Oklahoma House Bill HB2567

Oklahoma 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/1/21
• Refer: 2/2/21
• Refer: 2/22/21
• Refer: 2/24/21
• Report Pass: 3/1/21
• Engrossed: 3/4/21
• Refer: 3/15/21
• Report Pass: 3/22/21
• Refer: 3/22/21

Caption

Prison system training program; providing for hospice care training program; certificates; effective date.

Impact

The implementation of HB 2567 will have significant implications for state laws regarding inmate training and rehabilitation. It establishes a formal pathway for inmates to acquire skills that could be beneficial in the workforce, particularly in the healthcare sector. Furthermore, by creating a structured program that culminates in a completion certificate, the bill addresses the broader aims of reducing recidivism through education and vocational training. However, it also restricts participation based on certain convictions, introducing a layer of oversight meant to ensure the integrity of the program.

Summary

House Bill 2567 proposes the establishment of a hospice care training program within the Oklahoma prison system. This initiative is designed to educate eligible inmates who are assigned to work programs, enabling them to provide long-term end-of-life care to their peers. The curriculum will adhere to established training requirements for Nurse Aides, overseen by the Chief Medical Officer of the Department of Corrections. By facilitating such training, the bill aims to enhance the skill set of inmates, preparing them for potential roles in healthcare settings upon their release.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around HB 2567 leans towards support, especially among lawmakers focused on prison reform and rehabilitation efforts. Proponents believe that training inmates in hospice care not only benefits the inmates themselves by providing them valuable skills but also serves the health needs of the inmate population. Some critics, however, may raise concerns about the appropriateness of inmate roles in providing sensitive end-of-life care, particularly regarding the ethical implications and the emotional burden it may place on inmates and staff alike.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the bill's limitations on participation due to prior convictions, which could be seen as restrictive by advocates for inmate rights. While the intention behind the restrictions is to ensure that only suitable candidates are trained, there may be a debate regarding fairness and the potential impact on the rehabilitation process. Additionally, discussions about the adequacy of oversight and training standards could arise, as effective implementation of the program will rely on continuous evaluation and rule promulgation by the Department of Corrections and the State Department of Health.