A New ‘Ecology of Cruelty’? The Changing Shape of Maximum-security Custody in England and Wales

  • Alison Liebling
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology book series (PSIPP)


[T]he new prison sentences share with the death penalty this [life trashing] quality ... shattering any possibility of common ground between agents of punishment and subjects of punishment.... Such sentences are cruel because they are undisguisedly aimed at causing despair in their targets (Simon 2001a, p. 129).


Bare Life Penal Policy Penal Practice Agentic Capacity Eighth Amendment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agamberi, G 1995, Homo sacer: sovereign power and bare life, Stanford University Press Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, Z, 1989, Modernity and the Holocaust, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  3. Bottoms, A & Tankebe, J 2012, ‘Beyond procédural justice: a dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice’, Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, vol. 102, pp. 119–70.Google Scholar
  4. Brown v. Plata, No 09-1233, Kennedy, J May 23 2011.Google Scholar
  5. Crawley, E & Sparks, R 2005, ‘Older men in prison: survival, coping and identity’ in The Effects of Imprisonment, eds A Liebling & S Maruna, Cullompton, Willan Publishing, Devon.Google Scholar
  6. Crewe, B 2009, The prisoner society: power, adaptation and social life in an English prison, Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crewe, B, Liebling, A & Hulley, S 2014, ‘Heavy/light, absent/present: rethinking the “weight” of imprisonment’, British Journal of Sociology vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 387–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dolovich, S 2012, ‘Creating the permanent prisoner’, in Life without parole: America’s new death penalty, eds CJ Ogietree & A Sarat, New York University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Fader, JJ 2013, Falling back: incarceration and transitions to adulthood among urban youth, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.Google Scholar
  10. Graham, R & White, R 2014, Innm-ative justice, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  11. Haney, C 2009, Reforming punishment: psychological limits to the pains of imprison-ment, American Psychological Association, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  12. Haney. C 2008, ‘A culture of harm: taming the dynamics of cruelty in supermax prisons’, Criminal Justice and Behaviour, vol. 35, pp. 956–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harcourt, BE 2007, Against prediction: profiling, policing and punishing in an actuarial age, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  14. Harris, GW 1997, Dignity and mlnerability: strength and quality of character, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  15. HMCIP 2008. Report on an unannounced full follow-up inspection ofHMP Whitemoor, London: HM Inspectorate of Prisons, HM Inspectorate of Prisons, Lois don.Google Scholar
  16. Home Office 1968, The regime for long-term prisoners in conditions of maximum security. Report of the Advisory Council on the Penal System (Radzinowicz Report), HMSO London.Google Scholar
  17. Home Office 1984, Managing the long-term prison system (the Control Review Committee report), HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  18. Home Oflice 1991, Prison disturbances April 1990: report of an inquiry by the Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Woolf (Parts I and II) and his Honour fudge Stephen Tumirn (Part UMSO, London.Google Scholar
  19. Irwin, J 2009, Lifers: seeking redemption in prison, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  20. Jacobs, j 2014, “‘Punishing society: Incarceration, Coercive Corruption, and the Liberal Polity.’, Criminal Justice Ethics, vol. 33, no. 3, 200–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lazarus, L 2006, ‘Conceptions of liberty deprivation’, The Modem Law Review, vol. 738, pp. 740–4.Google Scholar
  22. Liebling, A 2002 ‘A “liberal regime within a secure perimeter”? Dispersal prisons and penal practice in the late twentieth century’, in Ideology, Crime and Justice: A Symposium in Honour of Sir Leon Radzino;vicz, eds M Tonry & AE Bottoms, Cambridge Criminal justice Series, Institute of Criminology, Cambridge, pp. 97–150.Google Scholar
  23. Liebling, A 2014, ‘Moral and philosophical problems of long-term imprisonment’, Studies in Christian Ethics, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 258–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liebling, A, with Arnold, II 2004, Prisons and their moral performance: a study of values, quality and prison life. Clarendon Studies in Criminology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  25. Liebling, A & Arnold, H 2012, ‘Social relationships between prisoners in a maximum security prison: violence, faith, and the declining nature of trust’, Journal of Criminal Justice, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 413–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liebling, A & Price, D 2001, The prison officer. Prison Service (and Waterside Press), Leyhill. 2nd edition completed February 2009.Google Scholar
  27. Liebling, A, Arnold, H & Straub, C 2011., An exploration of staff-prisoner relationships ai Elb/IP Whiternoor: twelve years on. National Offender Management Service, London.Google Scholar
  28. Liebling, A, Arnold, H & Straub, C 2015 fin press), ‘Prisons research beyond the conventional: dialogue, “creating miracles” and staying sane in a maximum security prison’, in International Handbook of Prison Ethnography eds D Drake, R Earle & J Sloan, Palgrave Macmilian, Houndmills, Basingstone, UK.Google Scholar
  29. Martina, S, LeBel, TP, Mitchell, N & Naples, M 2004, ‘Pygmalion in the reintegration process: desistance from crime through the looking glass’, Psychology Crime Si Law, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 271–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Padfield, N 2002, Beyond the tariff: human rights and the release of life sentence prisoners, Will an Publishing, Devon.Google Scholar
  31. Rhodes, L 2004, Total confinement: madness and reason in the maximum security prison, University of California Press, Berkeley CA.Google Scholar
  32. Rhodes, L 2009, ‘Supermax prisons and the trajectory of exception’, in Special Issue New Perspectives on Crime and Criminal Justice (Studies in Law, Politics and Society, Volume 47), ed A Sarat, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingly, pp. 193–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Scheff, TJ & Retzinger, SM 2001, Emotions and violmce: shame and rage in destructive conflicts, Univcrse, Lincoln, NE.Google Scholar
  34. Shaley, S 2009, Supermax: controlling risk through solitary confinement, Willan Publishing, Devon.Google Scholar
  35. Shapland JM & Bottoms A 2011, ‘Reflections on social values, offending and desistance among young adult recidivists’, Punishment & Sodcty, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 256–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Simon, J 2001a, ‘Entitlement to cruelty’: the end of welfare and the punitive mentality in the United States’ in Crime, Risk and Justice: The Politics of Crime Control in Liberal Democracies, eds K Stenson & RR Sullivan, Willan Publishing, Devon, pp. 125–43.Google Scholar
  37. Simon, J 2001b, ‘Fear and loathing in late modernity: reflections on the cultural sources of mass imprisonment in the United States’, Punishment & Society vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Simon, J 2014, Mass incarceration on trial: a remarkable court decision and the future of prison in America, The New Press, New York.Google Scholar
  39. Sparks, R, Bottoms, AE & Hay, W 1996, Prisons and the problem of order, Clarendon Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van Zyl Smit, D & Snacken, S 2009, Principles of European prison law and policy: penology and human rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  41. Ziarec, E 2012, ‘Bare life’, in Impasses of the Post-Global: Theory in the Era of Climate Change, Vol. 2, ed II Sussman, Open Humanities Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Alison Liebling 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alison Liebling
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations