Among the numerous cruel tactics utilized to torture and harass captives, sleep deprivation is often overlooked as a dehumanizing torture method, as at a first glance, the process lacks any physically inflicted pain. Sleep deprivation, being “one of the most prevalent and widely used methods of psychological torture” (Pérez-Sales 1), afflicts numerous health consequences. Various forms of sleep deprivation torture include “constant illumination, cold conditions, loud noises being played, constant and repetitive awakening, [and] forced standing” (Tabor).

As a result of being so commonly utilized as a form of torture, dilemmas on the act’s morality and the boundary between what should be allowed or not have brewed. Various court cases involving the use of sleep deprivation to torture incarcerated subjects have raised questions on the morals and extent to which intentional sleep deprivation is dehumanizing. Cases such as LeMaire v. Maass present verdicts that reflect the contrasting perspectives on where the boundary between constitutional and unconstitutional forms of sleep deprivation lie.

Sleep is an essential function for all humans. Insufficient amounts of sleep, “characterized by a maximum of 4 h[ours] of sleep per night for one to six consecutive nights” (Nollet 3) would lead to” reduced reactivity and slower recovery of the cortisol response” (ibid. 3), ultimately resulting in an increase of stress and even disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease. In a study conducted by Liu et al. (2019), the effects of one night of disruption in sleep on younger and older adults found “significant changes in mood in young people and a decline in memory in older adults” (Liu et al., 2019). From just one night of sleep disturbance, affective and mental alterations are evident in humans. If prisoners undergo numerous nights of sleep disturbance, the detrimental mental and emotional effects would only magnify.

Torturous sleep deprivation would often last “up to 180 hours” (Sharuk, p. 710) and the subjects would typically be forced into uncomfortable positions when chained or restrained, inevitably resulting in dysfunctions in parts of the body and long-lasting damage to the subjects’ mental and emotional state.

Referring back to the case of LeMaire v. Maass, the verdict raises questions about the extent to which forced sleep deprivation is categorized as torture. In this case, the plaintiff Samuel LeMaire was incarcerated in the Disciplinary Segregation Unit of the Oregon State Penitentiary. In the unit, LeMaire was trapped in a cell that was “lighted 24 hours per day, which the plaintiff alleged disrupted his sleep and led to psychological problems” (Tabor). Justifications for the sleep deprivation torture made by the defense focused on LeMaire’s vulgar and impulsive behavior in which he “assaulted officers with urine and feces” and “stabbed his [inmate] twelve to fourteen times” (Samuel), placing him in the Disciplinary Segregation Unit. Among the arguments made during court debates, the practices of sleep deprivation in the Disciplinary Segregation Unit were presented alongside the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment, on whether the form of punishment was justified. Chief Judge Owen Panner justifies the ruling in favor of LeMaire that “[t]here is no legitimate penological justification for requiring plaintiff to suffer physical and psychological harm by living in constant illumination. This practice is unconstitutional” (Tabor).

The United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) characterizes torture as “intentional infliction of severe physical or mental pain or suffering by a public official for a specific purpose” (Tabor). Despite the widely established condemnation of torture, many interrogation groups still implement torture practices such as sleep deprivation, as “sleep deprivation can be, and is, used as a very effective form of interrogation” (Allison, p. 20). With no concrete standard on defining what form of pain is severe to the point of being unlawful, “interrogators often dodge U.N. sanctions and codes by operating within the ambiguity surrounding definitions of certain words” (ibid., p. 20).

A significant factor to why sleep deprivation torture is still practiced today is due to the futility in explicitly characterizing the practice of sleep deprivation under the criteria of what is considered torture, as the UNCAT’s definition “fails to designate any particular acts—such as sleep deprivation— as torture” (Sharuk, p. 702). Even with the evident health risks and detriments that result from sleep deprivation, it is still practiced for the purpose of squeezing out information from detainees, as is similar to all other torture methods because detainers can easily bypass law that does not explicitly set boundaries on torturous sleep deprivation. A tradeoff between the process of extracting intel from subjects and valuing the fundamental human right of sleep subsists today. Beyond the scope of incarceration, sleep deprivation is implicitly present in today’s labor culture, with employees and even students trudging through nights of unhealthy amounts of sleep.

Name: Daniel Choi

Year: First-year (Class of 2028)

Major: Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology

Hometown: Bellevue, Washington

Reason of interest: I want to dig more into the different perspectives of how the medical field clashes with ethics and the justice system today.