CHARGING PRISON INMATES FOR HEALTH SERVICES

This research examines the public policy alternative of charging prison inmates a user fee for health services delivered by the state to a prisoner. Several states in the U.S. operate systems where convicted persons are required to pay a part of the costs associated with the administration of their corrections programs (Allen, Eskridge, Latessa, and Vito, 1990, pp. 74-91). Most of such fees are related to parole and probation; however, such actions provide a precedent for the imposition of user fees for health services. The establishment of user fees is a popular idea among the general public and politicians.

The Arizona legislation permits the state Bureau of Corrections to charge a prisoner $3.00 for each Health Needs Request. Health needs associated with catastrophic and chronic diseases and conditions (cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and so forth) are not subject to the imposition of a user fee. Similarly, health needs of female prisoners associated with pregnancy, health needs of prisoners of either gender involving serious mental illness, and the health needs of all juvenile prisoners are not subject to the imposition of a user fee.

Precedent for Health Services User Fees

Several states in the United States operate systems wherein convicted persons are required to pay a part of the costs associated with the administration of their corrections programs (Allen, Eskridge, Latessa, and Vito, 1990, pp. 7

Related Essays

Reduction of Inmate Privileges .... and until recently, the practice of charging inmates for basic .... rate of recidivism among released inmates is through .... counselling while they are still in prison. .... (2202 9 )

ACLU TODAY .... minority, primarily African American, inmates are condemned .... of African Americans in prison populations makes .... of racial discrimination in charging and sentencing .... (4391 18 )

ornia requires that presiding judges "determine defendants' ability to pay all or a portion of the reasonable cost . . ., provided that the reasonable cost does not exceed the actual average cost . . ." of administering a corrections program. Massachusetts requires that convicted persons on parole or probation pay a monthly supervision fee "equal to not less than one day's net wages nor more than three days' net wages" (Ring, 1989, p. 45). The Massachusetts approach is based solely on the ability to pay principle. Therefore, in Massachusetts, it is entirely possible that convicted persons on parole or probation may be required to pay fees in excess of the actual costs of administering their corrections programs. Should such situations arise, the Massachusetts approach to the cost shifting of corrections program costs would amount to an additional fine, as opposed to a reimbursement of costs by the convicted individuals concerned. Such cost shifting programs may prove to be detrimental to society in the short-run. If corrections program fees are beyond the financial capacity of the individuals subjected to them, they may not, as proponents contend, deprive convicted and incarcerated persons of beer and cigarette money. Rath

Category: Government - C