Corrections_Today_May_June_2020_Vol.82_No.3

Bookshelf

such as the opioid epidemic and the increased prevalence of childhood trauma. Christine Tartaro provides a well-researched overview of the incidence of suicide and self-harm in the incarcerated setting, as well as contributing factors and preventative measures. Readers of the first edition of “Suicide and Self-Harm in Jails and Prisons” (published in 2009) will find that, while the headings are similar, all chapters, except Chapter Nine (Litigation Issues), contain new information. The author begins with descriptions of jails, prisons and police lockups. While these facilities share similarities, understanding the unique role of each is important to identifying the risks for suicide and self-harm. Suicide, suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-injury as used by the author are also defined. The discussions of non- suicidal self-injury and malingering emphasize the complexity of pain and coping mechanisms. They underscore the level of knowledge and understanding a correction officer must develop as well as the need for continuous conversation between correction staff and mental health staff. The book progresses in an organized format through statistics on who commits suicide while incarcerated, when, where and how these incidents occur and

examines the differences between non-fatal suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-injury. Current data allows researchers to identify static characteristics such as age, gender, ethnicity and race, offense type and self-harm history, as well as dynamic factors such as current mental health status, substance abuse and coping skills. In addition, the stressors such as bullying and perceived burdensomeness that may contribute to increased suicidal ideation and self-harm during a period of incarceration are identified. Data from other countries is included for comparison. Interestingly, Sweden, Denmark and Norway have the highest rates of suicide; these prisons in these countries are often cited as models. The research is used to suggest best practices for screening, assessment and working with suicidal inmates. A key difference between jails and prisons is in the screening and assessment processes. The goal of the jail is to stabilize the offender and provide continuity of care, once the offender’s doctor, mental health clinic and pharmacy verify current status; this may be complicated if the offender is under the influence of drugs or is otherwise unable to provide accurate information, or has not had care in the community. The prison receives inmates from the jail with transfer information that includes the jail treatment protocol and adjustment to incarceration. The

Suicide and Self-Harm in Prisons and Jails, 2 nd Edition Written by Christine Tartaro, Lexington books (2019), 288 pp.

Reviewed by Alice Haskins, retired corrections administrator and current adjunct professor in the Criminal

Justice Department at Finger Lakes Community College, Canandaigua, New York Institutional corrections has been part of the conversation on mental health treatment and suicide prevention since the closing of mental health hospitals resulted in an unintended diversion of the mentally ill to the criminal justice system. Attempts to bring this concern to the forefront were largely ignored or minimized by governmental agencies, delaying funding for correctional staff training and diversion programs. While progress has been made over the past decade, the rate of potentially suicidal people in jails and prisons increases with each corollary crisis,

Corrections Today May/June 2020 — 111