Developing a kindness ecosystem for the digital prison

Kindness. A word that resonates with our hearts. A word that evokes compassion, humility, care and dignity. My arrival to this contemplative point in my research journey has been long. Fascinated in the intersection between the inside world and the outside, I have been drawn to how technology even in it’s crudest forms like the pen and the telephone have collided with the lives on those sentenced to time inside our prisons. I am indebted mostly to the thinking of others and the privileged opportunities of those living and working in prison settings.

Meyrowitz (1985) told us that ‘technology is not neutral’- I must say I agree. It changes our lives, our interactions, our feelings, our aspirations, our schedules, our traditions. I am deeply curious as to how humans respond to it, use it, tailor it and resist it. The context of the prison, for me at least, makes it all the more interesting to conceive how the birth of technology is shifting our understanding and ideas of what technology does but also what the prison does. For me humans are at the centre of all discussions about technology. If there is one thing you take from this blog- let it be that.

For most readers, you will understand that prisons are complex places, governed by regulation, legislation, policy, culture, politics, economics and so much more. Prisons are tasked with delivering so many objectives whilst maintaining public safety, reducing harm whilst contributing to rehabilitative aims- of which can be ambiguous and unweilding. A challenging place with challenging people and difficult to comprehend how kindness can be discussed in the same sentence! But, in my opinion there is all the more reason to- there is a moral obligation. The advent of technology presents further challenges where mechanisms and forms of control all of a sudden can be assisted merely by the production of bites of data itself. An ethical minefield in an ethical minefield- double jeopardy.

HOWEVER- I am always inspired by many practitioners and scholars and through my own empirical observations I am surprised to have discovered the power and role that kindness could have in developing our digital prisons. I’ll set out some of these important bodies of work in order to encourage you all to reflect on your intentions as developers, practitioners and policy makers. Tech UK’s Digital Justice 2021 week has galavnised the importance of relationships, transparency and radical thinking. All of which ARE qualities and acts of kindness. The week brought together technology companies, senior civil servants and academics. I was inspired by a commitment to betterment and reform.

In our book chapter, Steven Van De Steene and I propose a number of ethical principles. These are however useless, unless we understand the moral drivers in order to put these principles into practice. We argue that in order for technological development to be meaningful the underpinning motivations need to be driven by innovation that is disruptive to forms of penal power. We have Graham and White to thank for their model of innovation in the justice landscape for getting us to this point. First and foremost, any claims of innovation can vary- some can merely maintain what has always been done but do it differently and others can bring about radical change by disrupting established processes, policies and practice. Taking these ideas one step closer to our recommended ethical principles the influential work of Riesdorf and Rikard on a model of digital rehabilitation sets out a wonderful and carefully detailed pathway of digital rehabilitation. Where technology can enhance the routes towards rehabilitation.

Both innovation and rehabilitation in the context of digital is underpinned and fuelled by, in our opinion, five key moral drivers:

• Prepare- citizens for re-entry
• Normal- permit routine, everyday experiences
• Human Right- protect the interests of humans
• Harmful to deprive- eradicate pain
• Restorative- create therapeutic and nourishing experiences

This is all very well but as Riesdorf, Van De Steene and I are currently finding at the moment in our exploration of digital maturity of prison services, issues of moral purpose are hard to achieve. We are still analysing the data from this study but our interviews with chief information officers across different global jurisdictions illuminate how difficult it is to manage and trigger change, especially in a traditionally analogue world. To make the right decisions to satisfy needs of the ‘business’ versus the needs of ‘people’ is a challenging thing to get right. But not impossible.

The current global pandemic has seen an increased appetite and demand to digitize our prisons. With some positive outcomes for both people in prison and their families. In the UK and beyond Unilink delivered and supported thousands of video calls and BT managed to launch a pilot SMS Text service for male prisoners at HMP Parc, UK. I am privileged enough to be invited to contribute to developments, discussions and reviews on this topic and there is a sense of urgency in the air and an openness to change that I have witnessed so vividly. Reflecting back on this year of lockdown and social isolation the role that technology plays in our lives has become amplified, whether we like it, love it, resist or hate it- everyday practices require basic digital competencies and access to hard and software-and without prejudice. The trajectory is set and digital runs at the heart of our normal- the pull and push is evident. Sadly, lockdown shone a light on poverty with many children and households left isolated and abandoned because the state couldn’t deliver its services effectively or even at all and especially those in most need. In these circumstances digital was they only method to reach people. Our justice landscape is no exception with delays in justice, calls for early release and new lockdown legislation consuming police and courts time. For justice to happen meaningfully, justice now needs to be digitally enabled. The pressure to provide solutions is an unanticipated breath of fresh air but also comes with huge risks. Huge risks to create more harm, be more punitive and actually make our penal problems worse and not better. We, therefore have a moral obligation to design this out. As Steven and I suggest an ethical set of principles to provide valuable guardrails is a valuable and necessary undertaking. The digital evolution in penal settings demands cautious planning- not stipulated by technical standards per se but from a position of compassion and humanity. Sometimes digital technology is not the solution. As we have recommended elsewhere exploring and creating strategies and plans that are needs based will help ensure solutions are needed.

In reviewing our and others efforts so far we are at a cross roads- does justice hurtle down the road of technological determinism driven by performance indicators OR is this an opportunity to recalibrate ways of doing justice differently? Inspired by the work of social policy experts in Scotland the ‘Practice of Kindness’ has illuminated how humanity can be instilled, celebrated and practiced in complex social institutions of which digital interactions have a significant role to play. In short, this work on kindness in public policy identifies some values steps to consider shaped by the work of Brownlie and Anderson;

1. Authentic conversations- user and needs led practice
2. Sharing things- ideas, resources, practice
3. Activating and unlocking spaces- changing and improving experiences and extending social interactions
4. Management and leadership of kindness- user led strategies, policies, working practice
5. Kindness in procurement- needs based, widen market
6. Kindness of societal justice- reform, disruption to harm, acknowledge trauma

Based on evidence elsewhere I’d like to propose an exploration of digital kindness- is kindness inherent in design outcomes or does it merely ameliorate the punitive impact of justice? Digital WILL change the landscape of the prison forever- now is an opportunity to ensure these changes centre humanity and decency at its core. Whilst my ideas are to some degree experimental, provocative and tentative I will be reflecting on the development of a suitable digital kindness ecosystem. The need for this is because our relationships are different through and with the medium of technology, it eclipses and adjoins to everyday life. But it also has the power to harm, alienate, and exploit. As Hildebrant sums up we are not just online we are’ onlife’.  A model which can help developers, practitioners and end users experience compassion with opportunities to flourish.

If you are interested in exploring digital kindness in the context of the penal landscape then please do get in touch. [email protected].