Double-Bunking in Mass. Prisons Fuels Violence, Drugs, and Inhumane Conditions

Charles Diorio explains how double-bunking forces inmates into unsafe, inhumane conditions. At Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center, the practice fuels violence, drugs, and exploitation.

Recently I was forced to accept a cellmate. (Prisoners commonly call them cellies.) For years, I haven’t had a celly, and when I did have one, it always ended badly. Forced association is a part of prison life, and double-bunking disparate inmates is the most barbaric aspect of doing time.

How Double-Bunking Fuels Violence and Drug Abuse

Modern American prisons suffer many challenges. Illicit drugs flood into institutions, like Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center, the maximum security institution where I currently reside. SBCC is Massachusetts’ only Level 6 institution—a Supermax.

SBCC is fully contained. Windows don’t open. Movement is restricted, as are programs. Air conditioning is recycled. An entirely sealed facility—nothing comes in or out without prison officials carefully inspecting every article. Still, there’s an illicit drug crisis plaguing the facility, worsened by administrative neglect.

Massachusetts’ Supermax Prison Relies on an Outdated Practice

Cells in most American correctional facilities vary in size. There’s no industry standard. Many incarcerated people are serving their sentences in old institutions built before the 1980s, when mass incarceration ushered in uniformity in prison construction. In Souza-Baranowski, built in 1998, cells are 10 feet by 7 feet, in an oblong pattern, with a toilet/sink and table/seat. There’s a bunk bed and shelves for two.

During the 1990s, the science of prison construction created a uniformity across the nation. “McJails” were quickly built based on a similar architectural scheme. Same design, same paint, nuts, and bolts. Modern American prisons were built to state-of-the-art specifications. In Souza-Baranowski, like all Massachusetts correctional facilities, internet and WiFi are built into the design, as are computer-controlled cell doors and full closed-circuit video.

In older institutions, like the recently shuttered MCI-Concord, the evolution of cell design is on full display. Cells from the original construction in the 1800s are cramped and double-bunked with bars like we see in old movies. MCI-Concord, like many American prisons, were built around the Civil War. Modern restored parts of the institution have larger cells, heavy steel doors, and keyless systems that use a central computer terminal to open and close doors.

It’s common for states to tear down and reconstruct cellblocks. Massachusetts did this over decades, until recently, when they simply closed many dilapidated facilities like the old Walpole State Prison designated MCI-Cedar-Junction, minimum institutions in Shirley, and MCI-Bay State, which temporarily became a migrant shelter.

The Population Shift That Increased Double-Bunking

Massachusetts decided to shutter many prisons, because diversion programs and lower incarceration rates reduced prison populations. The prison population of Massachusetts is at its lowest in nearly 40 years.

Recently, however, Massachusetts found itself with rising prison populations and a reliance on one maximum security prison: Souza-Baranowski in Lancaster. SBCC is doing double duty as a reception center for newly minted convicts and general population for many other classes of prisoner, like mentally ill or special needs inmates.

A 1,500-man, Level 6, maximum security institution, Souza-Baranowski is a poorly managed facility of single- and double-bunked cells. A series of cellblocks, the institution is divided into North Side and South Side. The South Side of the facility is commonly called the Green Side because of the color of uniforms inmates wear. North Side inmates wear gray uniforms.

Putting Vulnerable Inmates at Risk

Prison authorities and the MADOC have set up a spectrum of Special Administrative Units segregating inmates based on many criteria, including gang affiliation, mental hygiene considerations, nature of their crime, and many other carceral considerations.

For decades, assignment officers carefully considered double-bunking inmates. Today, there’s little consideration about who will double-bunk with whom. Administrative neglect has worsened these unsafe pairing practices. And challenges facing prisoners in these institutions have grown more risky and dangerous.

As prison populations age, older inmates become vulnerable to younger stronger inmates. Synthetic drugs like K-2—a cannabis type drug often laced with fentanyl—are smoked. Second-hand smoke from this toxic cocktail causes conflict among cellmates. Prison authorities don’t distinguish drug addicts from non-drug users. Both must share a small cell together, sharing each other’s bad habits.

A rampaging gang culture thrives in every prison across America. Gang members are often thrown into cells with non-gang members. In Souza-Baranowski, a gang member may be forced to live with a vulnerable inmate who is easily extorted, sexually exploited, or recruited into the gang.

The Daily Reality of Sharing a Cell Under Barbaric Policies

Double-bunking prisoners is a barbaric practice. Incarcerated people are forced to share a single toilet. Smells, feces, farts, and body odor permeate these filthy cells. Smelling other people while locked in a cell with little ventilation is cruel—a throwback to a time when society was more primitive. Progressive Massachusetts has never evolved where incarceration is concerned.

In old cells, for example, a regular-sized man can touch each wall with his arms extended. These are cruel places for two individuals to live. In the past, prisoners could smoke cigarettes, and secondhand smoke would fill these crowded cellblocks with little, if any, ventilation. Today, secondhand smoke remains a much more serious health hazard. Smoke from illicit synthetic drugs chokes prisoners forced into double-bunking schemes.

Double-Bunking Is Avoidable

In Souza-Baranowski, a modern construction design, cells are larger, but conditions remain a blight. Incarcerated people present many problems. Most are poor, indigent, and helpless—reliant on hustling for simple essentials like hygiene products or food from the facility store. Prisoners sell artwork, tattoos, drugs; do laundry; or sell themselves to raise money within a jailhouse marketplace.

Drug dealing is common. Sexual exploitation occurs. Inmates sell services like laundry or cleaning cells. Prison authorities in Massachusetts prisons have created inhumane conditions through administrative neglect. Double-bunking disparate inmates is barbaric, cruel, and avoidable.

Want to read more? Check out It’s Over 100 Degrees in Texas Prisons!

Charles Diorio runs Inmate Author Project (IAP), an outlet for publications about conditions in prison. IAP is an underrepresented publishing opportunity for incarcerated writers. Help voices escape our nation’s prisons. Reach out to Charles directly via Corrlinks.com, a free email service for prisoners.

The post Double-Bunking in Mass. Prisons Fuels Violence, Drugs, and Inhumane Conditions first appeared on Prison Writers.