Name Instructor Course Date Abstract Cruel facts of solitary confinement My project ventures in the issue of solitary confinement in United States. It has been a major concern because the number of solitary detainees has drastically increased. While in solitary confinements prisoners are separated from the society mainstream as their communication as well as interaction is limited to the prison guards alone. Their conducts as well as actions are strictly monitored under pressure (Calambokidis 1117). Generally the prisoner’s correspondence with the outside world is totally blocked. This has man human rights activists get concerned about the issue of solitary confinement since it is against the constitutional rights of human beings. This form of confinement induces more harm to the detainees rather than achieving the desired behavioral correction. It is associated with adverse physical as well as psychological impact. Prisoners even go to extend of committing suicide as a way Cruel and Unusual: Solitary Confinement and Dignitary Interests." Ala. L. Rev. 68 (2016): 1117. Cooper Abigail Q. "Beyond the Reach of the Constitution: A New Approach to Juvenile Solitary Confinement Reform." Colum. JL & Soc. Probs. 50 (2016): 343 heinonline.org Gallagher Shaun. "The cruel and unusual phenomenology of solitary confinement." Frontiers in psychology 5 (2014): 1-26. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov Michelle. "Exiting Solitary Confinement: A Survey of State Correctional Policies." UCLA L. Rev. 64 (2017): 508. Kaba Fatos et al. "Solitary confinement and risk of self-harm among jail inmates." American Journal of Public Health 104.3 (2014): 442-447. Medrano Justine A. Turgut Ozkan and Robert Morris. "Solitary confinement exposure and capital inmate misconduct." American Journal of Criminal Justice (2017): 1-20. Polizzi David. Solitary Confinement: Lived Experiences and Ethical Implications. Policy Press (2017): 21-33. books.google.co.ke +David.+Solitary+Confinement:+Lived+Experiences+and+Ethical+Implications.+Policy+Press +(2017):+21-33.+&ots=o2-AjAkVOD&sig=HvGtHsWLsjYSHo7YeADC_GBjnNw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=falseRichmond Cedric. "Toward a More Constitutional Approach to Solitary Confinement: The Case for Reform." Harv. J. on Legis. 52 (2015): 1. Shalev Sharon. "5. Solitary confinement as a prison health issue." Prisons and Health (2014): 27. [...]
1. Provide a bibliography with 10-12 new sources that combine a variety of scholarly and popular material (at least half of these NEW sources should be scholarly sources). ANNOTATE FIVE SCHOLARLY SOURCES (review sample annotations under Files again if needed). In order to decide whether or not a given source is going to benefit your project, try to determine its place. Use the following checklist to ensure that you have a variety of sources. You should have sources that help you answer all of these questions. Can also consult AGWR, 274-76 to help you articulate what is the type of argument the work engages. --Do your sources help establish a trend in the advocacy approaches? (Remember the "trend" of recent decades from Alexander's Ch6: litigation. But also the "trend" in focusing on education and affirmative action rather than mass incarceration.) --Does the source help establish WHO are the advocates involved and what is the purpose of the advocacy? --Does the source help establish WHO has a stake in blocking efforts to solve or mitigate the problem? --Does the source show how the advocacy has been helped or hurt by public opinion? Or does it describe any common perception about the issue that determines the advocacy approach (remember the "politics of respectability" in Alexander's Ch6) --Does the source show how policy or law or other reform measures have failed? --Does the source help define the root causes of failed advocacy? --Does the source help establish HOW advocates have been successful in resolving or mitigating the problem? --Does the source help establish an evaluation of cost to benefit? --Does the source help establish the feasibility of your proposed solutions? (does it establish precedent? Show current action? Efforts at implementation?) --Does the source offer a solution to the problem similar to the one you envision? (if so, has their been any action after the work was published? If so, what? If not, why do you suppose that is?) --Does the source function as opposition to your proposed solution? Does it show, in other words, what might be problematic about your argument? (you will want real voices with real arguments here). 2. Abstract: Your task now is to find, articulate and evaluate advocacy efforts as they relate to your topic. Your AP abstract will be different from your HCP abstract, and somewhat longer. Use the following guidelines: 1) briefly summarize the problem and cause you investigated in your HCP (in 2-3 sentences); 2) briefly summarize the most influential advocacy approache(s) to solving or mitigating the problem that you articulated in your HCP; 3) describe the obstacles those advocates are up against; 4) evaluate the approaches you think are least effective and why; 5) most effective and why (be sure to qualify your answers. Just because you think an approach is most effective, doesn't mean it is perfect. Explain). To evaluate your advocacy positions, you might use the following questions: Do the efforts aim at creating, amending or enforcing federal or state law? local ordinances? Is there any conflict between the state, local and federal government? Do the efforts aim at educating the public? What about? Do the efforts involve long-term or short-term solutions? Both? Are short term solutions at odds with long term solutions? Or vice versa? Do the efforts involve reforming a system with key changes in policy and practice? Or do they involve dismantling a system? Do advocates rely on statistical analysis to make their case? Ethical arguments based in the constitutional rights of individuals? Other shared values, such as economic expedience? Are any of these appeals at odds with each other (e.g., ethics and economic expedience, for example?). In as much detail as you can, describe and evaluate the focus of these efforts, considering, too, what they do not focus on and why.