The 1993 introduction of a supermax prison in the Netherlands appears to be somewhat of an anomaly because Dutch prisons are generally considered safe, relaxed, and treatment oriented. The Dutch supermax was the result of crisis-induced reform in response to a series of embarrassing and sensational escapes. The Dutch have apparently come to accept it as a necessary feature, which facilitates progressive regimes in other prisons. However, the perceived success of the supermax has nipped discussions about other options, such as dispersal prisons, in the bud. Normal tensions between rehabilitative ambitions and security concerns become complicated dilemmas in a supermax. More programming or labor compromises security. If security is tightened, prisoners suffer as a direct consequence. The supermax is usually intended for two types of prisoners: escape risks and highly disruptive or dangerous prisoners. These are very different types of prisoners with very different needs. In the Dutch system, a commission decides which prisoner qualifies for the supermax. The commission also decides when a prisoner can be returned to a normal institution. A supermax requires experienced personnel and continuing training programs. Even if all works well, a supermax is guaranteed to generate negative publicity towards the institution and towards the prison system as a whole. The concentration of high-profile criminals serves as a magnet for the media. By placing all escape risks and dangerous prisoners under one roof, the prison system risks public humiliation in the wake of failure. An escape or riot will cause enormous political and societal damage. 12 notes, 17 references