Rehab

Human disservices

by Ben Geman

Critics of a policy that bars state-funded human-service agencies from hiring many ex-convicts filed a lawsuit on Monday against William O'Leary, the state's secretary of health and human services, alleging that the rule is unconstitutional and was wrongly put in place without public notification.

The suit is the latest effort by human-service advocates to dismantle a policy that they say is misguided, mainly for two reasons: it blocks an avenue of employment for former drug users who committed crimes but have since cleaned themselves up, and it often keeps service providers from hiring the very ex-users who make effective counselors at homeless shelters and drug and alcohol rehab programs (see "Addicted to Punishment," News and Features, July 2, 1999).

The policy dates back to 1996, when health officials tightened the hiring rules for state and state-funded human-service agencies after the Boston Globe reported that the Department of Social Services had hired foster parents with long criminal records. Now, past convictions for many serious crimes -- including rape, murder, armed assault, and some drug-trafficking offenses -- carry a lifetime ban on working with such agencies in jobs that involve contact with clients. Lesser crimes, such as some assaults and smaller-scale drug crimes, carry a 10-year ban.

Attorneys from the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute and two other groups filed the class-action suit in Suffolk Superior Court on behalf of would-be human-service workers who have criminal backgrounds. The lawyers claim that the rule violates the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights and the US Constitution by denying the right to equal protection and depriving the plaintiffs of liberty and property without due process. That is, the law fails to provide a forum to determine whether ex-offenders are a threat to clients at service agencies.

Also, the suit alleges that health officials broke state laws by failing to file a draft of the proposed rule with the secretary of state, and failing to allow human-service agencies and the public a chance to comment.

According to the lawsuit, at least 75,000 state residents are barred from seeking employment under the rule, which covers both state-operated facilities and more than 1200 private service providers that have state funding.

Critics say human-service agencies should have more leeway when hiring people who work with adults. Philip Mangano, executive director of the Massachusetts Housing and Shelter Alliance and a leading critic of the policy, argues that no crimes should carry a lifetime ban. Some serious crimes, he says, should carry a 10-year disqualification; others should carry a five-year limit; and drug offenders should always be eligible for service jobs at the service provider's discretion.

For years, Mangano has unsuccessfully tried to get state officials to discuss amending the policy, which he says places an unfair burden on people who've already been punished for their crimes. "Our preference was not to seek a legal battle," he says. Even now, he and other advocates are willing to sit down with O'Leary -- they'd meet "immediately" if the secretary were willing to discuss real changes, Mangano says.

That doesn't seem likely, though. Rich Copp, a spokesman for O'Leary, says the policy ensures that "you are not letting someone with perhaps a violent criminal history in close quarters with people we view as some of society's most vulnerable." In other words, see you in court.