Private Prisons in America: Overcrowded, Understaffed, and Unethical (2024)

The first private prison opened its doors in the early stages of America’s prison boom, in 1984 (Joy, 2018). Prior to that, all correctional facilities were run by the federal government. Outside companies were originally contracted by the government to run and maintain more inmates at a cheaper price (Bryant, 2015), however, today, private prisons take advantage of their responsibility. Private prisons encourage ethical violations in order to cut costs which lead to problems like understaffing, increased violence within prisons and corruption among judges.

There are more than 2 million people currently incarcerated in the United States. For-profit, or private, prisons are responsible for about 9% of inmates (Williams & Oppel Jr., 2018). Private prisons are owned and operated by government-contracted companies, while public prisons are owned and operated by the federal government (Bryant, 2015). Private prisons were first established during the 1980s by the Reagan administration in response to escalating incarceration rates. The sharp increase in incarceration rates is directly correlated with the Reagan administration’s “War on Drugs,” when it began enforcing several harsh policing and sentencing policies in regards to drug crimes (Joy, 2018). Before this, all correctional facilities were owned by the federal government, but it did contract out some of their operations, such as food and cleaning services (Bryant, 2015).

The basis of private prisons is to provide the same services (incarceration) for a cheaper price. They claim to save the government money and therefore, save taxpayers money. However, private prisons rarely produce the same services as public prisons. In order to save money and maximize profits, corporations like CoreCivic hire fewer employees and train them less. On average, employees who work for private detention centers are trained 58 hours less than those who work for public prisons (Joy, 2018). Private prison employees also make $5000-$7000 less than public prison employees (Mumford, 2016) (Joy, 2018), and in terms of the detrimental effects on prison inmates themselves, the Department of Justice reported that private prisons had a “28% higher average of inmate-on-inmate assaults” and almost three times as many inmate-on-staff assaults. The report also revealed that several private prisons were keeping inmates in solitary confinement for lack of beds in the general population, which violated policy and went unreported by staff (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016). Private prison corporations sacrifice security, employee rights, and inmate quality of life in an attempt to cut costs and increase their profit margin.

Supporters of private prisons argue private correctional facilities are cheaper to maintain and save taxpayers’ money. However, studies have produced inconclusive results as to whether or not private prisons actually save the government money (Mumford, 2016). One factor that must be considered is the fact that private prisons can choose to accept only healthy and/or nonviolent offenders (Joy, 2018). This reduces both medical and security costs in private prisons and makes it difficult to effectively compare the expenses of private and public prisons (Mumford, 2016). The Government Accountability Office has examined the cost of private and public prisons and reported that it is unable to determine if either is more affordable. Private prison corporations encourage cutting corners for employees and inmates.

One of the most serious ethical concerns about private prisons and the companies that run them is the way they earn money. The federal government pays the company a stipend for operating the prison, usually based on the number of inmates it houses (Bryant, 2015). Historically, the prison system was created to reduce crime and recidivism rates and deter citizens from committing crimes. Most corporations that run private prisons claim they want to lower recidivism rates and reduce crime, however, those corporations are paid based on the number of people who are convicted of crimes and sent to their facilities. If private prisons actually reduced crime and recidivism rates, it would result in lower profits for the companies who run them. More convictions that result in prison sentences would potentially lead to a higher profit for those corporations. Because of this, private prisons have no real incentive to rehabilitate inmates, and instead may be motivated to foster an environment that leads to more crime when offenders are released.

One corporation called CoreCivic, formerly called the Corrections Corporation of America, has a particularly disturbing history of understaffing, assaults, and overcrowding within its prisons. CoreCivic prisons have been audited several times and have committed numerous ethical violations. CoreCivic prisons are up to 23% more violent than public prisons in Tennessee. In one CoreCivic facility in Ohio, prisoner-on-prisoner assaults went up by 188% and assaults on staff went up by 306% when the facility switched from being government-run to CoreCivic-run (2016). The Department of Justice audited another CoreCivic-operated detention facility in Kansas that revealed extreme understaffing and overcrowding. In January 2015, staff vacancy rates were up to 23%. Inmates were forced to triple bunk in a room made for two people and hide the third bunk from inspectors (Lipton, 2017). At another CoreCivic-run facility in Idaho, correctional officers were so desperate for help maintaining order at the prison (due to understaffing) that they negotiated with gang leaders (Mumford, 2016). At CoreCivic facilities across the country, inmates have made numerous reports of sexual assault, bug infestations, and denial of medical care. CoreCivic’s policies and procedures are in clear violation of the law and ethical conduct.

In addition to merely encouraging human rights violations, the privatization of prisons encourages corruption between judges and corporations, as seen in the infamous ‘Kids for Cash’ scandal. In 2009, two Pennsylvania judges were discovered accepting millions of dollars from the owner of two private prisons in exchange for sending convicted children to those centers (Joy, 2018). The judges, Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan, sent thousands of children to juvenile detention centers for crimes as minor as saying a curse word and creating a prank myspace page. The children and their parents were encouraged to sign a document that waived their right to an attorney. The victims of the scandal claimed that they were never informed that they were signing away their rights and appeared in court without lawyers present, which was a violation of their Sixth Amendment right to counsel (May, 2013).

Private prisons are unjustifiable by any standard of ethics, but in particular, violate the ethical theories of utilitarianism and relativism. Relativism states that ethical acts are determined by the moral norms of society. Society is divided on the controversial topic of private prisons, but a recent study conducted by Enns and Ramirez revealed that the majority of Americans oppose private prisons (Enns & Ramirez, 2018). If the majority of Americans believe something is unethical, then according to the theory of relativism, that makes it unethical (Crittenden, 2019). The theory of utilitarianism states that the most ethical acts are the ones that provide the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people. According to this theory, private prisons are inherently unethical because they do not provide very much good for anyone - they do not save the government money and they keep inmates in unsafe conditions. Private prisons are unjustifiable according to most ethical theories and should no longer be used in the United States.

Private prisons exploit their employees and inmates who are in their care for their own financial gain under the premise of saving taxpayers’ money. In order to protect employees and inmates’ rights, detention centers should be government-run only. This would reduce the number of ethical violations committed in order to make more profits. It could also encourage the government to focus on more effective measures designed to reduce criminal behavior, such as educational and public assistance programs, to decrease the number of incarcerated persons. Through the use of private prisons and lack of proper oversight, the federal government has put the lives of both inmates and employees in danger.

Works Cited