State Senate agrees to delay warrentless arrests for assaulting workers in DDS-funded facilities
Anthony Remillard, an intellectually disabled man, fatally assaulted another resident at the former Templeton Developmental Center in 2013.
Remillard spent seven years in prison after pleading guilty to that killing as well as to a previous assault on a Templeton staff worker and setting fire to a dwelling in Worcester. He was only released to a Department of Developmental Services (DDS)-funded group home after he completed his sentence. Even though he has an intellectual disability (ID), he was found competent to stand trial by a Superior Court judge.
It was due to cases like Remillard’s that we have expressed concerns about legislation pending in Massachusetts that would enhance criminal penalties against individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) who assault healthcare workers in group homes and other DDS-funded residential settings.
Many people with IDD are not capable of controlling their aggressive behaviors and do not have the capacity to knowingly and intentionally commit crimes. Yet, they can and do sometimes face criminal charges for their actions and can end up in prison.
Last week, the state Senate voted in favor of S.3171, a bill “requiring health care employers to develop and implement programs to prevent workplace violence.”
The legislation contains several important provisions relating to developing plans to deal with workplace violence and with training healthcare workers and other personnel to reduce the potential for such violence. But the measure would also enhance criminal penalties for assaulting healthcare workers. That has led to a concern for some that the legislation could push more people with ID into the criminal justice system.
Amendment approved to delay warrantless arrests
Apparently due to that concern, the Senate approved an amendment to S.3171 on Thursday that would delay for a year an authorization in the legislation to police to perform a warrantless arrest of an individual who assaults a worker in a DDS-funded facility. According to advocates for the bill, the one-year exclusion would allow for consideration of alternatives to the arrest and criminal prosecution of persons with IDD who assault healthcare workers.
The Senate also approved a separate amendment that would require police officers responding to reports of workplace violence to use “de-escalation tactics and diversion strategies” before making arrests.
It does appear that the first amendment would not affect a separate section of the bill, which would expand the circumstances under which an individual could be criminally charged for assaulting a healthcare worker to any activity by the healthcare worker in the line of duty. Currently, the law provides for a 2.5-year prison sentence only for assaults on a healthcare worker while the worker is treating or transporting a client.
The legislation now goes to a House-Senate conference committee. In terms of the potential for incarceration of people with IDD, the Senate bill appears to be preferable to the House version of the legislation (H.4767). That House bill would upgrade assaults on healthcare workers to a felony charge, carrying penalties of up to 10 years in state prison.
Studies show many people with IDD end up in the prison system
In 2023, a University of Minnesota Policy Research Brief stated that people with IDD “are overrepresented in the criminal legal system.” The Brief stated that while less than 1% of the U.S. adult population has IDD, between 2–10% of people in jails, prisons, or awaiting trial have IDD.
The Arc of the U.S., citing a 2000 study, reached a similar conclusion, stating that:
Individuals with this disability (IDD)…constitute a small, but nonetheless growing percentage of suspects/offenders within the criminal justice system. While those with intellectual disabilities comprise 2% to 3% of the general population, they represent 4% to 10% of the prison population, with an even greater number of those in juvenile facilities and in jails.
A number of advocacy organizations with which we are aligned on many issues, such as the Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA), are rightly concerned about a serious and ongoing problem of assaults on nurses and other healthcare workers in healthcare facilities. The MNA has pushed for higher criminal penalties for such assaults, but the organization did support a one-year exemption for the DDS-funded facilities.
The doctrine of criminal intent does not always protect people with I/DD
It has been argued that the criminal penalties specified in the legislation apply only to intentional assaults on health care workers, and do not override the clinical and legal protections already in place for individuals whose behaviors stem from their disability.
It’s true that Massachusetts law relies on the doctrine of criminal intent or Mens Rea that requires that prosecutors prove that an individual charged with a crime acted “intentionally,” and not because of accident or negligence. While this ordinarily does provide protection to individuals with IDD, it is still up to the discretion of judges and juries as to whether the defendant acted with criminal intent.
In fact, in Anthony Remillard’s case, he pled guilty to a manslaughter charge in order to avoid a possible life sentence if found guilty by a jury. So his attorney had concluded that the criminal intent doctrine was not likely to protect him from a criminal conviction.
This issue clearly requires striking a delicate balance between ensuring the safety of healthcare workers in all settings and considering the rights of individuals who cannot be held responsible for their aggressive behaviors. Whatever action the conference committee takes on the legislation this year, we hope to continue to work with the MNA and other organizations in improving that balance.
I certainly understand that healthcare workers have and our attacked in both hospitals and non hospitals. For some reason those with IDD continue to be lumped in the category of mental health instead of a neurological or neurodivergent population. Their brains function differently. They don’t have the capacity to understand they are committing a crime and sometimes it’s as simple as not knowing their own strength while trying to be playful, sometimes it’s a violent outburst and sometimes it’s not it of frustration from not being heard, or being abused by others, which is not taken seriously. Abuse of those with IDD is regularly covered up. I’m glad there is a consideration and it will be looked at. Those with IDD need their own category, proper understanding of capacity to consent, capacity to understand, and proper training is really needed statewide. There is such bias and quite frankly wrong perceptions that they keep sticking them in a box that they don’t fit in flattening from ignorance or just lack of focus on the vast changes that need to be made systemwide.
this is so true , for example staff in group homes are not clinical poorly trained language cultural barriers their lacking can be a direct cause to aggravate clients triggering defensive major responses, Its sickening this is acceptable care in the first place and that ASD private group homes are seeking profits , hiring poor fit staff . The bully gets away with it once again . I honestly cant believe what Im reading sometimes its not logical. IDD is real can have great limitations on function. Speech delay in kids causes meltdowns , we shouldn’t punish we should teach help and support its the same with IDD, many with IDD are functioning at a lower level , plus can’t communicate effectively to resolve issues or needs, we know that is behind so many ” behaviors” but BEHAVIORS are communication ! Tired of seeing the victims get blamed thus another good reasons we need CAMERAS to protect the vulnerable.
Cameras do need to be placed in homes in central areas to see what creates a behavior. Just putting a client in front of a television and then not expect behaviors is ridiculous thinking. These clients need to be interacted with, not being guarded or filling an employee spot so the agenda is met. Nonverbal and delayed language can create behaviors when they do not understand what the staff are saying if there is a language barrier within staffing. Sign language should be a #1 priority as many non verbal clients do know some form of it. Language and speech devices are not being utilized because staff cannot comprehend how to use it, and that creates frustration within the clients , knowing they have a voice but no one is helping them use it.
Punishment as a strategy to change behavior rarely works for anyone, but it is especially ineffective and frankly immoral for those with IDD. It’s a lazy, ignorant way to address serious problems. We need to stop focusing on the behavior of the individual with IDD—he did this, she did that, etc.—and start focusing on the behavior of caregivers. Most individuals with IDD are dependent upon caregivers to meet their needs and to keep them healthy, safe and happy. It is up to caregivers to understand the many unique needs of their clients and to meet those needs. So do we lock up caregivers when their clients harm someone? No. That also does not solve any problems. We need to do the hard, creative work of developing and implementing and sustaining systems of care that truly meet the complex needs of the IDD population. Prevention, not punishment.