Editor's choiceDrugs and discretionary power in prisons: The officer's perspective
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.
Section snippets
Analytical perspective: everyday power in a prison setting
In order to understand how Danish officers’ allowance of inmates’ drug use is related to social order in prisons, it is important to look into how prison power is legitimized in practice by officers’ discretionary acts. Such an analytical focus on practice implies that social order should not be viewed solely as an outcome of the functional arrangements of the institution (Goffman, 1961), or linked merely to the historical or structural organisation of the prison (Foucault, 1991, Garland, 2001
Data and background
Denmark has five high security (closed) prisons, eight low security (open) prisons, and 36 remand prisons with a total prison population of approximately 4000 prisoners (75 individuals pr. 100,000 inhabitants, Hildebrandt, 2012). Open prisons are not fenced and therefore control is less strict than in closed prisons. Drug smuggling in open prisons is therefore easier in comparison with closed prisons, and the prevalence of drug use is higher (Heltberg, 2012). In an international context, the
Results: officers’ use of discretion and inmates’ drug use
Recent changes in Danish prison drug policy have led to an intensification of the existing dilemma in the officers’ work between having both to control and rehabilitate at the same time, making the practice of discretion even more important (Kolind et al., 2014a, Kolind et al., 2014b). One the one hand, there have been a tightening of drug control, as stipulated in the governmental drug action plans: fight against drugs (Regeringen, 2010) giving rise to such measures as mandatory urine tests on
Discussion
It is not the aim of this article to present Danish officers as heroic resisters trying to contest or ameliorate the effects of the present drug policy. The officers’ partial leniency towards some prisoners’ drug use (mainly cannabis) in certain situations is not necessarily a sign of officers’ sympathy for the inmates. As argued, such practices are examples of the guards’ exercise of power in everyday prison life, where power should be viewed much more as an ongoing negotiation between inmates
Conclusion
The article has aimed at providing a sociological explanation for the fact that some officers tend to turn a blind eye to inmates’ drug use, even though, such practices are legally unacceptable (Gilbert, 1997) and even though, it may be tempting to explain these practices as examples of neglect, laziness or personal idiosyncrasies. Instead our finding suggest, that officers’ unspoken acceptance of inmates’ drug use can be explained by the specific characteristics of power relations in prison
Study limitation
The relatively low response rate of the survey (51%) is a limiting factor. However, this should be related to the fact that many Danish officers explicitly have noted (in this and previous studies conducted by the author) that they are tired of what they see as an increasing demand for documentation in the Prison Service; and a research survey can easily be equated to increasing documentations.
The survey and the interviews have deliberately focused only on regulated officers. It could be argued
Conflict of interest
There are no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements
This work was partly supported by the Joint Committee for Nordic Research Councils for the Humanities and Social Sciences (NOS-HS) [210305]. Thanks to Vibeke Frank, Mie Haller, Karina Holm, Louise Nielsen, Bjarke Nielsen and the late Helle Dahl who have assisted in data collection and valuable discussions.
References (67)
- et al.
Drug treatment or alleviating the negative consequences of imprisonment? A critical view of prison-based drug treatment in Denmark
International Journal of Drug Policy
(2010) - et al.
Cannabis use in a Swiss male prison: Qualitative study exploring detainees’ and staffs’ perspectives
International Journal of Drug Policy
(2013) - et al.
Prison officers and prison culture
Nordic exceptionalism revisited: Explaining the paradox of a Janus-faced penal regime
Theoretical Criminology
(2013)- et al.
Understanding prison staff
(2008) - et al.
Drug use and initiation in prison: Results from a national prison survey in England and Wales
Addiction
(2002) The construction and interpretation of risk management technologies in contemporary probabtion practice
British Journal of Criminology
(2011)An exploration of prisoners’ and prison staff's perception of the methadone maintenance programme in Mountjoy Male Prison, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy
(2005)Scripting addiction: The politics of therapeutic talk and American sobriety
(2011)‘It's no time or high time’: Young offenders’ experiences of time and drug use in prison
The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice
(2003)
Doing prison work. The public and private lives of prison officers
Emotion and performance
Punishment & Society
Understanding prison officers: Culture, cohesion and conflicts
Power, adaptation and resistance in a late-modern men's prison
British Journal of Criminology
The prisoner society. Power, adaptation, and social life in an English prison
Soft power in prison: Implications for staff-prisoner relationships, liberty and legitimacy
European Journal of Criminology
Cannabis treatment in Danish prisons: A product of new directions in national drug policy?
A review of the current state of negotiated order theory: An appreciation and a critique
The Sociological Quarterly
Staff and order in prisons
Prisons and drug use in Europe: The problem and responses
Professional discretion in welfare services: Beyond street-level bureaucracy
Substance abuse and dependence in prisoners: A systematic review
Addiction
Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison
The culture of control. Crime and social order in contemporary society
The illusion of structure: A critique of the classical model of organization and the discretionary power of correctional officers
Criminal Justice Review
The discovery of grounded theory
Asylums. Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates
Running the risk: Police officer discretion and family violence in New Zealand
Policing and Society
Væk kære væk. Om terapeutisk stofmisbrugsbehandling i fængsler og hvad der kan ske, når forskningsmaterialet forandrer sig undervejs
The exercise of power in coercive organizations: A study of prion guards
Criminology
Nordisk statistik for kriminalforsorgen i Danmark, Finland, Island, Norge og Sverige 2006–2010
Drug misuse in prison: Views from inside: A qualitative study of prison staff and inmates
The Harvard Journal
Prison-based drug treatment in Nordic political discourse: An elastic discursive construct
European Journal of Criminology
Cited by (20)
Prison Misconduct and the Use of Alternative Resolutions by Correctional Officers in Therapeutic Communities and Other Custody Units
2024, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyLeadership in Canadian and French high security prisons expectations and perceptions
2023, European Journal of ProbationThe Floating Signifier of 'Safety': Correctional Officer Perspectives on COVID-19 Restrictions, Legitimacy and Prison Order
2023, British Journal of CriminologyAn Assessment of the Knowledge, Support, and Behavior Surrounding the Implementation of the Prison Rape Elimination Act
2023, Criminal Justice and Behavior‘This is not what I signed up for’ – Danish prison officers’ attitudes towards more punitive penal policies
2023, Punishment and Society