Staff sexual misconduct
This report presents national estimates of non-consensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contacts, staff sexual misconduct, and staff sexual harassment reported by correctional authorities in state juvenile correctional systems and local and private juvenile correctional facilities from 2007 to 2012. The report also examines substantiated incidents, including characteristics of victims and perpetrators, location, time of day, nature of injuries, impact on the victims, and sanctions imposed on the perpetrators. Companion tables in the Survey of Sexual Violence in Juvenile Correctional Facilities, 2007 – 2012 Statistical Tables include counts of allegations and substantiated incidents of sexual victimization for each state juvenile correctional system, juvenile correctional facility in Indian country, and sampled locally and privately operated juvenile correctional facility. Data are from BJS's Survey of Sexual Violence (SSV), which has been conducted annually since 2004. Highlights: In 2012, juvenile correctional administrators reported 865 allegations of sexual victimization in state juvenile systems and 613 in local or private facilities and Indian country facilities; The number of allegations per year has fluctuated in state juvenile systems and the rate more than doubled, from 19 per 1,000 youth in 2005 to 47 per 1,000 in 2012; In locally and privately operated facilities, the number of allegations dropped from 2009 to 2011 and then began to rise in 2012. Based on 2-year rolling averages, the rate in 2012 was 13.5 per 1,000 youth, up from 7.2 per 1,000 in 2010; From 2007 to 2012, nearly 9,500 allegations of sexual victimization of youth were reported in state or local and private facilities--Fifty-five percent involved youth-on-youth sexual victimization and 45% involved staff-on-youth sexual victimization; Upon investigation, 25% of the allegations of youth-on-youth sexual victimization and 10% of the allegations of staff-on-youth sexual victimization were substantiated during the 6-year period.
Results from focus group interviews of correctional personnel from 2 women's facilities (one jail and one prison) are reported. Observations are presented according to the following areas: summary of findings; staff perspectives on sexual assault in women's correctional facilities; knowledge about sexual assault; inmate reports of sexual violence; role of previous violence and institutional behavior; characteristics of vulnerable and predatory female inmates; staff sexual misconduct -- consequences, knowledge of policy, safety, inmate-initiated misconduct, risk factors, reporting, and false accusations; procedures for responding to sexual assault; staff training; staff recommendations; and conclusion.
This document intends to “provide a written policy that implements zero tolerance toward all forms of sexual activity, including sexual abuse and sexual harassment, and to provide guidelines to address the following prohibited and/or illegal sexually abusive behavior involving: Inmate perpetrator against staff victim; Inmate perpetrator against inmate victim; [and] Staff perpetrator against inmate victim. This policy also covers incidents involving contractors and volunteers. These guidelines are provided to: Help detect incidents, perpetrators, and inmate victims of sexually abusive behavior; Help prevent sexually abusive behavior; Educate staff to intervene properly and in a timely manner; Document, report, and investigate reported incidents; [and] Discipline and/or prosecute perpetrators” (p. 1). Procedures explain: prevention planning; responsive planning; training and education; screening for risk of sexual victimization and abusiveness; reporting; official response following an inmate report; investigations; discipline; medical and mental care; data collection and review; and audits. Also attached is the “PREA Intake Objective Screening Instrument”.
These statistical tables present “jurisdiction- and facility-level counts of allegations and substantiated incidents of nonconsensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contacts, staff sexual misconduct, and staff sexual harassment reported by correctional authorities in adult prisons, jails, and other correctional facilities in 2009, 2010, and 2011. Facilities include the Federal Bureau of Prisons, state prison systems, facilities operated by the U.S. military and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, sampled jail jurisdictions, privately operated jails and prisons, and jails in Indian country … In 2011, correctional administrators reported 6,660 allegations of sexual victimization in prisons. Of these, 605 were substantiated based on follow-up investigation. Local jail authorities reported 2,042 allegations, of which 284 were substantiated. About half (51%) involved allegations of nonconsensual sexual acts or abusive sexual contacts of inmates with other inmates, and half (49%) involved staff sexual misconduct or sexual harassment directed toward inmates.”
This report presents jurisdiction- and facility-level counts of allegations and substantiated incidents of nonconsensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contact, staff sexual misconduct, and staff sexual harassment reported by juvenile correctional authorities from 2007 to 2012. Facilities include state juvenile systems, juvenile facilities in Indian country, and sampled locally and privately operated juvenile correctional facilities. These tables accompany Sexual Victimization Reported by Juvenile Correctional Authorities, 2007–12, which provides national estimates and rates of sexual victimization and an in-depth examination of substantiated incidents (website). In 2012, juvenile correctional administrators reported 865 allegations of sexual victimization in state juvenile facilities. Of these, 104 were substantiated based on follow-up investigation. More than half (61%) of all allegations involved staff sexual misconduct or staff sexual harassment directed toward a juvenile or youthful offender. Administrators of state juvenile correctional facilities reported slightly more than 4,900 allegations from 2007 to 2012, including 906 allegations of nonconsensual acts, 1,235 allegations of abusive sexual contact, 2,307 allegations of staff sexual misconduct, and 474 allegations of staff sexual harassment (p. 1).
"In developing the PREA [Prison Rape Elimination Act] standards, the Department of Justice ensured that inmates/detainees/residents have multiple ways to report sexual abuse, and that they are able to access victim support services from outside agencies. The purpose of this fact sheet is to clarify the various external reporting methods that the standards require detention facilities to put in place, and that are separate from the internal reporting mechanisms described in the standard §115.51(a). This fact sheet aims to help facilities distinguish between external reporting, third-party reporting, and the provision of victim services, which each fulfills different but related requirements in the standards. In addition to clarifying the intent of the reporting standards, this factsheet contains three case studies to illustrate how these provisions apply in different corrections settings" (p. 1). The case studies cover adult female, adult male, and juvenile male.
"This video training series was designed to provide an important foundation for understanding trauma, the implications of trauma on the behaviors of inmates while in confinement, and how correctional administrators and practitioners can use this information to support successful PREA implementation and ultimately provide a safer environment for inmates and staff … Through considering the role that past and present trauma plays in building safe – and particularly sexually safe – environments, correctional administrators and staff training directors can support staff in efforts to more fully meet a facility’s mission and make everyone safer … the material contained in this video series will provide an opportunity for staff in confinement facilities to learn and be thoughtful about the benefits of a trauma-informed approach in correctional settings. " (p. 2).
This training program contains five models and one documentary. Module One—An introduction to the Series. Using a Prevention, Trauma-Informed Framework when Implementing PREA (7 minutes): Andie Moss introduces you to need for understanding the role of trauma in implementing PREA. Module Two--What Is It Important To Understand Trauma When Implementing PREA? (15 minutes): Dr. Joan Gillece, a pioneer in implementing a trauma-informed approach, will explain what trauma is and how it influences PREA implementation. Module Three--Understanding the Neurobiological Effects of Trauma When implementing PREA (12 minutes): the neurobiological impact of trauma is explained by Dr. Brian Sims. Module Four--Implementing PREA Standards with a Trauma Focus (26 minutes): A panel of clinicians and practitioners from the Dorchester County Detention Center on Maryland’s Eastern, hosted by Andie Moss, provides examples on how to implement the PREA standards "through a trauma-informed lens in adult confinement settings … [these concepts are easily transferable to juvenile facilities". Module Five--Practical Solutions to Challenging Situations (10 minutes): The implementation of a trauma-informed approach in a jail is discussed by Alisha Salisbury, Warden Steve Mills, and PREA officer and investigator Lt. Robert Fitzgerald from the Dorchester County Detention Center. This "module will provide some creative examples for policymakers and practitioners to consider as they begin or continue to implement a trauma-informed approach". Healing Neen: Trauma and Recovery (25 minutes): this film shows how one woman benefited from trauma-informed care that helped her to take a journey from trauma, through the criminal justice system, to healing.
This article is an excellent analysis of why the general public accepts prison rape. It also address the impact prison rape has on the community. Topics discussed include: the housing of juveniles in adult facilities and their rape by those inmates; toleration and subtle appreciation of prison rape; the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) of 2003; more sexual assaults due to staff than other inmates according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS); factors that make the risk of victimization greater; the effectiveness of PREA as reflected in these statistics; the iconic shower scene; Scared Straight; the weirdly comical presentation of prison rape on television; bad people deserve prison rape; the majority of those raped are released from prison; reentry focused on employment not sexual trauma services; rehabilitation being negatively impacted by post-traumatic shock from prison rape; prison rape as a barrier to HIV, AIDS, and other sexually transmitted disease treatment resulting to their transmission in the community; and the "ubiquity of prison rape nonchalance in popular culture, which promotes a rape-as-punishment framework and normalizes rape itself. There is no other element of carceral life so frequently referenced" in society. "If PREA is mostly toothless, it is only because it is allowed to be. It is difficult to conjure up similar legislation applied to any other population that would be met with such a resounding shrug. It appears that prison rape, by insinuating itself into the very punitive and rehabilitative functions of prison, has produced a deadly nonchalance. We have become a culture that tolerates and potentially lauds the rape and sexual exploitation of hundreds of thousands of people every year, many of them minors, mothers, mentally ill."