and hope to
numerous inmates. Americans ought to demand a safe, humane, and productive
prison environment with the goal of aiding inmates who genuinely seek
self-education.

[i]
Piehl, M.A. (1.2002). From Cell to Street: A Plan to Supervise Inmates
after Release.
[ii]
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1997). Characteristics of Federal
Prisoners: United States, 1992-1997.
[iii]
Gormane, C. (7.28.2003). The New Science of Dyslexia. Time.
[iv]
Tewksbury, R. (12.1994). Literary Program for Jail Inmates: Reflection
and Recommendation for One
Program.
The Prison Journal.
15 Barbara Street |
Jamaica Plain, MA 02130 |
Tel: 617-390-5397 |
[email protected]
|
|