Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Restrictive Housing Oversight topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bill to establish restrictive-housing oversight committee draws support and caution from DOC

2875844 · April 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

House Bill 5927 would create an oversight committee to monitor the use of restrictive housing — commonly called solitary confinement — at the Department of Corrections, advocates and clinicians told the House Judiciary Committee.

House Bill 5927 would establish a restrictive-housing oversight committee to monitor the Department of Corrections’ use of restrictive housing (commonly called solitary confinement) and administrative confinement.

Supporters — including clinicians, advocates, and former incarcerated people — told the committee that solitary confinement causes severe mental-health harms and increases suicide risk. Hailey McKee, a witness with lived experience, said she still hears the screaming she witnessed in segregation; other witnesses cited academic studies linking solitary confinement to brain changes, self-harm and higher post-release mortality.

The Rhode Island Developmental Disabilities Council asked the committee to ensure people with intellectual or developmental disabilities are explicitly covered and to include an IDD representative on any oversight body; the witness told the committee she had previously worked with the department to change policies for people with IDD.

The Department of Corrections, represented by Chief of Staff Ryan Crowley, urged caution about prematurely codifying policy changes that the DOC and federal monitors are still evaluating. Crowley described recent reforms implemented in 2023—limits on disciplinary restrictive-housing sanctions, a restorative housing program with an internal 70% success rate, and expanded privileges for people in restrictive housing—but said codification now could create unintended consequences and legal burdens, including increased litigation risk and staffing needs.

Many family members, formerly incarcerated people and community groups urged statutory oversight to make the changes durable and transparent. Witnesses described personal harms and urged codified limits, external monitoring, standards for medical and mental-health care, and clearer documentation. The committee did not take final action and held the bill for further study under the earlier procedural motion.