Nutraloaf
According to this article, a prisoner in a Vermont jail, charged in a school murder of two people, had been assaulting guards and decorating his cell with his excrement. The staff changed his meal to a combination of foods - "nutraloaf" - spinach, bread, beans, etc. mixed into a meatloaf type concoction. It requires no utensils so the prisoner loses access to tools to store and fling his crap. It is a full nutritious meal but horrible enough tasting that it encourages the prisoner to behave better.
The man started a class action lawsuit that will go to the Vermont Supreme Court today, essentially stating horrible tasting food is a punishment, and that he should have had a formal disciplinary hearing before being subject to such punishment.
Do you and I have a right to tax-payer funded, nutritious, good tasting food? How many people at your local soup kitchen would take a free serving of nutraloaf every now and then, no matter how bad it tastes? Already in jail on murder charges, he needs another hearing to determine if his guard-assaulting, crap-flinging behavior justifies the staff feeding him awful tasting food until he changes his behavior?
I see cases like this where the debate is whether the prisoner's rights are being violated. I usually disagree, but I at least see the legal ground that they are standing on. This one seems like a good example of the type of mentality and process that makes it harder for prison staff to do their job, easier for prisoners to feel quite at home in jail (and we see by the repeat crime rate that it is not an effective deterrent), and wastes taxpayer dollars in many ways.
I know when we're talking about rights it is a scary, potentially slippery slope, but there is a cliff on the other side too. Not saying there are easy answers, but I'd love to hear McCain, Clinton, or Obama talk about these type of issues at less than a 100K foot view.





