State Prisoner Misconduct: Contribution of Dual Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders

Abstract

Using self-report data from American state prisoners (N = 14,499; 79.8% male) and negative binomial regression, this study found prisoners with preadmission dual serious mental and substance use disorders reported greater diversities and numbers of disciplinary infractions in general compared to inmates without dual disorders. Findings were mixed for diversity and number of assaultive infractions. Variety and numbers of charges for infractions in general and assault were strongly associated with previous and current incarceration experiences with assault victimization. The article concludes with suggestions for corrections policies such as screening for dual disorders, PTSD, and assault victimization, and future research.

Keywords:

• dual disorders
• prisoners
• misconduct

Notes

¹ Many studies equate misconduct with only that misconduct that resulted in officials taking formal disciplinary action (e.g., tickets and hearings). Imperfect as this is, in the interests of consistency and clarity this article does the same (unless indicated otherwise).

² The survey asked inmates, “[s]ince your admission, have you been written up for or been found guilty of…” these offenses (wording here identical to wording in survey): (1) a drug violation, such as possession, use, or dealing in drugs; (2) an alcohol violation, including unauthorized possession, use, or sale; (3) possession of a weapon; (4) possession of stolen property; (5) possession of any other unauthorized item, substance, or contraband; (6) verbal assault on a correctional officer or other staff member; (7) physical assault on a correctional officer or other staff member; (8) verbal assault on another inmate; (9) physical assault on another inmate; (10) escape or attempted escape; (11) being out of place; (12) disobeying orders; (13) any other major violation, including work slowdowns, food strikes, setting fires, rioting, etc; (14) any other minor violations relating to facility orderliness and operation, such as use of abuse language, horseplay, failing to follow sanitary regulations, etc.; (15) any other violations (see BJS, 2007b, Questionnaire, Item S10Q13b1).

³ An undetermined number of these inmates were excluded from the analysis due to their having ever been told by a mental health professional that they had a SMI such as a psychotic disorder, bipolar disorder, or depression but had not received mental health treatment in the year before arrest. The same is true for those that reported having ever been diagnosed with some other unknown mental disorder.

⁴ Inmates were asked, “Since your admission on (Insert REC_ADMN_DATE), have you been written up for or found guilty of breaking any prison rules?” (BJS, 2007a, Section 10, p. 6). Examination of the survey shows that REC_ADMN_DATE refers to the prison admission date for the offense(s) imprisoned for now. As inmates are sometimes transferred to other facilities and the dataset lacks a prison transfer variable, there is no way of knowing if the misconduct (so too victimization in prison) occurred in the facility wherein the survey was administered or another facility.