By Barbara Koepel . . . For the 6,000 men confined in compounds in the 20 states with civil commitment laws—which keep sex offenders behind bars and out of sight for decades after they complete their prison terms and often until they die—the mantra has got to be “don’t get sick.” (See “Sex Crimes and Criminal Justice”, The Washington Spectator, May, 2018).

If they’re sick, whether with kidney disease, Covid or cancer, medical care is delayed, deficient or denied. It doesn’t matter if the facility is in “blue” states, such as New York, Massachusetts and California, or “red” ones, such as Texas and Virginia. Also, it doesn’t matter if it is run by the state or a private corporation (such as the Management and Training Corporation—MTC).

I interviewed 15 men in Minnesota, Texas and California (one has since died) as well as nurses and therapists who work in these facilities. I’ve also corresponded with men in Massachusetts and New York. All agree the medical care is deplorable and far better in regular prisons—where the men completed their sentences before being sent, indefinitely, into civil commitment.

Coalinga, California

At Coalinga, California’s civil commitment compound, one resident (we’ll call him Robert to shield his identity) said he “had severe stomach pain, was wetting himself and urinated frequently.” Still, he had to wait over a month to get an appointment at the medical clinic where the nurse practitioner (NP) told him his PSA numbers were high and he should see a specialist. That was in October 2018. But since the men aren’t allowed to book their own appointments, Coalinga must make the referrals. So it wasn’t until February that Robert saw a urologist—whose tests showed he had Stage 3 prostate cancer and needed chemotherapy and radiation immediately. “Still, seven months passed before Coalinga arranged for my treatments, and then, only because the court intervened,” Robert said.

Fast forward to August 2022. Robert saw blood in his urine and the NP said he should see an oncologist; still, it took Coalinga’s clinic five months to write a referral and get him an appointment. “In January 2023, the oncologist said I needed a PET scan to see if the cancer returned—which took Coalinga another four months to arrange. Because the scan, which was in June 2023, showed a new spot on my kidney, the oncologist said to see a urologist right away. It’s now December, and Coalinga hasn’t made the appointment,” he says. His lawyer is seeking a court order to make it happen. . . .

Littlefield, Texas

At the Littlefield, Texas civil commitment facility, the medical clinic handled Covid in a way which ensured that many of the 390 inmates would get it. According to Mandi Brady, a security officer and medical assistant at Littlefield from 2018 to 2021, “Covid spread like wildfire every few days. It was the worst in 2021, when at least half the men had it and 12 died.”

Brady says those who tested positive weren’t quarantined from those who tested negative; the clinic didn’t sanitize the examining room between patients; the sick and non-sick were sent back to their rooms, which hold two, four or 14 men. “We passed food trays through their doors and the infected and uninfected ate together in their rooms. Also, they weren’t permitted to do their own laundry. Instead, staff threw their dirty clothes into the same sacks and washed them together,” she adds. . . .

Moose Lake and St. Peter, Minnesota

As in Texas and California, the men in Minnesota’s sex offender program (MSOP) at its two facilities in Moose Lake and St. Peter wait months for medical care; nine months is the norm to see an outside doctor. This happens because Moose Lake doesn’t have a full-time in-house doctor. Daniel Wilson, who has a para-legal certificate and has been an inmate for six years, says “besides the long wait, clinic staff don’t tell us the truth about our diagnoses. We can submit something like a FOIA request to see our test results and doctors’ notes, but you have to know how to do it and most of the men don’t.”

Wilson says “one man had abdominal pain and was examined at Essentia (a nearby hospital) in July 2022. The hospital sent his medical records to Moose Lake where the nurse who read them told the inmate ‘nothing was wrong.’ As his pain worsened, he asked Essentia to send him the records directly: they showed he had Stage 5 kidney disease (end-stage renal failure).” . . .

Read the full piece at The Washington Spectator.

The post The horrors behind “sex offender” civil commitment: “Don’t get sick” first appeared on NARSOL.

Published with permission by Newton Daily News, Newton, Iowa.

By Christopher Braunschweig . . . Visitors at the Iowa Board of Corrections meeting Aug. 4 complained [that] the multidisciplinary team that determines if incarcerated individuals who finished treatment are still considered sexually violent predators are extending their prison time by referring them to the attorney general’s office for review.

Michelle Alfano, an educator from Chicago advocating for an incarcerated person, spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting at Newton Correctional Facility. She was “extremely disturbed” by the multidisciplinary team, or MDT, appointed by Iowa Department of Corrections Director Beth Skinner.

The multidisciplinary team, Alfano alleged, sends a majority of the cases it reviews to the attorney general’s office and thereby extends sentences, ignores “significant accomplishments” like earning a degree while in custody, and does not consider re-entry plans for incarcerated individuals.

“In doing so, the MDT has overcrowded the prison system and has put staff and incarcerated people in danger,” Alfano said.

The multidisciplinary team is also used to refer sexually violent predators to the state’s Civil Commitment Unit for Sexual Offenders (CCUSO) in Cherokee. The five-phase treatment program has a 166-bed capacity. As of June 30, 2023, there are about 148 individuals in the program.

According to the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services, CCUSO is supposed to treat sexually violent predators who have served their prison time but have been found likely to commit further violent sexual offenses. The CCUSO program has been operational in Iowa since 1999.

In order to be eligible for the CCUSO program, incarcerated individuals must be considered a “sexually violent predator” by a civil court and by the state’s criteria, and it must be determined they have a “mental abnormality” that makes it more likely than not that they will engage in future acts of a sexually violent nature.

They must also be referred into the program by the multidisciplinary team and be determined by a professional evaluator to be at a high-risk for re-offending.

According to state code (Chapter 229A.3), the multidisciplinary team has 30 days upon time of notice to assess whether an incarcerated individual meets the state’s definition of a sexually violent predator. The state’s attorney general, Brenna Bird, is to be notified by the team of its assessment.

The law provides no exemptions or provisions for the 30-day timeframe, Alfano said. Any reviews conducted beyond the 30-day window should be immediately dismissed, she added, and those individuals should be cleared. Instead, Alfano alleged the cases are sitting dormant and in error at the attorney general’s office.

“In my view, the AG does not have the authority to review a case and possibly prosecute an individual for commitment if their case was referred in violation of the law,” Alfano said, adding that the person she is advocating for, Eric Strenge, was reviewed in November 2022 but the team received notice around June 2022.

Furthermore, Alfano contends in a letter addressed to Skinner and board members that Strenge should be cleared from civil commitment proceedings so that he may be staff-initiated for release on parole. Strenge’s review did not follow the 30-day timeframe, she alleged, and should not be considered.

“It’s not that the AG needs to review Eric’s case. It’s that Eric’s case should not be at the AG’s office,” Alfano said in the letter, which was dated the same day as the board’s meeting this month. “The case was sent to the AG’s office in violation of the law.”

At the Iowa Board of Corrections meeting, Alfano went over her allotted three minutes to speak and provided board members with a packet of information regarding Strenge’s case. She also included documents submitted to the multidisciplinary team but felt like they either did not receive or review them.

Webster Kranto, vice-chair of the Iowa Board of Corrections, said he was glad Alfano was able to hand the documents directly to them.

“Because now I’m going to go through it personally,” Kranto said.

Alfano also said she had sent letters about Strenge’s case and her concerns about the multidisciplinary team to board members and the department of corrections for some time. Board members seemed confused and admitted they had not received the letters. Alfano estimates 25 letters had been sent.  . . .

When public comments concluded, Kranto said the board should have a review of the multidisciplinary team at the next meeting, and he addressed the lost mail.

“I’m deeply sorry for all the people who have sent in materials that haven’t made it to us,” Kranto said. “That shouldn’t be that way … As far as everything else, we’re going to have answers for you at our next meeting, if you can make it to our next meeting. I, myself, have questions for the MDT.”

If you wish, you may contact Michelle at  michellemidwestbooks2prisoners@yahoo.com

The post Advocate for incarcerated person accuses Iowa A.G. of wrongly committing persons to civil commitment first appeared on NARSOL.

By Sandy . . . “Sex offender” civil commitment is one of the cruelest of all practices to evolve from laws targeting men with sexual crime convictions. NARSOL has long engaged in advocacy against this practice, stating in our goals and positions, “NARSOL opposes the use of post-sentence civil commitment as it is now practiced with those having sexual crime convictions, which is as a means to extend the incarceration period beyond the court-imposed sentence.”

We have, over the years, engaged with protests and information campaigns against the civil commitment programs in a variety of states, among them Rushville in Illinois, Littlefield in Texas, and Moose Lake in Minnesota.

We had not had our attention brought to the facility in Iowa until a man incarcerated in a state institution there wrote to us and enclosed a piece he has written about the Iowa’s CCUSO – Civil Commitment Unit for Sex Offenders. Written as a letter addressed “Dear potential CCUSO prisoners” and signed “Possible Future CCUSO Prisoner,” he paints a stark and terrifying picture.

First addressing the required treatment program, he writes:

Regular prison SOTP treatment programs last three to six months depending what level of SOTP program you are put in. The community SOTP treatment can safely rehabilitate an offender in a treatment program in about a year. Community groups generally meet once a week up to an hour and a half. That is far shorter than the failing CCUSO’s five-year plan. It seems very few ever leave the program and get discharged from CCUSO, according to research studies. In the first ten years of CCUSO’s existence, only one person discharged. It is interesting to note that CCUSO uses the same treatment workbooks the community and state prison use. Something is seriously wrong here.

He then writes, “After much research, talking to people and looking up appellate cases on-line, it appears CCUSO has been known to give out false or questionable disciplinary reports. Why? CCUSO then uses the disciplinary reports to prove during your annual review with the court that you are still unfit to return to society.”

He also says, “CCUSO uses mandatory regular polygraphs during your treatment. You are punished, demoted, and charged a fee if you fail your polygraph. The CCUSO policy manual is very clear on this.”

He then addresses something that, among many, is considered a dark chapter in our law enforcement history.

CCUSO will also use the long time controversial penile plethysmograph test to aid in their quest to keep you civilly committed. Again, the highly invasive plethysmograph test has done little over the years to prove the offenders’ deviant thought processes. I was a victim of this test many years ago before it was banned from the prison and community programs. Fortunately, I passed the test. The plethysmograph is no longer allowed as part of the State of Iowa’s community or prison treatment programs. What makes CCUSO exempt to this highly invasive testing? I can’t answer that.

The letter closes with information that we have not been able to verify but do not doubt to be accurate.

The last thing I want to cover is cost of treatment. If you think you are going to be heading to CCUSO, be vigilant. Per policy, CCUSO will go after your bank accounts, retirement accounts, property etc. that you may own to help pay for your treatment. This makes you worth nothing. What is hypocritical about this is that if you ever graduate from the program, you must have $2,000 in your CCUSO savings account. This is to help you get started back into the community, which is good, but then again CCUSO should not have wiped out any of your savings or property you had, leaving you with nothing. You cannot break free of CCUSO. You will always be in one of their traps.

NARSOL is adding the Iowa CCUSO program to its official protest list of state civil commitment programs. These programs have much in common, the greatest of which is creating in those they are supposed to be helping a feeling of total helplessness and hopelessness.

If someone with a sexual crime conviction is nearing his discharge date and is still in need of treatment, he should be treated in the mental health system, not an extension of the prison system.

The post Iowa’s civil commitment program — a first-hand account first appeared on NARSOL.