The New York City Board of Correction plans to eliminate the term “inmate” from its jail regulations, substituting it with “person in custody.” This change is part of an ongoing initiative aimed at emphasizing that incarceration doesn’t define a person.
In 2021, efforts began to remove the term “inmate” from the Board’s Minimum Standards. Officials maintained that individuals should not be identified by their imprisonment. The Board stated, “People in DOC custody are people first, and their incarceration isn’t their defining feature.” Consequently, a commitment was made to use person-first language in all standards and communication.
The Board’s plan includes replacing words like “inmates” with “people,” “persons,” or “individuals in custody.” The proposal extends this revision to further areas of regulations. For instance, the section “Classification of Prisoners” is now “Classification of People in Custody.” Definitions define a “person in custody” as “any person confined in a facility.”
This proposal underscores the Board’s intention to perpetuate its previous work stated in 2021. The commitment is evident in various chapters of the regulations. The efforts are part of a broader movement, as seen when New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s 2022 legislation replaced “inmate” with “incarcerated individual.” However, New York City prefers “person in custody.”
The terminology shift coincides with scrutiny over New York City’s correction system. Events like the FIFA World Cup semifinal watch at Rikers Island, attended by Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic mayoral nominee, brought renewed focus. Mamdani reminded attendees, “These are New Yorkers, and they will be New Yorkers post-Rikers.” These semantic changes do not impact jail operations or policies but reflect an effort to modernize language, aligning with the philosophy against defining people by incarceration alone.
Fox News Digital inquired why the Board opted for “person in custody” over the state’s choice of “incarcerated individual” and if public feedback was sought. The Correction Officers’ Benevolent Association and the Vera Institute of Justice were also approached for comments.