Prison & Education Symposium: The Responsibility of Engagement

This free two-day symposium is organized by the student and faculty leaders of the Tufts Prison Initiative (TUPIT).

Focus
1. Education in Prison
Provide multiple perspectives on the value of higher education in prison in the context of a critique of mass incarceration and the prison system itself.
2. Solitary Confinement
Explore the purpose and consequences of solitary confinement from several perspectives (juridic, psychological, and cognitive).

Speakers
Featuring a diverse group of formerly incarcerated people, activists, and educators in social justice and criminal justice. Their experiences will highlight the vast discrimination and inequalities that feed into the carceral system- before, during, and after incarceration.

Doe v. Massachusetts Department of Correction

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

Update: In April 2019, Angelina Resto, formerly Jane Doe, was released from Massachusetts Correctional Institution – Framingham. She was a featured speaker at our annual The Spirit of Justice Award Dinner, and is now advocating for LGBTQ people in prison and recently released people across Massachusetts.

Victory! In September 2018, in a groundbreaking development, our client, Jane Doe, a transgender woman incarcerated at Norfolk State men’s prison, was transferred to the state’s women’s facility at Framingham. The transfer was a result of our lawsuit and marked the first such transfer in the country.

On July 13, 2018, GLAD filed a renewed motion for preliminary injunction seeking our client’s transfer to the Department of Correction’s female corrections facility, MCI-Framingham.

On June 14, 2018 Judge Richard G. Stearns issued an order denying the Department of Correction’s motion to dismiss the case and allowing Jane Doe’s claim challenging mistreatment under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) to move forward.

On March 5, Judge Richard G. Stearns issued an order granting in part our client, Jane Doe’s motion for preliminary injunction. The order, which demonstrates a clear understanding on the part of the court of the brutalization faced by our client, a transgender woman, as she is housed in a men’s prison, instructs DOC to provide nearly all of the accommodations she sought as preliminary relief while housed at MCI Norfolk, including utilizing female correctional officers whenever feasible when conducting strip searches of Ms. Doe.

On February 28, 2018, GLAD Transgender Rights Project Director Jennifer Levi argued in federal district court in Boston on behalf of our client, a transgender woman who is experiencing devastating daily harassment and mistreatment because she is incorrectly housed in a men’s facility. The argument supported our client’s request for emergency relief, including transfer to Massachusetts Department of Correction’s female corrections facility, MCI-Framingham.

In seeking relief and proper treatment for our client, the case challenges the discriminatory historical exclusion of transgender people from the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A group of disability rights, health and mental health law, and transgender rights organizations submitted a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Ms. Doe’s right to bring a claim under the ADA.

The brief, filed by Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, Health Law Advocates, Inc., Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition, and National Center for Transgender Equality, argues that to read the statute as excluding coverage for transgender people with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria (such as Ms. Doe) would be impermissible discrimination that undermines the very purpose of the law – which is to protect people from discrimination stemming from prejudice, ignorance, and stigma associated with certain health conditions.

In addition to GLAD, Ms. Doe is represented by Prisoner Legal Services and Goodwin Procter LLP.

GLAD and our partners filed the initial complaint November 15, 2017, on behalf of Ms. Doe, a transgender woman currently incarcerated at Massachusetts Correctional Institution-Norfolk, a state facility that houses male inmates. Ms. Doe’s request for emergency relief was filed February 2, 2018.

Ms. Doe is currently serving a sentence of three to four years for a non-violent drug offense. She is a woman. She was diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria and underwent gender transition nearly forty years ago, as a teenager. She has a female gender identity, and identifies and lives as a woman.

MA DOC has incorrectly housed her in a male facility. She is regularly subjected to strip searches by male correctional officers, who routinely grope her breasts in the process. She is forced to shower in view of male prisoners who inappropriately comment on her body and otherwise harass her. Correctional officers and other staff at the facility refuse to address or refer to her using her correct name and female pronouns.

The impact of this discriminatory treatment on Ms. Doe is scarring, humiliating, and both physically and emotionally harmful.

The complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts requests that Ms. Doe be appropriately transferred to DOC’s female corrections facility, MCI-Framingham, and that in the interim:

she be searched only by female correctional officers;
she be provided with a separate shower time without the presence of men;
she be referred to by the correct name and female pronouns

News

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

We have a huge opportunity to make real change in a system that disproportionately hurts LGBTQ people.

Today is the deadline for Massachusetts House representatives to make amendments to the comprehensive criminal justice reform bill. We need your help to urge your representative to support four amendments that would impact LGBTQ youth and adults in the Commonwealth. Criminal justice reform is an LGBTQ issue, and here’s why. LGBTQ youth, particularly LGBTQ youth of color, are overrepresented in the juvenile system because of pervasive bias, unsupportive families or school administrators, and discriminatory policing. LGBTQ adults are also particularly vulnerable to discrimination when interacting with the criminal justice system. Now we have an opportunity to reform the system. Contact your representative today and ask them to support the criminal justice reform bill H.4011 and to co-sponsor these four important amendments. We’ve made it easy with these short talking points:

Solitary confinement and LGBTQ prisoners: LGBTQ prisoners are more likely to be placed in solitary confinement for their “protection.” But solitary confinement does not protect LGBTQ prisoners from harm, and in fact increases psychological and emotional harm. This amendment would limit how long a prisoner can remain in solitary confinement and prevent LGBTQ prisoners from being held in isolation simply because they are or are perceived to be LGBTQ. Will you co-sponsor this amendment with lead sponsor Rep. Ruth Balser?

Expungement: Juvenile court records follow youth for the rest of their lives. Those records can create barriers for youth higher education, employment and housing later in life. Expungement of criminal records, including juvenile records, would create more opportunities for young people to reach their full potential. Will you co-sponsor this amendment with lead sponsor Rep. Kay Khan?

Raise the Age: Current law allows for kids as young as seven years old to enter into the juvenile justice system, and allows for 18-year-olds to enter into the adult criminal justice system. Raising the age on both ends would ensure a fairer system with better outcomes for kids and young adults. Will you co-sponsor this amendment with lead sponsors Rep. Kay Khan and Rep. Evandro Carvalho?

Romeo and Juliet: Efforts are underway to decriminalize teens engaging in consensual sexual activity. This amendment would help ensure consenting teens are provided guidance about relationships, rather than being criminalized. Will you support this amendment?

These provisions would result in more LGBTQ young people, particularly LGBTQ young people of color, staying out of the system and remaining in their communities in programs designed to empower them to reach their full potential.

It just takes two minutes to contact your legislators and ensure they do everything they can to make the criminal justice system more fair for our young people.

Barneys: Cocktails, Conversation, and Shopping

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

Barneys invites you to their Boston location for an evening of cocktails, conversation, and shopping to benefit GLAD.

Jumpstart your holiday shopping and do good at the same time! You’ll save 10% and The Barneys New York Foundation will donate a portion of proceeds made that night. You’ll also have the chance to hear from Senior Attorney and AIDS Law Project Director Ben Klein on what’s new and upcoming at GLAD.

Cocktails and hors d’oeuvres. Free to attend.

RSVP to GLAD@barneys.com

Blog

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

One year ago, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court made it clear that children born to unmarried same-sex couples stood on equal footing as all other children. Thanks to our plaintiff Karen Partanen, who bravely brought her case to our state’s highest court, Massachusetts parentage statutes recognize that same-sex non-birth parents can be full, legal parents.

I was honored to work with Karen on her critical parentage case. Karen and I connected last week about how we couldn’t believe that it has only been one year since her case changed the legal landscape for families like hers in Massachusetts. She had just gone apple picking with her children, a family outing she might not have experienced had she not fought to be secured as their equal, legal parent.

Karen and her family are among the wonderful diversity of today’s modern families, and their story is representative of so many across the country.

Karen and her former partner Julie were a couple for nearly 13 years, and decided to have children together using assisted reproduction. Julie conceived and, with Karen by her side, gave birth to their two children. Together, they cared for their kids, made mutual decisions to further their well-being, and held themselves out to family, friends and their community as a family.

Eventually their relationship ended. They never married and didn’t complete co-parent adoptions, so Karen filed suit to secure her children’s rights to continue their relationships with her.

Massachusetts “paternity” law enables children who are born to unmarried parents to have a determination of who their legal parents are, ensuring that both parents are available for support, parenting time and decision making, based on the children’s best interests. The Court faced resolving the question of whether the law applied to non-biological parents like Karen.

Karen’s case argued that child-centered laws should protect children born from assisted reproduction whether their parents are a same-sex or different-sex couple, and should ensure equal treatment of all children without regard to their parents’ marital status and genetic connection.

The Court concluded that the plain language of the statute applies to children born to same-sex parents like Karen, regardless of genetic ties, and declared Karen a legal parent to her children.

What does this mean for families in Massachusetts?

It means that unmarried parents – who planned to create a family, who conceived through assisted reproduction and who welcomed children into a joint home – can be full legal parents. It means that children cannot be deprived of their parents because they are unmarried or because they are not the birth parents.

More broadly, Karen’s case illustrates how the courts and the law are catching up to today’s families. More and more, states are recognizing the diversity of our families and ensuring protections for all children. GLAD is working hard across New England to ensure that all children are secure and all families are recognized – no matter how they were formed.

Part of our work involves helping parents navigate what can be complex legal terrain to understand their rights, as well as finding accessible resources to empower parents to protect their families. Here are some key points that unmarried same-sex couples or parents should know about securing their relationships with their children, before and after birth.

Known Donor Agreement*

When thinking about creating your family, it is important to plan ahead and seek legal advice. If you are planning to use a known donor, an agreement can help clarify everyone’s intentions and make sure that all involved have the same goals. A family attorney can help you draft an agreement and inform discussions with your donor to clarify roles going into the family creation process.

Voluntary Acknowledgement of Parentage

In Karen’s case the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court noted that same-sex parents should be able to establish their legal parentage through a Voluntary Acknowledgement of Parentage (VAP) form, just like different-sex parents. Although this right exists, Massachusetts hasn’t yet updated their VAP forms to be gender neutral, and GLAD is advocating for these key forms to be updated. Never-married parents should ask about VAPs at the hospital and contact GLAD if they encounter barriers accessing this form.

Parentage Adjudications

For never-married parents who cannot use a VAP or if there is a dispute between parents, never-married same sex parents can seek parentage adjudications through the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court.

GLAD believes that all parents – regardless of their marital status – should be able to create and secure their families. If you are encountering barriers to establishing your legal parentage, please call GLAD Answers, our legal information line, at 800-455-GLAD or visit www.GLADAnswers.org.

The “Known Donor Agreement” section of this post was updated in May 2022.

Blog

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

One year ago, Massachusetts’ law protecting transgender peoples’ use of public accommodations went into effect. This victory means something incredibly simple yet also incredibly profound – that transgender people in Massachusetts can go about their daily lives knowing that they cannot lawfully be turned away from establishments that provide goods and services to the general public simply for being transgender.

The passage of this law was the culmination of a years-long battle for the inclusion of express protections for transgender people in public spaces, such as hospitals, restaurants, libraries, and movie theatres. Making our non-discrimination law whole means that everyone from all walks of life, including transgender people, must be treated fairly and with dignity.

This is a moment to reflect on the incredible progress we have made in Massachusetts towards justice. It is with great pride that I remember the strong coalition of community members that was the driving force behind getting this law passed. We could never have achieved what we did without the broad show of support from faith leaders, law enforcement officials, and legislators, not to mention the many incredibly articulate and courageous transgender individuals, family members, and friends.

Yes, we are celebrating a great legislative victory achieved a year ago. But putting it in that time frame highlights how much work remains and reminds us that, unfortunately, we cannot rest comfortably on our achievements and must be ever vigilant.

This past year marks some of the most hostile and significant backlash the LGBTQ community has experienced in recent memory. From the transgender military ban – which GLAD along with our partner NCLR is fighting with everything we’ve got – to the withdrawal by the U.S. Department of Education of critical school guidance for transgender students, the transgender community has been under attack by this new administration.

Here, too, in Massachusetts, we remain vulnerable. In November, 2018, due to the efforts of a small group who want to roll back protections for transgender people, there will be a question on the ballot: should we maintain the critical public accommodation non-discrimination protections that went into effect last year? I’m confident that Massachusetts will once again say yes to fairness and equality – but it will take every one of us working together to make sure that happens.

To join the fight for equality in Massachusetts, and defend non-discrimination protections for transgender people, visit our friends at Freedom For All Massachusetts to get involved.

The Dangerous Impact of Eroding Church-State Separation

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

During the struggle for civil rights, restaurant owners and others invoked their religion to refuse service to Black people. Courts rejected that argument, but the Supreme Court re-visits it this fall in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case focused on the rights of same sex couples.

But there is much more at stake, as the improper invocation of religion is increasingly used as an excuse to deny civil rights, LGBTQ equality, and reproductive freedom, and as government policies target Muslims and favor other religious beliefs.

Join our prominent panel in an urgent discussion of the current state of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses and what we need to do to protect these very important constitutional rights.

5:45pm: Reception and Refreshments
6:45pm: Panel Discussion

Speakers:
Prof. Jay Wexler, Boston University School of Law, Author: Holy Hullabaloos: A Roadtrip to the Battlegrounds of Church/State Conflict. Overview of America’s religious conflicts.

State Rep. Byron Rushing, Assistant Majority Leader, Mass. House of Representatives. Establishment and Religious Exercise: Their impact on racial and religious minorities.

Professor Jessica Silbey, Northeastern University School of Law; former board member, Planned Parenthood Advocacy Fund. Current threats to reproductive justice and rights.

Louise Melling, Deputy Legal Director of the ACLU/Director, ACLU Center for Liberty; How religion is invoked to excuse discrimination, including attacks on LGBTQ rights in Masterpiece Cakeshop case in Supreme Court

GLAD is co-sponsoring this special event. Free tickets available here.

Blog

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

At a time when our client Lynn was rebuilding their life after a long battle with substance abuse and poverty, an encounter with racial and anti-transgender discrimination – at a nonprofit whose mission is precisely to provide support to people in need – could have dealt a blow to their progress.

Instead, Lynn is standing up to that discrimination to ensure it doesn’t happen to anyone else.

In 2016 Lynn, who is Puerto Rican and identifies as transgender, took the initiative to fight their addiction, with its roots in distress from discrimination experienced since childhood, and embark on the road to recovery.

Lynn sought the help of Tapestry Health, a community-based health services organization in Western Massachusetts that addresses public health needs, such as substance abuse. Through Tapestry Health’s Services, Opportunity, Awakening, Recovery (“SOAR”) program, which focused on trauma informed wrap around care for women and transgender people with a history of substance misuse and trauma, Lynn connected with Tapestry Health employee and former case manager, Emily.

As Lynn’s case manager, Emily connected Lynn to community resources to meet their needs and support Lynn’s journey to self-sufficiency. When Lynn expressed the need for clothing, Emily set-up an appointment for Lynn to visit the Give-Away Center, a distribution center open to the public that provides items like clothing, toiletries and household supplies to those in need, at no cost. Notably, the Give-Away Center is run by Springfield Rescue Mission, which characterizes itself as a Christian nonprofit whose mission is to help the less fortunate.

You don’t have to face discrimination alone. Stand up for yourself. Don’t let anybody think they can treat you like that.

Because Lynn exclusively wears men’s clothing, they intended to shop only for men’s clothing items at the Give-Away Center. However, shortly after Lynn began shopping for clothing, an employee at the Give-Away Center loudly told Lynn that ‘only men were allowed in the men’s section’ and ‘only women were allowed in the women’s section.’ The employee went on to later say that because Lynn’s identification said female, they could not take any clothing from the men’s section.

“I was embarrassed,” Lynn says. “There were more than a handful of other people inside the Center. At that point, I just wanted to get away from there. I didn’t think I could do anything about it at that time.”

When volunteers at GLAD Answers, our legal information line, learned about Lynn’s experience at the Give-Away Center, Staff Attorney Allison Wright met with Lynn and Emily to discuss the encounter.

What they described to Wright was a breach of Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law, which prohibits discrimination by any place that is open to the public. When it was revealed that, in the past, some of Emily’s white and non-transgender female clients had been allowed to shop in both the men’s and women’s sections, it became clear that Lynn was denied access to the clothing in the men’s section at the Give-Away Center not only because of Lynn’s sex and gender identity, but also because of Lynn’s race and color.

Wright filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination in January 2017. Springfield Rescue Mission moved to dismiss the case by arguing their religious character exempted them from coverage under the Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law. Wright has since submitted a rebuttal to Springfield Rescue Mission’s position statement and an opposition to Springfield Rescue Mission’s motion to dismiss the case.

The irony of Springfield Rescue Mission rejecting a person in need is not lost on Lynn. But it hasn’t chipped away at their determination.

“They are supposed to help, that’s their purpose. I just want the Give-Away Center to be educated on how to treat people fairly.”

This case marks a turning point in Lynn’s journey through resilience, which began in childhood.

“I identified as transgender as early as eight or nine years old,” says Lynn, now in their 40s. “I didn’t know what was going on and I would think, ‘Why me?’ I had trouble being accepted for being me, and didn’t have any support in those early years.”

When Lynn was just 11 years old, their hair started falling out. “My mom took me to our primary care physician. He told us my hair loss was due to high stress.”

Bullying in school, an unsupportive family and societal unacceptance were all contributing stressors. Eventually, the rejection by family and peers sent Lynn down a path of depression, substance use, poverty and attempts at suicide.

“I hated that feeling of thinking something was wrong with me,” Lynn says. “The verbal and emotional abuse was really overwhelming and I just wanted to cover it up with something. And yeah, there were times when I wanted to end things. I took a bunch of pills at one point and wound up in the emergency room.”

Although Lynn has a good relationship with their mother today, she has not always been accepting of Lynn’s identity as a transgender person.

“It’s been a long haul with my mom, but it’s good now,” Lynn says. “We have a good relationship. My dad – not so much. He didn’t accept my identity, and thought it was a bad thing. He just didn’t understand.”

Lynn’s long battle with poverty and substance abuse is one that is all too common among LGBTQ youth, particularly LGBTQ youth of color. Research has shown that LGBTQ youth may use substances at higher rates than their peers, an outcome linked to family rejection and discrimination related to their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Additionally, a disproportionate number of LGBTQ youth who are homeless are youth of color.

A 2014 survey of human service providers serving the youth homeless population in the U.S. reported that 31 percent of their LGBTQ clients identify as African American and 14 percent identify as Latino/Hispanic.

“Dealing with my family dynamic over my identity – an identity they did not accept – it was a slippery slope. If my family had been more supportive, they could have helped me through it.”

Despite the challenges, Lynn remains resilient. And they hope to encourage others to stand up for who they are, too.

“You should feel comfortable as a person,” Lynn says, when asked what they would tell someone facing similar circumstances. “If you find yourself in the same situation, you don’t have to face it alone. Stand up for yourself. Don’t let anybody think they can treat you like that.”

GLAD is proud to be working with Lynn in standing up against the discrimination they faced at the Springfield Rescue Mission. “This case speaks to the intersection of anti-LGBTQ discrimination with racism,” says Wright. “LGBTQ people of color often experience discrimination because of their LGBTQ status and their racial or ethnic backgrounds. It is no surprise then that LGBTQ people of color are more likely to live in poverty, be victims of hate crimes, and disproportionately targeted and harmed by the criminal justice system.

“I am proud to represent Lynn,” Wright adds, “whose courage to act sends a powerful message to all places providing services to the public – that having a religious mission does not exempt them from a civil obligation to treat everyone fairly.”

“Even though I don’t know what the outcome will be, nobody deserves to go through what I did,” Lynn says. “I’m fighting against it with GLAD so it doesn’t happen to anyone else.”

If you have questions or need legal assistance, contact GLAD Answers, our legal information line, at 800-455-GLAD or visit www.GLADAnswers.org.

Resist with GLAD in Boston

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

In the wake of the racist, hate-motivated violence by white supremacists and neo-Nazis in Charlottesville last weekend, we have an opportunity – and a responsibility – here in Massachusetts to take action to show up in the face of anti-Semitism and white nationalist extremism. We must speak up for justice, equality, and human dignity for all.

GLAD is saying NO to hate by joining in peaceful counter-protest with the Fight Supremacy! Boston Counter-Protest & Resistance Rally. We invite you to join us.

Two opportunities to join the rally:

9:45am
Meet near the Whittier Street Health Center to march to the Boston Common (march starts from the Reggie Lewis Athletic Center).

11:30am
Gather at the GLAD office in Downtown Crossing to walk to Boston Common and join others at the rally.

RSVP below for either location and we will send you details.

Please note: This event is a counter protest to a planned white nationalist event. GLAD supports peaceful, non-violent expression. We encourage you to use caution and awareness if participating.

Rivera v. Springfield Rescue Mission

Home » Massachusetts » Page 24

Update June 21, 2018: The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination found that there was probable cause that discrimination occurred. A date for mediation has been scheduled for August 6.

On January 30, 2017, GLAD filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination on behalf of our client, Lynn Rivera. Lynn, who is from Puerto Rico and identifies as transgender, was discriminated against by a place of business based on their gender identity, sex and race, in violation of Massachusetts Public Accommodation Laws.

Months earlier, Lynn had tried to shop at the Give-Away Center, a distribution center in Springfield open to the public that provides items like clothing and toiletries to those in need, at no cost. Because Lynn exclusively wears men’s clothing, they intended to shop only for men’s clothing items at the Give-Away Center. But when Lynn began shopping for clothing, an employee loudly told them that ‘only men were allowed in the men’s section’ and ‘only women were allowed in the women’s section.’ This employee later said that because Lynn’s identification said female, they could not take any clothing from the men’s section.

At the time of the incident, Lynn was on a road to self-sufficiency after a life-long battle with substance abuse and poverty, outcomes linked to family rejection and pervasive bias related to their gender identity. Lynn had sought the help of Tapestry Health, a community-based health services organization in Western Massachusetts. It was through Tapestry Health that Lynn was connected with Tapestry Health employee and former case manager, Emily, who would go on to support and connect Lynn to community resources, including the Give-Away Center.

Springfield Rescue Mission moved to dismiss the case by arguing their religious character exempted them from coverage under the Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law. GLAD Staff Attorney Allison Wright, who has been working with Lynn on their case, has since submitted a rebuttal to Springfield Rescue Mission’s position statement and an opposition to their motion to dismiss the case.