Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medical Parole topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advocates, clinicians and exonerees press for elder and medical parole changes
Summary
Supporters told the committee that Massachusetts imprisons a disproportionate number of older people and that the current medical-parole process is slow and underused. Clinicians, exonerees and family members urged changes in S.1722/H.2693 to speed hearings, add screening and reduce deaths in custody.
At the joint public hearing, dozens of witnesses recommended statutory changes to allow timely release of incarcerated elders and medically vulnerable people. Testimony included clinicians, advocacy groups, exonerees and people currently incarcerated.
Several speakers described the human cost of denying timely medical parole: clinicians recounted patients who died in hospitals while shackled or whose families were permitted very limited bedside time; former inmates and exonerees described long waits and multiple denials before relief. James Carver, recently released after decades in custody, told the committee he had been denied medical parole despite severe, ongoing medical needs including cancers, stroke-related disability, and hearing loss; he said care improved after release. Medical providers from academic hospitals described cases in which in‑custody patients deteriorated rapidly and argued that DOC environments are ill-suited for long‑term, complex medical care.
Researchers and advocates presented data showing Massachusetts has among the oldest incarcerated populations in the country and that relatively few medical‑parole petitions have succeeded since the 2018 Criminal Justice Reform Act. The American Civil Liberties Union and advocacy groups cited a low grant rate and racial disparities in approvals.
Witnesses asked the Joint Committee to advance S.1722 / H.2693 to clarify timelines for medical‑parole petitions, add cognitive screening for elders, and permit the parole board to consider elder parole in cases where an individual is not yet medically eligible but would present low public‑safety risk due to age and time served.
Ending
Committee members heard firsthand accounts from families and clinicians but did not vote. Advocates asked for expedited review and stronger statutory tools to prevent elders from dying in custody without meaningful review.
