Incarceration now extends far beyond the four walls of a prison or jail – it can extend into the home and has for over 100,000 people on any given day in the U.S.
This is another form of incarceration called e-carceration, or electronic incarceration.
E-carceration is the use of electronic monitoring for the purpose of monitoring an individual’s location or vitals, tracking an individual’s movements, and constraining an individual’s movements through strict guidelines and rules.
There is a very common misconception that e-carceration or electronic monitoring is an alternative to prison or jail. The truth is that e-carceration is an alternative form of prison.
This distinction is emphasized by James Kilgore, a formerly incarcerated author, educator, and activist. In a podcast titled Beyond Prisons: Challenging E-Carceration, Kilgore argues that e-carceration is just as punitive as physical incarceration due to its massive invasion of privacy, especially in more recent years.
One form of technological innovation that Kilgore points out is the shift from radio frequency devices to GPS trackers and the harm this shift alone has done. Simply put, radio frequency devices are typically used for “curfew monitoring” and use a monitoring unit in the home to detect if a bracelet is in the allowed range and then sends that information to a monitoring center. GPS trackers have the ability to actively or passively track your activity and location and either store that information or report it back using a satellite in real time. The major difference is the ability to see if you are home when you are supposed to be and the ability to see where you are at all times.
Is the latter really freedom?
The harm of e-carceration reaches far beyond privacy issues; this use of invasive technology has the power to further oppress many communities.
This is a fear that Kilgore speaks forcefully about in the previously mentioned podcast. Kilgore discusses an experiment where, when people were released from prison, they were being tracked using e-monitoring that tracked not only their movements, but also their biometrics. The recorded biometrics are then interpreted as individuated, biological indicators of potential violent behavior, and thus have the power to set a model or base-line for criminalization. In other words, rather than focusing on the structural and systemic factors that lead to increased violence, this emphasis on biometrics allows for the criminalization of individuals based on biological data, thus labeling people “violent” based on their body’s heart rate, blood pressure, or other factors, which can then lead to preemptive policing.
Another recent shocking practice concerning electronic monitoring that has come to light is the use of microphones in ankle bracelets. This practice is used in Chicago and typically on juvenile “offenders” and pre-trial defendants. This allows for government agencies to send “push” alerts to the device or listen to conversations – no matter the location or setting, including in the bathroom, a therapy session, etc. This goes far beyond “monitoring” people’s behaviors; this is monitoring people’s entire lives.
E-carceration and electronic monitoring go hand in hand, one facilitating the other. E-carceration does not equal freedom in any sense. This advancement in technology has deprived people of their liberty more than ever before – in completely new ways.
We must monitor technology and create boundaries on how far that technology can go. We have to remember that prison is not necessarily the four walls of a cell: in the age of e-carceration, your own home can become a prison.