Washington Jail Settles DOJ Allegations of ADA Noncompliance in Failure to Treat Opioid Use Disorder
Sheriff Ryan Sperling of Washington’s Mason County signed an agreement on September 19, 2024, settling allegations by the federal Department of Justice (DOJ) that the county jail was not complying with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. ch. 126 § 12101 et seq., in providing treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) to those incarcerated there.
Title II of the ADA provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” However, the term “individual with a disability” specifically excludes anyone “currently engaging in the illegal use of drugs, when the covered entity acts on the basis of such use.” Except that “a public entity shall not deny health services, or services provided in connection with drug rehabilitation, to an individual on the basis of that individual’s current illegal use of drugs, if the individual is otherwise entitled to such services.”
The Settlement Agreement specified that “[m]ethadone, naltrexone, and buprenorphine are medications approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat OUD.” Treatments are individually “tailored” and “can be indefinite.” Taking a patient off OUD medication “should be part of an individualized treatment plan collaboratively developed and agreed upon by the patient and their medical provider.”
The agreement further explained that DOJ investigated and substantiated allegations that the Jail was discontinuing detainees’ OUD medication for “non-medical reasons.” Discontinuing the methadone treatment of detainees booked into the Jail forced some to go through methadone withdrawal before they were permitted to convert to buprenorphine or naltrexone.
While the Jail expressly denied it violated any provision of the ADA or any other law, the agreement that it entered required ensuring that all individuals in custody receive medical evaluations including for OUD; that the Jail would not change or discontinue an individual’s current use of a particular OUD medication unless a qualified medical provider determined the current treatment was no longer medically appropriate; and that the Jail would offer OUD medical treatment to all individuals in its custody with any FDA-approved OUD medication, including those who were not prescribed OUD medication prior to their incarceration.
The agreement required the Jail to train its employees in ADA policies as well as the settlement provisions within 45 days. All future employees must be trained within the first 30 days of employment. Additionally, the Jail was required to keep a log of any discontinued OUD medication and provide copies of the log every 180 days to the DOJ. Further, the Jail was required to report to the DOJ all complaints regarding its OUD medication within 14 days of the complaint. The Settlement Agreement was effective for one year.
The problems were brought to the DOJ’s attention by a prisoner who complained that he was unable to continue his OUD medication—which had been prescribed at another lockup—when he was booked into the Jail.
“Substance use disorder is a disabling condition under the [ADA],” said then-U.S. Attorney Tessa M. Gorman. “Public service providers such as jails and prisons must treat it as such—providing the medical care and prescriptions needed to treat the disorder.” See: Settlement Agreement Between the United States and Mason Cty. Jail, USAO #2023v00959; DJ#204-82-338.