MD Lawmakers Divided Over Proposal to Ease Early Release for Elderly and Ill Inmates

Maryland Lawmakers Divided Over Proposal to Ease Early Release for Elderly and Ill Inmates

Debate Over Early Release for Inmates

ANNAPOLIS — Maryland lawmakers are sharply divided on whether to make it easier for elderly and seriously ill inmates to seek early release from prison. Proponents of reform argue that the state is wasting resources by keeping individuals who are too old or sick to pose a threat to society behind bars.

“We are talking about people who are very, very ill, who do not and cannot physically hurt anyone,” said Sen. Shelly Hettleman, D-Baltimore County. “I don’t think it is in the interest of justice to make them spend their final days behind bars.”

However, some conservative lawmakers strongly oppose this idea.

“That’s why we have life in prison,” said Sen. William Folden, a Republican from Frederick County. “They’re supposed to die in prison.”

Current Challenges in the Parole System

Maryland’s Parole Commission, which supports the reform, has rarely approved medical parole requests over the last decade. In fact, only one person has been released on geriatric parole during that time. While programs exist for inmates over 60 or those with serious illnesses, many who qualify are still denied parole, according to the parole commission and the state’s Office of the Public Defender.

Stricter Eligibility Criteria Under Current Law

Advocates argue that strict eligibility rules are preventing many inmates from receiving medical or geriatric parole. According to Lila Meadows, an assistant public defender, current state law limits geriatric parole eligibility to individuals convicted of multiple violent offenses—something lawmakers likely did not intend when they created the program.

To qualify for medical parole, the law requires that inmates must either have a terminal illness or a health condition that renders continued incarceration “no useful purpose.”

Proposed Changes to Maryland’s Parole System

Sen. Hettleman’s proposed bill aims to address these concerns by requiring the Parole Commission to hold in-person hearings for inmates with serious terminal or chronic illnesses, including conditions like dementia. Advocates argue that these hearings would allow inmates to demonstrate that they no longer pose a safety threat to others.

Additionally, the proposal would mandate parole hearings every two years for inmates over 60 who have served more than 15 years of their sentence. The bill would exclude individuals sentenced to life without parole and those on the sex offender registry.

Challenges in Passing the Reform

Despite support from the Parole Commission, Hettleman’s proposal has failed to pass in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee for the past three years. However, committee chair Sen. William Smith, a Democrat from Montgomery County, expressed hope that the bill might finally gain traction this year, pending some technical adjustments.

According to Hettleman, more than 400 individuals in Maryland’s prison system would meet the criteria for geriatric or medical parole.

Arguments in Favor of the Reform

Supporters, including Meadows, argue that releasing elderly or seriously ill inmates would not only improve their quality of life but also save the state money. Meadows highlighted cases of clients who are confined to wheelchairs, unable to feed themselves, and suffering from untreated medical conditions while being denied parole.

“It’s really costly from a personnel standpoint at a time when a lot of institutions, frankly, can’t afford to be further short-staffed,” Meadows said.

Opposition to the Bill

Skeptics, including Sen. Chris West, R-Baltimore and Carroll Counties, believe the current bill does not go far enough in ensuring that inmates serve adequate time for their crimes. He suggested that inmates should serve a minimum of 20 years before being considered for parole, particularly those who committed particularly egregious crimes.

Sen. Folden echoed this concern, arguing that expanding opportunities for parole could undermine the intended severity of lengthy prison sentences. He also dismissed the idea that reducing prison healthcare costs should be a driving force for reform.

“If that’s how they’re trying to save money, by re-victimizing victims and setting loose those that have committed the most egregious crimes upon our communities, shame on the state legislators,” Folden said.

Support from the Department of Public Safety

While the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services did not provide a public statement during the Judicial Proceedings Committee hearing, a spokesperson later confirmed the agency’s support for the bill.

The Future of the Proposal

For now, the proposal remains in limbo, with no clear path forward as lawmakers continue to debate the merits and potential risks of the proposed reforms.