2013 California prisoner hunger strike

Health and human rights concerns surrounding California's use of solitary confinement are not a new phenomenon. Questions regarding both the mental and physical health of prisoners kept in solitary confinement have been prevalent since the practice began in the early 1800s. The majority of prisoners confined in solitary confinement in California are contained to 11-foot-by-7-foot windowless concrete cells. These cells generally contain a toilet, shower, a slot in the door large enough for a food tray, and a bed. In the case of Madrid v. Gomez in 1995, the U.S. district court for Northern California determined that a significant number of inmates held in SHU units within Pelican Bay prison suffered from mental health issues. The prisoners' release from the SHU unit can only be reviewed every six years. The supporting opinion on this bipartisan and landmark decision described that the California prison system had failed to meet the minimum requirements needed for the mental and physical health of prisoners. No state besides California is believed to have held such high numbers of prisoners in solitary confinement for such a prolonged period of time. Human Rights Watch, an independent organization that focuses on human rights, found that prolonged use of solitary confinement is inconsistent with respecting the inmates humanity. Amnesty International, a global human rights NGO, voiced support for the hunger striker's concerns as well as saying that California has fallen short of international law and the necessary standards for humane treatment due to California's use of solitary confinement. == Organization of the strike ==

The Hunger strike began in early July 2013 by inmates across prisons in California in an effort to protest solitary confinement and inhumane conditions within the prisons. The strike began and was led by inmates within the Pelican Bay Prison's SHU unit. The leaders of the strike formed the Pelican Bay State Prison SHU Short Corridor Collective in 2011 to protest prolonged solitary confinement and debriefing practices that were common within the prison. The 2011 hunger strike was ended by the organizers after approximately a month because of the agreement by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to make reforms. == Health concerns ==

After a few days of refusing food, the body stops feeling hungry and begins to break down proteins within muscle to create glucose according to the California Correctional Health Care Services. Prisoners were denied access to their medications, and were denied medical oversight. The process of force-feeding, often referred to as "refeeding" within the prison system, can be as severe as inserting feeding tubes into prisoner's noses or stomach. Previously to this order, prisoners who had signed orders not to be resuscitated were not allowed to be force-fed based on California policy. Officials cited concerns over prisoners being coerced into participating in the hunger strike by gangs as a reason to force-feed them, which Judge Henderson agreed to ignore the signed "do-not resuscitate" orders of the prisoners due to these concerns. Despite the concerns by the CDCR that inmates were being coerced into participating, only one instance of explicit coercion was ever recorded by prison officials. By the time the order was put into effect, there were less than 200 prisoners still fasting, and numerous others had been hospitalized. == Legal actions ==

The lawsuit, Todd Ashker, et al., vs. Governor of the State of California, et al., was brought by 10 Pelican Bay State Prison inmates who were housed in the Security Housing Unit (SHU). The lawsuit alleged that long-term confinement in the SHU violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment's clause for due process. The court case on September 1, 2015, was settled resulting in the termination of indeterminate solitary confinement in California and greatly reducing the number of individuals in solitary confinement as a whole. Many prisoners feel that there is still much change needed as the debriefing process for gang affiliated prisoners was not revised. ==See also==