Select a region
A psychology student has been praised for his “thoughtful” essay reflecting on whether the mental health consequences of solitary confinement justify it being removed from our prison system.
Hautlieu student Nathan Healey’s entry to a psychology essay competition was praised as “thoughtful” and “well-evidenced” by the judges.
Now in its second year, the Mourant Psychology Essay Competition has awarded Nathan a £350 bursary to fund university visits and a £200 cash prize for his essay, which concludes that solitary confinement should be taken out of the prison system due to the negative effects on prisoners’ wellbeing.
Pictured: Nathan's essay questions whether solitary confinement should be removed from prisons.
Solitary confinement, Nathan explains in his essay, is a disciplining method used “if a prisoner is to misbehave they will be placed in a single cell where they will have no contact with other inmates, strict measures to control contraband and extra security (equipment and more guards".
By law, prisoners are allowed to be held in this state for up to 21 days or 10 days for young adults.
Focusing on several studies of prisoners having undergone solitary confinement, Nathan makes the case that there is evidence that it causes “anxiety, hallucinations, self-harm and impaired memory.”
The essay contest challenges students to write a 1,000-word essay on a topic relating to mental health in psychology – thinking independently and critically to demonstrate a genuine understanding of the subject matter.
Pictured - left to right: Head of Psychology at Hautlieu School, Adrian Moss, third place winner Sian Butler, first prize winner Nathan Healey, second place winner Yasmin Hayes and Mourant Counsel, Sarah Huelin. (Mourant)
Feeding back on Nathan’s winning entry, the judges wrote: “Throughout the essay there are high levels of reflection, critical analysis and good use of psychological terminology, which is used effectively. It is these level of evaluation of evidence and the solid structure of the essay in conveying a balance of argument with several sources of evidence that the judges will have found appealing to read.
“Nathan also provides an effective conclusion. It summarises the overall findings of the analysis of the research evidence. It also conveys a balance of the key findings and make a suggestion as to the future direction, based on his analysis of the evidence, as to why the practice of solitary confinement should not be maintained. In doing so, it neatly addresses the original aim of the essay and keeps it tightly focused on mental health.”
Second place was awarded to Yasmin Hayes for her written debate of whether individuals with schizophrenia are predisposed to commit crime and third place was secured by Sian Butler who considered to what extent the mental disorder Pervasive Refusal Syndrome is caused by erroneous cognitions.
Pictured: The students' essays contemplated issues of mental health within psychology.
Commenting on the contest, Mourant Counsel and sponsor of the programme said: “This competition provides an excellent platform to encourage young people in Jersey to consider, talk openly and share their thoughts on mental health.
"We're thrilled to have attracted almost double the number of entries this year compared to 2018. The quality of the essays was very strong and we congratulate Nathan, Yasmin and Sian on their achievement and engaging in the dialogue on this important issue."
The competition entries were judged anonymously by Michelle Vaughan - Principal Educational Psychologist, Ruth Emsley - Principal Prison Psychologist (retiring) and Rachel Baxter - Senior Adviser with responsibility for teaching and learning and secondary curriculum from the Education Department.
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.