Drugs and discretionary power in prisons: The officer's perspective

Highlights

• Some Danish prison officers tend to turn a blind eye towards inmates’ drug use.

• Being lenient towards inmates’ drug use (mainly cannabis) is part of prison officers’ everyday discretionary power.

• Discretion continues to play an important role in the prison officers’ everyday work.

• Officers’ discretion depends on changes in the institutional arrangement of the prison.

Abstract

Background

Drugs play an increasing role in contemporary prison life. Prisoners’ drug use, drug smuggling and drug selling have also had a growing impact on the work routines and practices of prison officers. This has led to critiques that prison staff have become ‘too lenient’ regarding drug use.

Methods

Based on observational data, qualitative interviews and survey data, this study examines the role of drugs in the way Danish prison officers exercise power.

Results

Two forms of power are analysed: institutional power, by which the officers can sanction or reward inmates in everyday prison life, and personal power, by which the officers’ personal authority and skills can reduce the more intrusive aspects of prison control. These forms of power are applied by officers’ use of discretion in order to maintain what they consider to be adequate levels of peace and order in the prison wings. It is shown that officers are highly ambivalent towards the presence of drugs in prisons. On the one hand, they support the stricter drug policies implemented over the past two decades. On the other hand, they are aware that drug use can have a positive function in the everyday running of the prison. Officers’ acceptance of inmates’ drug use (mainly cannabis), therefore, is not necessarily a sign of leniency but one way in which prison officers exercise their power in prison settings.

Conclusions

It is concluded that discretionary power is still very central to the officers’ work. This conclusion contradicts recent arguments that prison officers’ agency is being threatened or restricted by ‘neoliberal’ management reforms. The prison officers’ discretion and informal power is the key to understanding their acceptance of inmates’ drug use.

Introduction

Drugs play an increasing role in contemporary European prison life. The proportion of the prison population who use drugs is much higher than in the general population (Ritter, Broers, & Elger, 2013). In the Nordic countries,¹ approximately 60% of inmates report drug use prior to imprisonment (Heltberg, 2012). Similar proportions are found in other European countries and in North America (Fazel, Bains, & Doll, 2006). Inside prisons in many European countries, drug use is common (EMCDDA, 2012, Singleton et al., 2003). Furthermore, people who inject drugs commonly have a history of imprisonment (Stöver & Michels, 2010). Over the past two decades, the proportion of offenders sentenced for drug offences has increased markedly in the Nordic countries (Kolind et al., 2014a, Kolind et al., 2014b). As a consequence of these developments, the daily prison routine is in many respects dictated by drug-using inmates and drug-related problems, including a growth in drug treatment programs and in control measures aimed at preventing drug trafficking and drug-related violence (Kolind, Frank, Lindberg, & Tourunen, 2013). Despite the fact that drug use in prison and drug-related problems have been relatively well documented, only a few studies have examined the role of drugs in the everyday life of prisons (Crewe, 2009). These studies have mainly focussed on the inmates and the inmate culture, showing, for instance, how drug dealing makes up the most important illegal economy – and even a reciprocal gift economy (Mjåland, 2014) – among inmates in present days prisons. Also, drug dealing can be part of the inmates’ attempt to build personal respect and reputation (Crewe, 2007, Crewe, 2009). Studies show that drugs are used strategically by inmates as a kind of self-medication, as a way to cope with imprisonment, and as a means of relieving insomnia and boredom (Boys et al., 2002, Cope, 2003, Keene, 1997, Ritter et al., 2013; Swann & James, 1998). Almost no studies, however, have focussed on the experiences and role of prison officers in relation to inmates’ drug use (Carlin, 2005, Ritter et al., 2013). This article uses quantitative and qualitative data to discuss Danish officers’ attitudes towards inmates’ use of drugs in prisons. Especially, it will be explored whether officers’ tacit acceptance of inmates’ drug use is a means by which they attempt to create and maintain social order in the prison. In this respect, it will be relevant to discuss if prison power is dependent on the officers’ discretionary enactment in concrete situations.