Prison dentistry conjures visions of a “white, lab-coated, devilish dentist in a darkened room with a blinding overhead light, bending his tall, lanky body over his screaming victim, restrained in a dental chair, while drilling into his victim’s mouth, savagely yanking out one tooth after another – as the high – pitched shrill of the drill deafens the blood curdling cries” as in the chilling scene of the 70’s hit movie, “The Marathon Man”, starring Dustin Hoffman. Numerous remakes of another popular horror movie dentist is “The Little shop of Horrors” depicting the insane dentist using anesthesia to numb the pain he’s inflicting upon his patients using rusty dental tools and medieval implements of torture as he rips teeth and nerves out of the heads of his victims. But what do horror movie dentists and prison dentistry share in common? Prison dentists do little more than take X-rays, subjecting prisoners to months of pain and abscesses, culminating in prisoners, me included, having to yank-out our own bloody teeth, due to “negligence, indifference, and endless delays.” Horror movie dentists, a little more skilled at rapidly removing teeth, do not allow six months to lapse between visits – unlike prison dentists – they keep their appointments without delays. Both horror movie dentists and prison dentists are sadistic in their own ways.
Most prisoners leave prison after years or decades to re-integrate back into society-clinging to a thin veneer of hope that their smile and appearance will be acceptable to a prospective employer. With abscesses, broken teeth, gaps between the front teeth, discolored, stained teeth (green or black), bad breath due to poot hygiene, or periodontal disease and bleeding gums, the parolee sits before the potential employer. Behind the mask of the interview, the employer may be recoiling from revulsion at the sight of the parolees deteriorating and rotting teeth. The employer will pass on this candidate as a viable fit for sales or customer-service related positions. Working with the public requires a pleasant, if not, charming smile. A gnarly toothed smile, like a Florida crocodile, a checker-board smile with missing teeth, or a Jack O’Lantern sinister grin, raises alarms as to the person’s abilities in the competitive, new “post-pandemic” working environment. I considered how many parolees, over the years, lost out on great employment opportunities due to a lack of adequate dental care and concluded that “dental care is a necessity, not a luxury,” in a modern world- where the emphasis is all on the optics.
\To make a substantial change in the quality of dental care for prisoners, I needed to assume the role of a tigress, baring her fangs in this “dentigerous” advocacy campaign. I roared at the Department of Corrections for nearly a decade pushing for dental services to provide inmates with preventive dental care removing plague from their teeth, so the teeth can be preserved. In “dentalese” the language of dentists, it’s Known as a “prophylaxis” (not to be confused with “prophylactic”- a condom treatment. It’s the scraping of tartar and plaque from the teeth, in between the teeth, and from the gums. The dental hygienist also polishes the teeth, helping to protect what teeth remain.
I began the arduous process by submitting a paper request to see the dentist. After a three month wait, I made myself comfy in the reclining dental chair careful to keep my hands on my lap, trying to hide my anxiety. I requested the cleaning service, knowing I would be denied. The dentist wasted no time denying me my request. However, the dentist aware of the problem, explained to me in “dentalese” that he needed – a cavitron to complete the prophylaxis treatment. He stated, “No one will pay for that machine.” I growled, “Wanna bet?” Back in my cell, I shoved the oozing clutter of paper off my desk. I drafted a letter to the legal counsel of the Department of Corrections, under our state’s transparency of government act, called the “Inspection of Public Records Act. I requested a copy of the dental service provider’s contract with medical, under the jurisdiction of the above statute. About three weeks later, I received a notice that I could receive, review, and copy the agreement under the medical services policy and under I.P.R.A. Shortly thereafter, the contract arrived. Luck still holding – it cost me just 50 cents.
Once you start acquiring the contracts of prison vendors, you begin to comprehend the complex, internal mechanisms of prison operations, often seen by prisoners as a “puzzle palace.” The clarity of the game becomes obvious, as you observe that denying prisoners the stipulated right as delineated in the contract for preventive care, saves the Department of Corrections tens of thousands of dollars each year. It also allows prisoners teeth to rot. In this instance, the contract specifically reads: “Preventive measures to maintain optimal oral health, and complete dental examination and prophylaxis on all inmates every two years.”
Another sentence modifier adds, “the prophylaxis is the scraping of the teeth.” And there you have it, yet another attempt by the powers that be, to defraud prisoners of their rights under the contractual agreement granted by the state legislature and taxpayers to ensure prisoners’ teeth do not decay. For the past 30 years, no one could remember a time when we had real dental services. (Even horror movie-dentists had female hygienists working in their offices).
To be fair, the prison dentist did not actively promote the fraud. The corrections department had the dentist chained to a desk, performing clerk’s duties within two of the three days he stationed himself inside the infirmary. This created a staggering list of inmates in need of dental services. Due to the pain and discomfort, we were forced to resolve our own dental dilemmas-utilizing denture tablets sold by the commissary department. The label read, “hydrogen peroxide” (jet fuel). The dentist, restrained by the corrections department, spent laborious hours attending to data entries on the prison computer. The hydrogen peroxide killed the infection, as well as the healthy gum tissue. The entire process also killed the dentist’s motivation to provide his skillset to needy prisoners with blackened gums.
With the contract in my physical possession, I began phase Il of my campaign to “take a bite” out of the corrupt practices of the corrections department. while gnawing on a carrot stick, I wrote out the following complaint: “The above entity (the D.O.C.) refuses to allow us teeth cleaning despite the willing dentist. The [prison] needs a cavitron, but the medical provider and the [corrections department] refuse to provide it. This facility could easily provide it and allow the dentist four (4) days a week instead of three (3). However, he is overloaded with paperwork. Those of us who are long-term are losing their teeth due to a lack of preventive care. End.”
A contractual agreement between two parties (bi-lateral agreement) to provide limited dental care to inmates was created by the State legislature and funded by taxpayers of the state and signed off by the governor’s office. But graft and collusion by the top administrators redirected this budget elsewhere. Prisoners had been intentionally denied medical services, while prison officials pocketed the funds.
About ten days after submitting the complaint to the grievance officer, a formal response was returned, (equal to warp time in prison), and attached to my complaint. The chief medical bureaucrat deemed the issue resolved. He, unwittingly, did not read the copy of the attached contract. This placed me in the proverbial “catbird-seat.” The bureaucrat spills out the usual dental nonsense, “…we do not have a cavitron machine and do not currently provide regular teeth cleaning services to patients. Inmates receive oral hygiene instruction (brush your teeth three times a day…blah…blah…blah! At this time, oral hygiene instruction and dental health instruction is provided,” (what now, a college class?).
With the bureaucrat’s brusque send off, thinking he just saved his corporation money, I moved the informal complaint to a formal grievance. I attached the grievance and a copy of the contract, highlighting the two key sentences the bureaucrat chose to ignore. Where the grievance asks for relief, I asked for monetary damages for denying me preventive dental care for 20 years. Three months after the corrections department received my grievance, I received a visit from the compliance officer. Smiling, he stated, “The cavitation is on its way here.” I had won. By the following week, teeth cleanings had commenced. I was the first inmate.
After scraping my teeth, commenting negatively on the condition of my teeth, I sweetly asked the dentist if he intended to polish my teeth, “Oh,” he replied, “that machine is broken.” Prison dentistry: I shuddered.
It’s a toss-up between what’s worse, horror-movie dentists or prison dentistry. But the “rotten truth” is that prison officials all over the country, are diverting funds, meant for prisoners’ dental needs (per the agreement), into slush funds used for “various nefarious” purposes. Prisoners released back into society, should at the least, have a healthy set of teeth and gums to succeed in re-integration. To look as if a “horror-movie” dentist visited destruction upon the mouths of prisoners will not help prisoners get jobs and rejoin society as responsible and compassionate citizens. Afterall, it’s a difficult path to recovery when you have $8,000 worth of dental surgery needed due to corrupt practices of prison officials. I don’t have enough teeth left to take a serious bite out of the corruption, and that’s the rotten truth.
No Comments