Who is responsible?
When someone dies or is injured in jail, it’s the corrections officers and wardens who are most frequently targeted in lawsuits, Mills said. However, the broader culpability extends from jails to state governments that set policies and fail to fund the mental health services that could keep people out of jail.
Officials in Dauphin County agree, saying “stagnant funding” amid an increase in people needing mental health services has led to an over-reliance on jails, where the “lights are always on.”
“We would certainly like to see some of these individuals treated and housed in locations better equipped to treat the specificity of their conditions,” Hambright said. “But we must play the hands we are dealt by the existing system as best we can with the resources that we have.”
The state Department of Corrections has limited authority over county correctional institutions, according to DOC spokeswoman Maria Bivens. It does inspect the jails every year or two years as required by state law. Bivens declined to provide inspection reports or summaries of those inspections.
The Department of Corrections training academy in Elizabethtown provides training to some county jails. About 130 officers have been trained there so far this year, Bivens said. That four-or five week training involves a wide range of topics and has evolved to respond to a need to address mental health issues.
Whatever officers may learn at the academy, WITF’s investigation shows that pepper spray is seen as a ready solution: It was used in 31% of the uses of force examined. Bivens emphasized that the state training is a “baseline introduction to the profession” and counties are responsible for their staff.
Along with requesting records, WITF sent interview requests to 61 counties and followed up with a handful of wardens in counties that provided use of force reports. None agreed to talk about how their officers are trained or whether they could change how they respond to people in crisis.
Searching for solutions
To really understand the issue, people need to look at the hours, days and weeks leading up to uses of force, said Jamelia Morgan, an attorney and professor at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law.
Morgan studies a growing area of civil litigation. Lawyers have successfully argued that demanding that a person with mental illness comply with orders they may not understand is a violation of their civil rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Americans With Disabilities Act. Jails should be providing “reasonable accommodations” for people with a designated illness.
“In some cases, it’s as simple as having medical staff respond as opposed to security staff,” Morgan said.
But these cases can be difficult to litigate due to a complex grievance process that prisoners have to follow prior to filing suit, Morgan said. That’s especially tricky if someone’s illness makes it difficult for them to communicate clearly.
“If you’re not getting access to mental health treatment or medical care, that in many ways makes the administrative process unavailable to you,” Morgan said.
To solve the problem, wardens need to redefine what it means to be in jail, Morgan said.
“And so if we start to see the the problem of cell extractions and use of force and solitary confinement as health problems, as indicative of a denial of health care access, or a lack of health care access and mental health care services within prisons, we will respond differently — if we wanted to actually solve the problem.”
Some jails are trying this. In Chicago, the Cook County Jail doesn’t have a warden. Rather, it has an “executive director,” who is a trained psychologist. It’s part of a total reimagining of the jail after a 2008 U.S. Department of Justice report found it was violating inmates’ civil rights.
In recent years, the jail has gotten ride of most segregated housing, opting to put problematic prisoners in common areas with some additional security measures in place whenever possible, Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart said.
A mental health transition center within the jail provides alternative housing — a “college setting of quonset huts and gardens” — where prisoners have access to art, photography and gardening classes, Dart said. There’s also job training, and a case management system works with local agencies, planning for what will happen once someone leaves the jail. Just as important, Dart said, jail leadership has worked to change the norms around when to use tools such as pepper-spray.
“Our role is to keep people safe, and if you have someone with a mental illness, I just don’t see how Tasers and O.C. spray can do anything other than aggravate issues, and can only be used as the last conceivable option,” Dart said.
In Dauphin County, Hambright said restraint chair and pepper spray use have decreased since 2019, part of “ongoing comprehensive review and reform of prison operations.”
And about 250 law enforcement officers in Dauphin County have completed crisis intervention courses, which he says has resulted in a 10% decrease in the number of prisoners with mental illness at the jail since it was implemented in 2018.
At the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania, Vice President Brinda Penyak drew a line from the increase in people with mental illness in jail to the failure of the community-based mental health system to meet demand.
The pandemic has started to change that, she said. Increasingly frank conversations about mental health have led to more support for investment. But that support hasn’t yet translated to a significant change to the way people get mental health care.
“The system is really overtaxed, and it’s not just the jail system,” Penyak said. “It’s the probation system. It’s the courts. It’s the treatment system — so there does need to be a real commitment.”
Editor’s note: This story was produced through the 2021-2022 Benjamin Von Sternenfels Rosenthal Investigative Mental Health Fellowship — a partnership between the Carter Center’s Mental Health Program and Reveal from the Center for Investigative Reporting. The fellowship honors Benjamin von Sternenfels Rosenthal, a writer, athlete, devoted son, brother and friend to many. von Sternenfels Rosenthal was the son of Inka von Sternenfels and Robert J. Rosenthal, CEO of the Center for Investigative Reporting. Benjamin lived in the San Francisco Bay Area. He died by suicide in August 2019.
How we reported this
This story evolved from earlier work looking at uses of force in Bucks County Correctional Facility, where WITF found that a woman with a serious mental illness had been pepper-sprayed and was being kept in horrific conditions.
That reporting elicited widespread outrage, and days later the woman was moved to a state psychiatric facility. However, people who had been in jail or knew someone in jail were quick to tell me that what happened in Bucks County was pretty common.
This work sought to learn just how common.
Aggregated use of force data is available from the state Department of Corrections. Its records show how many times pepper spray, stun guns, restraint chairs and other control measures were used last year. But these aggregated records lack key context. They fail to show what events led up to the uses of force.
To answer that question, I needed to look at the use of force records themselves. I knew from prior reporting that these documents, written by corrections officers, contain a wealth of quantitative and qualitative information.
So in January, I filed right-to-know requests for use of force records from 60 of the 61 county jails in Pennsylvania. (Wyoming County Correctional Facility didn’t receive my request due to a bad email address). The request was for documents from the last three months of 2021. That’s 91 days.
I also requested jail policies related to using certain types of force, such as pepper spray, the restraint chair, spit hoods and anti-suicide smocks. About half the counties denied my request. I appealed these denials to the state Office of Open Records, with guidance from the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association’s Melissa Melewsky. At the center of these appeals were discussions around whether making these documents public would threaten public safety, staff or inmate safety, or building security. I argued they wouldn’t. Counties argued they would.
Most counties won their appeals and did not have to turn over documents to me. However, 32 other counties granted at least part of my request. Some of these counties redacted names from the use of force reports. Others did not. Some small county jails had no uses of force during that time period. Others provided policies but declined to provide detailed reports.
I think it’s worth noting here that, while Pennsylvania right-to-know law allowed counties to shield their documents from public view, other counties saw no issue with sharing them with WITF.
When the dust settled, I had obtained use of force records from 25 jails. The map shows the counties that provided those records. I’d caution against drawing any conclusions from a county-by-county comparison. These numbers are snapshots of uses of force around the state but don’t represent long-term trends. A fair comparison between counties would require more data and was not the focus of this story.