Solitary By Any Other Name: Silence to Segregation in American Prisons

This thesis examined the United States’ ability to circumvent international and constitutional law in regards to solitary confinement in American prisons. Drawing on scholarship examining inmates’ rights and inmates’ resistance movements, international human rights doctrine, United States constituti...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: van Aken, Chelsea (Author)
Format: Electronic Book
Language:English
Published: 2016
In:Year: 2016
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866131524
003 DE-627
005 20250115054903.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866131524 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866131524 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a van Aken, Chelsea  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Solitary By Any Other Name: Silence to Segregation in American Prisons 
264 1 |c 2016 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This thesis examined the United States’ ability to circumvent international and constitutional law in regards to solitary confinement in American prisons. Drawing on scholarship examining inmates’ rights and inmates’ resistance movements, international human rights doctrine, United States constitutional law, activist led movements, and inmate testimony, the thesis demonstrates that the United States is able to simultaneously claim that it is meeting its human rights violations while resisting reforms to both state and federal current policy of warehousing inmates in solitary confinement for decades at a time through two strategies. First, the United States utilizes framing strategies to deny the use of solitary confinement by framing it as a necessary housing policy to guarantee safety and security within the prison. Second, the United States uses continually changing rhetoric to label solitary confinement as segregation. These two strategies allow the United States to avoid both constitutional challenges to the use of solitary confinement and meeting its obligations under international human rights agreements 
650 4 |a thesis 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/70427125.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391812282 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866131524 
LOK |0 005 20231018043647 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE9456444 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw