When E. Benton, a probationary guard (C.O. I), opened the House II module doors a couple weeks ago, on a cold mid-November Thursday, he wore a bright yellow sign that said “NO!”, tied by a string around his neck – a greeting to all the prisoners who passed under his Control Room observation window on their way to get their morning chow. Tell me, if you can, where are dedication, integrity, and vigilance to be found in Benton’s disdain for those in his care and custody, or in the arrogant display of his fancied authority?
Dedication. Integrity. Vigilance. These words, found on the insignia worn by every Alaska “Correctional Officer,” are supposed to represent the foundation of their service to the citizens of this State. Three words, verbal representations of spiritual qualities or attributes prerequisite to employment in the Department of Corrections, or are they expected to be instilled during training? What if neither the prospective (or probationary) employee nor those assigned the task of his training possess those characteristics?
After a course of academy training, probationary guards, (C.O. I’s) are put to work with more experienced guards, (C.O. II’s), all of whom are under the supervision of Sergeants, (C.O. III’s). The idea is for those probationary guards to watch and learn, while the more experienced guards show them the ropes, and the Sergeants oversee, observe, and guide their progress as they gain experience.
There are no less than seven (7) guards assigned to work in this cell house. Including two Sergeants, one of whom supervises the new Youth Offender Program that the Department of Corrections has been touting of late. So, there were four other guards and two supervising Sergeants who could have, should have, said or done something to dissuade Benton’s display. Not only did they fail to do so then, but those on the next shift failed to do so when another probationary guard, perhaps attempting to outdo Benton, put up his own sign in the window that read: “WHO’S YOUR DADDY?” – to taunt prisoners who were leaving the module, or who needed to ask for his assistance.
I cannot say where or when Benton and his fellow probationary guard developed the negative characteristics evident in their actions, but it is obvious that they are having those character traits reinforced and nurtured by the more experienced guards, as well as by the Sergeants, who are responsible for their training and supervision.
Dedication? Integrity? Vigilance? A Warden once told me that the men and women who worked for him were not “guards,” but “Correctional Officers.” I beg to differ. While I readily concede that such disdain, disrespect, and arrogance are not reflected in the actions and attitudes of all guards, they are certainly prevalent enough to warrant serious consideration. After all, a recidivism rate in the 80+ percentile range is proof positive that very few are being “corrected” by the Department of Corrections. Not the prisoners or the guards.
© Anthony Brown 14 December 2000
correctional officers and prison administrators