California temporarily halts medical parole for inmates in prisons

Tossing Prisoners Back Behind Bars: California Shuts Down Medical Parole Program

California has scrapped its court-ordered medical parole program, instead electing to send the most incapacitated inmates back to state prisons or discharge them early through other means. This move has thrust a wave of protests from attorneys representing inmates and the original author of the medical parole legislation, who allege that this decision puts a vulnerable population in harm's way unnecessarily.

This latest twist comes in the midst of a long-running effort to free prisoners deemed so ill that they no longer pose a threat to society.

"We've got concerns about their ability to meet the needs of the population, such as memory care, dementia, traumatic brain injury," said attorney Sara Norman, who represents the prisoners in a nearly three-decade-old federal class-action lawsuit. "These are not people who are fully in command of their surroundings or their memories – they're helpless."

Keeping older inmates in prison costs twice as much as housing younger ones, as per Johns Hopkins University researchers, and prisoners aged 55 and older are over twice as likely to suffer cognitive difficulties when compared to non-incarcerated seniors.

Medical parole is available to the tiniest fraction of California's 90,000 prisoners – those who have a "significant and permanent" disability that leaves them unable to care for themselves. In-prison facilities provide more expensive, substandard care compared to community-based health facilities.

California houses those approved for medical parole in a specialized nursing facility instead of a state prison. Known as compassionate release, this strategy allows prisoners to maintain their legal status while receiving care outside prison walls. The state achieved this setup via a contract with Golden Legacy Care Center in Sylmar, which is no longer in operation.

The California Correctional Health Care Services spokesperson, Kyle Buis, described the discontinued medical parole program as being "paused," as in-prison facilities accommodate returning patients, and officials take steps to increase the use of compassionate release.

While California is one of 47 states with a medical parole law, the use of such programs remains minimal, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Eligibility and procedural hurdles are common reasons these laws are rarely used.

Some states have moved to broaden medical parole programs. Michigan expanded its program because the original version was too hard to implement and resulted in the release of only one person. New York has broad criteria for release but grapples with finding nursing home placements for parolees.

Medical parole dates back to 1997 in California, when corrections officials could petition for the release of dying prisoners in a rarely-utilized process. However, this initiative led to the freeing of just two prisoners in 2009, while California's medical parole program, officially created in 2011, granted medical parole to nearly 300 prisoners since 2014.

Medi-Cal, California's Medicaid program, did not cover medical parolees' care costs because they were still considered legally incarcerated.

The expiration of the contract with Golden Legacy led to the return of 20 prisoners to state prisons, while one was released through standard procedures. Another 36 were recommended for compassionate release, with 26 being granted and eight denied. Two of the recommended candidates died before their petitions were reviewed.

The surge of compassionate release, accelerated by a 2022 law that eased eligibility criteria, is expected to result in around 100 prisoners each year being freed. Supporters of the policy contend that compassionate release allows terminally ill inmates to die with dignity while reducing the burden on the already-strained prison system.

Critics, however, argue that California's decision to halt medical parole in favor of relying solely on compassionate release is unwise. Democratic State Sen. Mark Leno, the original author of California's medical parole law, characterized the state's choice as "perfectly inhumane" and unlawful without legislative approval.

The abolishment of California's medical parole program in 2025 might be met with controversy, as it could potentially jeopardize the wellbeing of inmates with significant disabilities, such as neuropathy and dementia, who are unable to care for themselves.
General-news outlets may report on the effortless transitioning of prisoners with severe health issues from the medical parole program to compassionate release in 2025, which could potentially reduce the strain on the prison system while improving healthcare outcomes for these inmates.
Crimes and Justice reporting might cover the protests from attorneys and advocates in 2025, arguing that California's decision to discontinue the medical parole program and rely solely on compassionate release is inhumane, unnecessary, and potentially illegal without legislative approval, putting a vulnerable population at risk.