Introduction
Commenting on the design of the House of Commons Chamber in 1943, Winston Churchill opined, “We shape our buildings and afterwards, our buildings shape us.”[1] A growing body of research from criminology, carceral architecture, and environmental psychology highlights the veracity of this statement in the context of prison planning and design. Indeed, the traditional aesthetic and aural hallmarks of custodial spaces – long corridors, hard surfaces, barred windows, clanging doors, and desolate holding cells – can exacerbate prisoners’ pre-existing traumas, particularly for incarcerated women,[2] who have often been the victims of much more serious offences (sexual violence or grievous bodily harm), than those for which they are convicted (non-violent drugs and property offences).[3] It follows that if effective gains are to be made in promoting women’s rehabilitation and desistance from crime, gender-specific and trauma-informed thinking should be implemented holistically into prison design and architecture.
The construction of a new “trauma-informed” facility for women prisoners in Limerick is therefore an ostensibly welcome development. The prison, which is due to become operational by the end of this year, has been designed around the “principle of rehabilitation and normalisation”[4] and is characterised by prison design expert Dr Yvonne Jewkes as “an architecture of hope.”[5] With the proposed facility adding an extra twenty-two spaces to the current prison estate, it will notably expand the official prison capacity for women to 196 spaces - an increase of almost 50 per cent since 2019.[6] Thus, this article will analyse the merits and limitations of trauma-informed prisons in light of recent international research, and will ultimately argue that a true rehabilitative penal philosophy does not begin with prison architecture and design, but with a penal policy that regards incarceration as the sanction of last resort.
Trauma and Women in Prison
Enthusiasm for integrating trauma-informed practice and care (TICP) into the provision of services for women offenders has grown exponentially over the past two decades. With strong evidence linking high rates of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) to the likelihood of incarceration and risk of recidivism, there is an impetus for criminal justice service providers to develop evidence-informed strategies for engaging with unrecovered trauma survivors.[7] Research conducted by Dermody et al into the incidence of ACEs amongst women engaged with homeless, probation and/or drug treatment services in Limerick found that they were 3.6 times more likely than the general population to have grown up in a household with domestic violence, and 2.5 times more likely to have experiences childhood sexual abuse.[8] Moreover, a significant proportion of incarcerated women present with the “dual diagnoses” of addiction and mental health issues, with women in the Dóchas Centre identifying addiction services as their most urgent need.[9] The provision of in-prison TICP must therefore address this complex intersection of interpersonal violence, substance abuse, and criminal offending behaviour.
Nonetheless, the justice system is a challenging setting for trauma-informed care, not least due to the correctional nature of the system itself. Recent research carried by Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology into two “wholly trauma-informed” women’s prisons in England revealed a significant disparity between prison staff’s perceived implementation of TICP and the day-to-day experience of prisoners, with the presence of drugs, bullying, and fear of victimisation posing obstacles to embedding TICP into the prison environment.[10] In this regard, Jewkes et al contend that it is not sufficient for staff to speak trauma-sensitive language, or engage with trauma-informed practice; rather, methods of arresting and reversing trauma must begin with the design and fabric of the prison itself.[11]
Trauma-Informed Prison Design
Qualitative studies detailing the experiences of incarcerated women reveal a number of trauma triggers within the prison milieu. Clanging doors, loud noises, yelling, limited privacy and invasive treatment by prison officers can reactivate experiences of childhood and intimate-partner abuse, causing intense mental distress and impeding rehabilitative efforts.[12] Moreover, the absence of the “basic environmental elements” that are fundamental to ontological security such as the need for privacy, socialisation, freedom of movement outside and inside, regular family visits, and interaction with nature, are apt to trigger and/or exacerbate mental instability in custodial settings.[13] For prisons to successfully heal trauma rather than cause further harm, such ontological dimensions must therefore inform prison architecture and design.
With these considerations in mind, the architectural design of the new Limerick women’s prison has borrowed design cues from pioneering healthcare centres in the UK, which are explicitly designed to be trauma-informed. The 50-bed facility features a bright, open reception area, a curvilinear garden around which all accommodation units are constructed, and an outdoor space for visiting family members - a far cry from the institutional wire-topped yards and 19th century catacomb-like cells that currently characterise Limerick’s women’s wing. Long, straight corridors have also been replaced by structural curves and undulations to ensure good sightlines and avoid the incidence of a traumatised individual being caught off-guard by persons appearing around sharp corners.[14] These softer features are designed to complement and ensure effective delivery of the supports and services on offer, including full access to healthcare, in-reach mental health and addiction counselling services, and educational facilities. [15]
The Limitations of Trauma-Informed Prison Design: “Lipstick on a Pig?”
The contention that an aesthetically pleasing environmental design can compensate for the harms inflicted by losing one’s liberty, privacy, autonomy, and familial connections can certainly be disputed. Indeed, some commentators have likened architects’ attempts to design trauma-informed facilities to “applying lipstick to a pig.”[16] Recent research detailing the experiences of incarcerated men in Norway’s universally lauded Halden Prison gives force to these concerns. By incorporating elements of biophilic design into a maximum-security prison, the architecture of Halden has been designed to create a “humane” space conducive to mental wellbeing. However, Abdel-Salam and Kilmer’s study reveals that the vast majority of offenders do not perceive the positive design elements of the prison to have a therapeutic or motivational benefit.[17] Conversely, prisoners articulated their frustration with the dissonance they perceived between the illusion of autonomy and normality promoted by the prison’s design, and their day-to-day experience of restricted movement, constant monitoring, and intensive surveillance. Green spaces, for example, could only be enjoyed behind locked windows and closed doors.[18] The aesthetically pleasing environment could ultimately do little to mitigate the pains of imprisonment.
Indeed, thoughtful prison design can only go some way towards creating a trauma-sensitive custodial environment, as studies continue to reinforce the primacy of staff-prisoner relationships for effective trauma-informed practice. Research conducted by the Cambridge Institute of Criminology found that victims of trauma may have a particularly acute sensitivity to these relationships, due to previous negative experiences with those in positions of authority.[19] Notably, the prisoners interviewed for this study reported incidents of staff engaging in behaviour that was antithetical to TICP, such as forcefully removing clothing from prisoners suspected of hiding contraband and intentionally antagonising, provoking and shaming the women in their care.[20] It is significant that the 2019 Chaplain’s Report of the Dóchas Centre records similar complaints of verbal abuse, xenophobic remarks, and threatening language by prison staff “triggering memories of mistreatment in other contexts, creating a re-traumatising effect.”[21] Moreover, the Office of the Inspector of Prisons expressed its concerns about the extremely isolated existence of two transgender women in its review of Limerick prison in April 2021.[22] The Inspectorate found that the women were confined in their cells for up to 23 hours a day under Rule 63 of the Irish Prison Rules 2007[23] - an experience characterised by one of the women as “mental torture” and a clear violation of Principle 9 of the Yogyakarta Principles. [24] Therefore, while a trauma-informed mode of staff engagement and operational culture is unlikely to be successfully implemented in a trauma-generating environment, it is submitted that the converse is also true.
Towards a Penal Policy of Hope: Incarceration as the Sanction of Last Resort
For penal reformers, the construction of Limerick’s women’s prison exhibits a policy tension between the need to reduce overcrowding and improve existing conditions, and the needless expansion of the women’s prison estate. With an official bed capacity of 174 in the Dóchas Centre and Limerick prison and a total of 185 women detained in custody at the time of writing,[25] it is evident that the addition of 22 beds to the women’s prison estate is unlikely to address persistent issues of overcrowding without additional policy interventions. In 2019, 91% of all sentence committals for women were for 12 months or less.[26] Research conducted into recidivism rates among prisoners in Ireland have consistently highlighted that the imposition of short-term custodial sentences place a significant strain on prison resources, while having a minimal deterrent and rehabilitative effect on offenders.[27] It follows that for women convicted of low-level, non-violent offences who present a high level of need, custodial sentences should be regarded as the sanction of last resort.
While the trauma-informed conditions of Limerick’s new facility may enhance prisoners’ everyday quality of life, it is imperative that a thoughtfully designed prison does not become the justification for imposing increased custodial sentences where more appropriate alternatives exist, such as supervision and community service orders. Introducing a national cap on the number of women in prison could incentivise increased use of alternative sanctions in this regard.[28] Moreover, a trauma-informed prison design fails to address the structural, long-term conditions which render TICP in the custodial context so necessary: poverty, addiction, homelessness, and gender-based violence. Increased investment in wraparound, gender-specific services for justice-involved women at a community level is therefore essential. Ultimately, it is submitted that the successful rehabilitation of women offenders should not begin with a hopeful architecture that aspires to mitigate the “pains of imprisonment,”[29] but with a hopeful penal policy that limits women’s exposure to these pains in the first instance.
[1] ‘A Sense of Crowd and Urgency’ (International Churchill Society, 28 October 1943) <https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1941-1945-war-leader/a-sense-of-crowd-and-urgency/> accessed 15 October 2022.
[2] It should be noted that this article adopts a trans-inclusive definition of “woman” and discusses the experiences of both cisgender and transgender women in prison.
[3] Yvonne Jewkes and others, ‘Designing ‘Healthy’ Prisons for Women: Incorporating Trauma-Informed Care and Practice (TICP) into Prison Planning and Design’ (2019) 16 International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 3818, 3825.
[4] Dáil Deb 4 May 2022, vol 1021 no 4.
[5] Yvonne Jewkes, ‘Limerick women’s prison: an architecture of hope’ (Architect’s Journal, 14 July 2022) <https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/limerick-womens-prison-an-architecture-of-hope> accessed 15 October 2022.
[6] Keith Adams, ‘More Women in Prison: The Only Certainty in Prison Policy in 2022’ (Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice, 8 April 2022) <https://www.jcfj.ie/2022/04/08/more-women-in-prison-the-only-certainty-in-prison-policy-in-2022/> accessed 15 October 2022.
[7] Matthew Moore and Anthony Tatman, ‘Adverse Childhood Experiences and Offender Risks to Re-Offend in the United States: A Quantitative Examination’ (2016) 11(2) International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences 148.
[8] Aoife Dermody and others, 'Resilience in the Face of Trauma: Implications for Service Delivery' (2018) 12 Irish Probation Journal 161, 167.
[9] Rosemarie McHugh, Tracking the Needs and Service Provision for Women Ex-Prisoners’ (Association for Criminal Justice Research and Development 2013).
[10] Katherine M Auty and others, ‘What is trauma-informed practice? Towards operationalisation of the concept in two prisons for women’ (2022) Criminology and Criminal Justice 1, 13.
[11] Jewkes and others (n 2) 3831.
[12] Stephanie Kennedy and Annelise Mennicke ‘“Behind every woman in prison is a man”: Incarcerated Women’s Perceptions of How We Can Better Help Them in the Context of Interpersonal Victimization’ (2017) 29(3) Journal of Progressive Human Services 206, 216.
[13] Jewkes and others (n 2) 3827.
[14] Jewkes (n 4).
[15] Dáil Deb (n 3).
[16] Jewkes and others (n 2) 3830.
[17] Sami Abdel-Salam and Ashley Kilmer, ‘‘A Prison is a Prison’: Perspectives From Incarcerated Men on the Therapeutic and Punitive Aspects of Halden Prison in Norway’ (2022) The British Journal of Criminology 1.
[18] ibid 9.
[19] Auty and others (n 9) 18.
[20] ibid 11.
[21] Dóchas Chaplaincy Service, ‘Dóchas Chaplain’s Report’ (2019) <https://www.irishprisons.ie/wp-content/uploads/documents_pdf/CR_Dochas-Centre-2019.pdf> accessed 15 October 2022.
[22] Office of the Inspector of Prisons, ‘COVID-19 Thematic Inspection of Limerick Prison’ (April 2021) 33 <https://www.oip.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Limerick-Prison-COVID-19-Thematic-Inspection-Report-2021.pdf> accessed 25 October 2022.
[23] Prison Rules 2007, SI 2007/252, r 63(1): ‘A prisoner may, either at his or her own request or when the Governor considers it necessary, in so far as is practicable and subject to the maintenance of good order and safe and secure custody, be kept separate from other prisoners who are reasonably likely to cause significant harm to him or her.’
[24] Principle 9 of the Yogyakarta Principles on ‘The Right to Treatment with Humanity while in Detention’ provides that protective measures which are out in place for all prisoners vulnerable to violence or abuse on the basis of their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression should involve no greater restriction of their rights than is experienced by the general prison population.
[25] Irish Prison Service, ‘Prison Population on Friday 14th October 2022’ <https://www.irishprisons.ie/wp-content/uploads/documents_pdf/14-October-2022.pdf> accessed 15 October 2022.
[26] Department of Justice, Criminal Justice Policy: Review of Policy Options for Prison and Penal Reform 2022-2024 (Department of Justice 2022) 41.
[27] Ian O’Donnell, An Evidence Review of Recidivism and Policy Responses (Department of Justice and Equality 2020).
[28] Adams (n 5).
[29] Abdel-Salam and Kilmer (n 16) 10.
Comments