The 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Stanford University Professor Philip Zimbardo, gave an essential viewpoint into the psychology of prison guards (authority figures) as well as inmates. Through this experiment, subcultures arose that defined the roles of guards and inmates. The guards tended to take on more aggressive roles, using psychological abuse towards the inmates as punishment and a means of control. Meanwhile, the "prisoners" were victimized by the "guards." The experiment brought forth the idea that good people can create harm in negative environments, such as correctional institutions. The experiment tends to assume subcultures will arise, however it is unreasonable to claim extreme subcultures will arise in all cases.
…show more content…
The Normative Code of Behaviour for CO 's states the correctional officer is to: always assist a fellow officer in danger, no inappropriate relationships with inmates and trust the advice of veteran officers (Griffiths, Murdoch, 2014). It is in the best interest of both the officers and the inmates for the code to be followed in order to ensure maximum safety for both parties. Most corrections officers recognize codes and regulations have to be flexible in order to maintain maximum stability (Griffiths, Murdoch, 2014). However the Stanford Experiment exemplifies the importance of rule flexibility in order to avoid mistreatment and retaliation. It is quite clear that the "guards" in the Stanford Experiment did not follow ethical standards that resemble the CO code and were left to their own judgement. Rather than avoiding conflict, like most corrections officers the "guards" in the experiment created conflict. The experiment therefore demonstrates the importance of a universal CO code to prevent abuses from the officers as well as prevent prisoner …show more content…
However if the criminal justice system continues to enforce penalties such as discharge or imprisonment for any corrections employee 's misconduct, fewer abuses of power as exemplified in the Stanford Experiment will be conducted. Also with severe consequences, people who would be unfavourable corrections officers (abusive, intolerant, prejudiced...) would likely avoid entering or remaining the position as a CO. Therefore, emphasizing the accountability of officers is one of the best precautions the criminal justice system can take. Overall, the Stanford Prison Experiment raised concerns over whether or not dangerous subcultures will become present whenever people are put in a position of power. It is unfair to assume authority figures will always abuse power and the people they oversee be victims. The Criminal Justice System can continue to avoid the creation of dangerous environments by increasing surveillance, including inmate councils as well as emphasizing the accountability of correctional
The Normative Code of Behaviour for CO 's states the correctional officer is to: always assist a fellow officer in danger, no inappropriate relationships with inmates and trust the advice of veteran officers (Griffiths, Murdoch, 2014). It is in the best interest of both the officers and the inmates for the code to be followed in order to ensure maximum safety for both parties. Most corrections officers recognize codes and regulations have to be flexible in order to maintain maximum stability (Griffiths, Murdoch, 2014). However the Stanford Experiment exemplifies the importance of rule flexibility in order to avoid mistreatment and retaliation. It is quite clear that the "guards" in the Stanford Experiment did not follow ethical standards that resemble the CO code and were left to their own judgement. Rather than avoiding conflict, like most corrections officers the "guards" in the experiment created conflict. The experiment therefore demonstrates the importance of a universal CO code to prevent abuses from the officers as well as prevent prisoner …show more content…
However if the criminal justice system continues to enforce penalties such as discharge or imprisonment for any corrections employee 's misconduct, fewer abuses of power as exemplified in the Stanford Experiment will be conducted. Also with severe consequences, people who would be unfavourable corrections officers (abusive, intolerant, prejudiced...) would likely avoid entering or remaining the position as a CO. Therefore, emphasizing the accountability of officers is one of the best precautions the criminal justice system can take. Overall, the Stanford Prison Experiment raised concerns over whether or not dangerous subcultures will become present whenever people are put in a position of power. It is unfair to assume authority figures will always abuse power and the people they oversee be victims. The Criminal Justice System can continue to avoid the creation of dangerous environments by increasing surveillance, including inmate councils as well as emphasizing the accountability of correctional