Inmates Strike Over Bid to End Conjugal Visits

In the first organized protest against proposed new limits on rights long cherished by state prison inmates, about 1,000 convicts at the prison here have gone on strike over a rule that would sharply restrict conjugal visits, officials said Tuesday.

The convicts, housed in one of the prison’s maximum security blocks, have refused to come out of their cells since Sunday night for work, recreation, laundry or even meals, prison officials said. No violence has been reported, spokesman Dean Crenshaw said.

The strike began, officials said, in anticipation of the proposal that would ban overnight family visits for those inmates serving time for murder, spousal abuse and a wide array of sex crimes.

The move to limit conjugal visits comes as the state Department of Corrections is instituting or considering several other get-tough rules, including banning pornography, limiting access to weights in exercise yards and imposing grooming standards.

The striking inmates in the C-block at the California State Prison at Lancaster were surviving on soup, crackers and chips purchased from the prison canteen and squirreled away in anticipation of the protest, Crenshaw said. No end was in sight, he said, adding that prison officials were “informally talking with inmates” about a return to “regular programming” at the prison, which holds 4,100 convicts.

For inmates, the right to a conjugal visit is an emotional issue. Prison officials would not permit interviews with striking inmates, but Robert Parker, 45, an inmate on the neighboring D-block, said in a phone interview Tuesday that restricting the visits was all but certain to heighten tension inside the prison walls.

“What incentive would a man have to do right?” asked Parker, serving time for kidnaping and robbery. “You ain’t got nothing to lose.”

Martha Riley, 51, of Lincoln Heights, agreed. Her 48-year-old husband is on C-block doing 36 years to life for murder.

“What you’re doing is creating a desperate subclass with nothing to lose,” Riley said.

Riley, who said she has enjoyed conjugal visits with her husband about every four months for the last 11 years, said that the stays are “incredibly treasured” by inmates’ wives.

Under the proposed rule, she and her husband would no longer be allowed the intimate visits.

“I talk to so many women who say, ‘It’s not just the sex,’ ” Riley said. “I think anyone can appreciate that. Without any intimacy, it would be very hard to maintain a marriage.”

During regular visits guards are vigilant. “That is not conducive to an exchange of feelings, openness and intimacy,” she said.

State Corrections Director James H. Gomez formally issued the new rule Monday, but decided not to implement it until after a hearing April 27, giving prisoners, their families and others time to comment, Department of Corrections spokeswoman Christine May said.

“Family visiting is a privilege that must be earned,” the proposed rule says. “Because it is unsupervised, it is a privilege based on trust and that trust must also be earned.”

Conjugal visits for inmates in California date back to Ronald Reagan’s tenure as governor. He instituted the program in 1968 as part of an effort to reduce homosexual rapes in prison.

Over the years, corrections officials came to see the visits as an effective reward for good behavior by inmates.

California is one of seven states that allow such visits. The state spends $3.7 million a year on the program. About 25,000 such visits take place annually.

Tucked away near the C and D yards at the Lancaster prison, which opened in 1993, are 10 one-story stucco bungalows where the 46-hour visits take place, beginning at 11 a.m. on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.

Only wives and, in certain cases, fiancees may visit--no girlfriends. Also allowed are parents, siblings, children, grandparents and grandchildren.

The bungalows, Riley said, are actually “quite pleasant.” Each has two small bedrooms, one with a double bed, the other with two twin beds, prison spokesman Crenshaw said. There’s one bathroom and another room that doubles as living room and kitchenette with a refrigerator, electric stove and dinette set, complete with six chairs, he said.

Bungalow 8, the one Riley and her husband have been regularly assigned, has “these large Naugahyde chairs in them,” Riley said. “Because inmates have nothing but steel to sit on, it’s quite wonderful to sit on, these big, stuffy things. There’s an easy chair and a couch.

“My husband loves to sit on the easy chair.”

A TV is available, she added, but no VCR.

Last Friday, Riley got a hint that the proposed new rules might spark trouble. Her husband spoke of “a mishmash rumor to the effect that (prison officials) were taking away everything by regulation, including cigarettes, coffee, candy and weight (training) piles,” she said.

On Sunday, only one of the approximately 1,000 inmates in C-block came out of the cells for the evening meal, Crenshaw said. There has been some erosion in prisoner unity since then. On Monday morning, the count was up to three. On Tuesday morning, it was five.

But by Tuesday night, 150 inmates went to dinner.

At other California prisons, the rule has prompted “whispers, possibilities” of protests but “nothing has actually occurred,” May said.

Authorities at Lancaster had not identified a leader of the strike, Crenshaw said.

Asked to predict how long inmates were prepared to stay in their cells, he answered: “It’s hard to tell.”

Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento and correspondent Mark Sabbatini in Santa Clarita contributed to this report.