Special Report: Advanced Correctional Healthcare’s Position on MN Revised Statute 241.021
Authors: Dr. Melissa Caldwell, Dr. William Dennis, Jessica Young, Esq.
On behalf of Advanced Correctional Healthcare and our commitment to ethical, patient-centered correctional health care, we advocate for the repeal of recent revisions to MN Statute 241.021 Subd. 4f. Within the last 30 days, this statute was revised to require that correctional facilities must administer to incarcerated persons the same medications they were prescribed prior to incarceration. This new language was introduced as part of HF 2432 and not publicly discussed. Senator Ron Latz, Rep. Paul Novotny and Rep. Kelly Moller are named as authors of this bill and was approved by Governor Tim Walz on May 23, 2025. The statute puts patients at significant potential for injury and needs to be repealed.
The statute mandates overmedication and injury to detainees.
The legislation appears to mandate or incentivize the administration of medications prescribed by community providers without sufficient clinical oversight or individualized assessment of the detainee’s current medical status. This could lead to the overprescription of psychotropic or other medications, which may not be medically indicated and could cause adverse effects, including dependency, cognitive impairment, or exacerbation of existing conditions – especially in cases where a detainee has not been taking prescribed medications and suddenly begins again. The statute could require administration of multiple medications prescribed by different physicians outside the jail, even if those medications are duplicative or contraindicated with each other.
Forcing medications on detainees disregards their autonomy and violates ethical standards of medical practice, such as those outlined by the American Medical Association (AMA) and the National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC). This legislation would have detainees submit written notice to be allowed to stop taking medications. Detainees, like all patients, have the right to informed consent and to refuse treatment unless a court order deems otherwise.
The statute creates potential for detainee abuse and neglect.
The statute may ultimately prioritize compliance over patient-centered care. Pushing inappropriate medications could mask underlying health issues, delaying proper diagnosis and treatment.
The statute could require giving medications that would cause an overdose or dangerous drug interaction. For instance, a detainee who tests positive for fentanyl at intake may still be administered contraindicated prescription medications. Jails have medication verification processes to review outside medications and have them approved by a licensed medical provider to avoid such potential complications.
The statute is inconsistent with federal law.
The legislation may conflict with federal laws, such as the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) and the Eighth Amendment, which protect detainees from deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. Forcing medications without medical justification could be deemed unconstitutional.
It may also violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to provide individualized mental health care, as highlighted in the Alameda County investigation in which the justice department highlighted ADA constitutional violations in the county’s blanket policy to institutionalize individuals with mental health disabilities. Federal courts have consistently ruled against policies that undermine detainee health rights.
The statute lacks medical professional input.
The statute appears to have been enacted without adequate consultation with correctional health care professionals. This raises concerns about the influence of non-clinical entities, such as lobbyists, who may prioritize policy agendas over evidence-based practice. The absence of input from psychologists, psychiatrists, and correctional health experts undermines the statute’s legitimacy and safety.
The statute limits the ability of providers at the bedside to act in the interests of their patients in the jail and presents community providers with potential liability for medication issues in the jail.
The statute sets a precedent for unreasonable nationwide policy.
If this statute becomes a model for other states, it could normalize a one-size-fits-all approach to detainee healthcare, disregarding regional differences in resources, detainee populations, and health care standards. It does not consider continuity of care for detainees who may no longer have access to previously prescribed medications either due to financial or geographic challenges.
The opioid crisis in jails, and now with synthetic drugs infiltrating facilities, underscores the need for careful medication management, not blanket mandates. A blanket policy could worsen these issues by encouraging over-reliance on pharmaceuticals rather than comprehensive treatment plans.
The statute will disproportionately affect marginalized groups.
Detainees with mental health disorders, who make up a significant portion of the incarcerated population (e.g., one in three at Cook County Jail), are particularly vulnerable. Forced medication could disrupt existing treatment plans, destabilize conditions like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, and lead to worse outcomes post-release, increasing recidivism and community health burdens.
The legislation could disproportionately harm marginalized groups, including those with substance use disorders, who need tailored interventions like medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs), rather than broad medication mandates.
ACH condemns the legislation because of its negative impacts on detainee health.
The statute is not only medically unsound, but constitutionally questionable and ethically indefensible. Sheriffs need flexibility to partner with qualified providers, rather than adhering to rigid medication mandates. The statute raises constitutional and ethical concerns. ACH is prepared to offer expert testimony and data to support our position. Those of us in correctional health care have seen firsthand how poor medication decisions can adversely affect vulnerable populations, especially in correctional settings. Drugs should not be prioritized over comprehensive care. Forcing medications on detainees without individualized assessments violates medical ethics and NCCHC standards. We cannot stand by and let this statute undermine quality care. The statute needs to be repealed.
