clockwork orange or just a lemon peter stenfelds

8/7/2019 clockwork orange or just a lemon Peter Stenfelds

1/4

A Clockwork Orange - Or Just A Lemon?

Author(s): Peter SteinfelsSource: The Hastings Center Report, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Apr., 1974), pp. 10-12Published by: The Hastings CenterStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3560335

Accessed: 08/05/2010 19:23

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hastings.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Hastings Centeris collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Hastings

Center Report.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3560335?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hastingshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hastingshttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3560335?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/4

Page 10age 10

ments are weakened by the inherentuncertainty of future events.The truly difficult question is ifthe Masons could morally proceedwith a pregnancy where there wasa chance of having a hemophilicchild. I think they could. Indeed,were she to believe that the possibleambiguities of a carrier test wouldaggravate the psychological burdenof the pregnancy, Ruth Masonmight justifiably even refuse thecarrier test. To refuse, she shouldbe able to justify her presumptiveright to conceive a child wherethere was a substantial risk of hav-ing an infant who would requirespecial and perhaps expensive careon a lifetime basis.

To do this, I believe that RuthMason would need to examine someor all of the following factors: 1)her valuation of human life; 2) herpsychological ability to nurture achild who will necessarily experi-ence some suffering, both physicaland psychological; 3) her family'sresources-emotional, psychologicaland monetary-to care for thischild; 4) the possibility that herown or her husband's expectationsin having male children are incom-patible with the life style dictated byhemophilia; 5) her recognition thatsuch a child may himself have deeppsychological problems from over-protection affordedby well-meaningothers.

ments are weakened by the inherentuncertainty of future events.The truly difficult question is ifthe Masons could morally proceedwith a pregnancy where there wasa chance of having a hemophilicchild. I think they could. Indeed,were she to believe that the possibleambiguities of a carrier test wouldaggravate the psychological burdenof the pregnancy, Ruth Masonmight justifiably even refuse thecarrier test. To refuse, she shouldbe able to justify her presumptiveright to conceive a child wherethere was a substantial risk of hav-ing an infant who would requirespecial and perhaps expensive careon a lifetime basis.

To do this, I believe that RuthMason would need to examine someor all of the following factors: 1)her valuation of human life; 2) herpsychological ability to nurture achild who will necessarily experi-ence some suffering, both physicaland psychological; 3) her family'sresources-emotional, psychologicaland monetary-to care for thischild; 4) the possibility that herown or her husband's expectationsin having male children are incom-patible with the life style dictated byhemophilia; 5) her recognition thatsuch a child may himself have deeppsychological problems from over-protection affordedby well-meaningothers.

To my mind, a final test for thiscouple is whether or not they cangive the prospective hemophilicchild an assurance of independentexistence, even where risks of hissafety are still apparent. If theycannot, then perhaps they ought toconsider those options which avoidhis birth. They might well decidethat sterilization is the only moralcourse open to them. Or, wishingto avoid the anxiety, costs and pos-sible guilt of an "at-risk"pregnancy,they could adopt a child, especiallyif they consider abortion morallyunacceptable.But assuming they have weighedall the factors, and could accept therisk of a "worst" outcome, I thinkthe Masons could go ahead andhave a child. I know I would. *?

To my mind, a final test for thiscouple is whether or not they cangive the prospective hemophilicchild an assurance of independentexistence, even where risks of hissafety are still apparent. If theycannot, then perhaps they ought toconsider those options which avoidhis birth. They might well decidethat sterilization is the only moralcourse open to them. Or, wishingto avoid the anxiety, costs and pos-sible guilt of an "at-risk"pregnancy,they could adopt a child, especiallyif they consider abortion morallyunacceptable.But assuming they have weighedall the factors, and could accept therisk of a "worst" outcome, I thinkthe Masons could go ahead andhave a child. I know I would. *?

Y

A ClockworkOrange-O r J u s t

A ClockworkOrange-O r J u s t

B by PETER STEINFELSehavior control in prisonsdoes not enjoy a very favorablepress. One recent article in a largecirculation magazine warned that"psychotechnologiesare under rapiddevelopment by 'behavioral engi-neers' intent on putting Big Brotherin constant and efficient charge ofup to 25 million Americans whohave either committed crimes orseem 'likely' to do so." And laterthe same writer describes these vil-lainous "behavioral engineers" as"the technologists of a totalitarian-ism that could make those in An-

thony Burgess' A ClockworkOrange and George Orwell's 1984look whimsically inefficientby com-parison."Are such charges justified? Orare they expressions of that oldtechnological paranoia which onceled a leading science popularizer in19th-century France to predict thatthe railroad would feminize menand suffocate women?

Popular journalism has not beenthe only arena for concern aboutbehavior control in prisons. A num-ber of programs around the U.S.have recently been challenged bycourt actions. Probably the mostprominent was Project START(Special Treatment and Rehabilita-tive Training), a federally fundedprogram for particularly unman-ageable prisoners. Based on operantconditioning principles, the aim of

Peter Steinfels is Associate for theHumanities, Institute of Society,Ethics and the Life Sciences.

B by PETER STEINFELSehavior control in prisonsdoes not enjoy a very favorablepress. One recent article in a largecirculation magazine warned that"psychotechnologiesare under rapiddevelopment by 'behavioral engi-neers' intent on putting Big Brotherin constant and efficient charge ofup to 25 million Americans whohave either committed crimes orseem 'likely' to do so." And laterthe same writer describes these vil-lainous "behavioral engineers" as"the technologists of a totalitarian-ism that could make those in An-

thony Burgess' A ClockworkOrange and George Orwell's 1984look whimsically inefficientby com-parison."Are such charges justified? Orare they expressions of that oldtechnological paranoia which onceled a leading science popularizer in19th-century France to predict thatthe railroad would feminize menand suffocate women?

Popular journalism has not beenthe only arena for concern aboutbehavior control in prisons. A num-ber of programs around the U.S.have recently been challenged bycourt actions. Probably the mostprominent was Project START(Special Treatment and Rehabilita-tive Training), a federally fundedprogram for particularly unman-ageable prisoners. Based on operantconditioning principles, the aim of

Peter Steinfels is Associate for theHumanities, Institute of Society,Ethics and the Life Sciences.

this program was to alter the con-duct of especially troublesome in-mates so that they could be re-turned to the open prison popula-tion from which the referral orig-inated. Recently the Federal Bureauof Prisons announced the discon-tinuation of START, ostensibly foreconomic reasons, though they re-fused to rule out the establishmentof similar prison programs on avoluntary basis. Shortly thereafterthe House Subcommittee on Courts,Civil Liberties and the Administra-tion of Justice opened hearings onthe extent of behavior modificationprograms in federal prisons. Calledto testify were Norman A. Carlson,Director of the Bureau of Prisons,and Dr. Martin Groder, designateddirector of a new federal facility atButner, North Carolina, which ismandated to conduct research intonew rehabilitation techniques (andwhich is also under court chal-lenge). Whether the subcommitteewill hold further hearings is not yetknown; the chances are good thatit will.

Institute ConferenceSome perspective on this contro-versy was provided by a conferencesponsored last December by the In-stitute's Behavior Control Research

Group. Participants included repre-sentatives from START and theButner research center, as well asfrom Patuxent, a Maryland stateprison organized around a combina-tion of behaviorist theory andgroup therapy. (Patuxent calls itsinmates "patients"; they progressA. j

this program was to alter the con-duct of especially troublesome in-mates so that they could be re-turned to the open prison popula-tion from which the referral orig-inated. Recently the Federal Bureauof Prisons announced the discon-tinuation of START, ostensibly foreconomic reasons, though they re-fused to rule out the establishmentof similar prison programs on avoluntary basis. Shortly thereafterthe House Subcommittee on Courts,Civil Liberties and the Administra-tion of Justice opened hearings onthe extent of behavior modificationprograms in federal prisons. Calledto testify were Norman A. Carlson,Director of the Bureau of Prisons,and Dr. Martin Groder, designateddirector of a new federal facility atButner, North Carolina, which ismandated to conduct research intonew rehabilitation techniques (andwhich is also under court chal-lenge). Whether the subcommitteewill hold further hearings is not yetknown; the chances are good thatit will.

Institute ConferenceSome perspective on this contro-versy was provided by a conferencesponsored last December by the In-stitute's Behavior Control Research

Group. Participants included repre-sentatives from START and theButner research center, as well asfrom Patuxent, a Maryland stateprison organized around a combina-tion of behaviorist theory andgroup therapy. (Patuxent calls itsinmates "patients"; they progressA. jHastings Center Report 4/74astings Center Report 4/74,

- -- - - -- -

J

%


3/4

Page 11Y

A Lemon?

through graded tiers dependingupon their behavior and attitude;theyattendweeklytherapy essions;and they are held indefinitelyas"patients"illpronounced"cured.")Also attending the conference,alongwith membersof the InstituteResearchGroup,were a numberofpsychiatrists, criminologists andlawyers with combined extensiveexperience n prisonwork."Behavior Control in Total In-stitutions"was the general subjectof the meeting; prisons were thegroup's chosen focus. Not only,then,was the objectto examinetheuse in prisons of specificbehaviorcontrol technologies-like psycho-

surgery,aversive and operantcon-ditioning,and variouspsychothera-peutic approaches-but also to ex-amine the "total nstitution" f pri-son as itself a behaviorcontrollingtechnology.This double emphasis was im-portant or, at least in my interpre-tation,the threedaysof discussionssuggested that the new behaviorcontrol methods are of much lesssignificancen themselves hantheyare as accessoriesfor the mainte-nance andpreservation f the basicbehaviorcontrol device-incarcera-tion in a total institution.To beginwith, if one is to judgeboth from the conference discus-sions and from other available n-formation,there simply aren't thatmanybehaviorcontrolprogramsnoperationwithinprisons.And thosethat are, far from being the devil-ishly clever models of scientific n-geniousness ometimes maginedbycritics,appear o be relatively rudeandof questionable ffectiveness. nother words-"Clockwork Orange"it isn't.This hardlymeans that behaviorcontrol programsin prisons poseno serious ethical and legal prob-lems. It does mean that theseprob-lems may be closer to the tradi-tional ones afflictingprisonsystemsin generalthan entirelynew issues

"We take on a burden when we put a man behind walls, and thatburden is to give him a chance to change. If we deny him that, wedeny him status as a human being, and to deny that is to diminishour own humanityand plant the seeds of futureanguishfor ourselves."-Chief JusticeWarrenE. Burger

"... The window can be covered with paper blocking all light by thestaff if it so desires. In one case an inmate alleged his window wascovered for 42 straightdays. When asked about this allegation, the[START] staff said it was for no longer than two weeks but that therecordsconcerning his could not be located at the time of our visit."-Excerpt from a Report of the Subcommitteeon Courts,Civil Liberties,and theAdministration f Justice

spawned by new technologies.Thus, Project START involved areward-punishmentystemthat, in-tellectually,was barelyfancier thanthe schemesparentsdevise for get-ting the Saturday horesdone. Ad-ministeringt in a prisonsetting,toan exceptionallyresistantgroup ofprisoners who had definitely notvolunteeredfor the program,wasan entirely differentmatter, how-ever, involving levels of depriva-tion and conflictwhich led to pre-cisely the kind of charges-aboveall, brutality-which prisonershavelong madeagainst heirkeepers.Behaviorcontrol nnovationsmaythus merely reinforce old prob-lems; they can also work in theopposite direction. Two Instituteobservers of Patuxent concludedthat, whatever the merits of thetherapywhich could be offeredinsucha setting(and theywereprettyskepticalabout it), the prisonhada lower level of "hassling"andpetty brutality han most otherpri-sons they had visited.This was anunintendedconsequence, hey con-cluded, of removingultimate au-thorityfrom the custodialand se-curity personnel, of limiting theprison's size and of hiring thera-pists at higherwages. ("You maynot get the greatesttherapists,butyou certainlyget a highercaliberofguard.")Legitimatinghe PrisonsThe real significance f behaviorcontrolprograms, hen,maynot betheir uncertain mpacton a limitednumber of prisoners - thoughabuseshave occurredand shouldbeconstantly guarded against-buttheir influencein maintainingandlegitimating he entire prison sys-tem. This, if I interpretsome ofthe conference participants cor-rectly,couldhappen n threeways:First, behaviorcontrolprogramscoulddevelopmeansof "managing"thatminorityof prisonerswhosere-belliousnessand politicalmilitancyhave been the catalyst or continualconflict or even large-scale erup-tions in the institutions.So far, de-spite the obvious orientationof aprogram ike START towardman-agement rather than genuine re-habilitation,behaviorcontrolseems

Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences\ J

f_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

_ l--


4/4

Page 12 YThe model institution

has always playeda special rolein legitimating

prisonsystems.no morelikely to succeedthan tra-ditional means to this end: isola-tion, deprivation,physical punish-ment. Of course, behaviorcontrolprogramsmayprovidea new pack-aging for precisely such practices.Second, behavior control pro-gramscould end scientificand med-ical prestige to the cause of re-habilitation through incarceration.Generally he bloom is off rehabili-tation.Despitethe humanitariann-tentionsof its advocates,efforts atrehabilitativeprograms have toooften begun as alternatives o theharsheraspectsof imprisonmentutended as additions o them. But thecurrentcritiqueof prison systems,rehabilitationncluded, is "a fainttrumpet," aid one conferencepar-ticipant.The critics are unable topropose any alternativeswith un-qualifiedenthusiasm.The behaviorcontrollerscould fill this vacuumwith promisesof a new era of re-habilitativepenology. Their prom-ises might go unfulfilledor, in theopinion of the more pessimistic,work out to the further detrimentof the imprisoned; ut in the mean-timethe moment or a fundamentalreexaminationf ourdependence nincarceration itself would havepassed.Third, behavior control tech-niques could succeed to the extentof creatingone or several "modelinstitutions."An historian at theconference stated that the modelinstitutionhas always playeda spe-cial role in legitimatingprison sys-tems-regardless of whether thecharacteristicsof the model weregenuinelyapplicable hroughouthesystem. One or two good juvenile

reformatories r adult prisons canthus serve as an excusefor tolerat-ing numerous institutions whichmay be abominableat present,butsome day....

'Y

Are theControllersControlled?Recognizingthat prisons them-selves are behavior controlling"totalinstitutions"means recogniz-ing that they control the behaviornot only of inmates but of guardsand scientistsand psychiatrists ndwhoever attempts to work withinthis context. The tasks of security,custody,maintaining rder andpre-serving bureaucraticstability willalwayshavetoppriority,arguedonecriminologist;other programswillbe shaped by these needs.Spokesmenfor behaviorcontrol

programs in prisons seem eitherfranklyacceptingof these priorities-which is not reassuring-orblithelyconfident hat they can re-mainunaffectedby them-which isalso not reassuring. The latterstrandof thoughtwas expressedbyB. F. Skinnerin a letter to The

New York Times (2/26/74) la-menting federal governmenthesi-tance to supportbehaviormodifica-tion in prisons hroughmanagementof the prisonenvironment.Skinnerquite rightly pointed out that"whether we like it or not, thebehavior of prisonerswill continueto be modified by the world inwhich they live.... Contingenciesof reinforcementrealreadyoperat-ing in the present system,"wroteSkinner, "... and the result isAttica." Skinner is confident thatmoreconstructive nvironments anbe built throughthe work of be-havior modifiers.But he does notinquire nto what "contingencies freinforcement"have worked onguards, wardens, governmentoffi-cials, state legislatures,and eventhe well-intentioned reformers ofthepast,to giveus our Atticas.Oneis faced with a varianton the oldquestion of who will guard theguards:how will the behaviorcon-trollers in prisons escape the be-havior controlling influence ofprisons? 0*

Classroom Materials AvailableTwo publications suitable for classroom discussions on behaviorcontrol are now available from the Institute. "Physical Manipulationof the Brain," the May, 1973 Special Supplement of the HastingsCenter Report, has been reprintedand can now be supplied in bulk.This Special Supplement is the edited transcript of a conferencesponsored by the Institute's Behavior Control Research Group.Also available is a booklet containing four articles prepared forthe Institute conference on "ControllingBehavior Through Drugs."These articles, which originally appeared in the January, 1974 issueof the Hastings Center Studies, are: "Psychotropic Drugs as Thera-peutic Agents," by Gerald L. Klerman;"Drugs and Competing DrugEthics," by Robert M. Veatch; "The Case of MBD," by Paul H.Wender; and "Hallucinogenic Drugs: Perils & Possibilities," by LouisJolyon West.The per-copy prices for each publication are:1-5: $1.506-30: $1.2531 &up: $1.00Postage will be paid by the Institutewhen payment accompaniesorder. Please make checks payable to the Instituteof Society, Ethicsand the Life Sciences. Send orders to:Ms. Nancy TaylorPublications DepartmentHastings Center623 WarburtonAvenueHastings-on-Hudson,N.Y. 10706

Hastings Center Report 4/74K .2 J

w - -

_ _

I11.1 01- ^

clockwork orange or just a lemon peter stenfelds

Documents