Staff at Tewksbury State Hospital say they are bracing for more violence if state officials follow through on a plan to pull pepper spray and other non‑lethal restraints from the campus’s safety officers. Workers and union leaders say the facility is caring for a growing number of court‑involved and behaviorally complex patients even as staffing and security practices remain strained. Frontline caregivers told investigators they see the gear as a last resort during sudden assaults or elopements.
According to CBS Boston, the WBZ I‑Team reports that the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is weighing a directive that would strip safety officers at the Tewksbury campus of pepper spray and certain non‑lethal restraints. WBZ chief investigator Cheryl Fiandaca reviewed internal documents and interviews for the piece. The I‑Team’s reporting presents the possible change as part of a broader review of safety practices at state facilities.
Staff and unions push back
Nurses and other employees have gone public with their objections, staging pickets and sending formal letters to state mental‑health leaders, GBH News reported. "People are really afraid to go to work," Katie Murphy, president of the Massachusetts Nurses Association, told GBH News. Union leaders and staff point to thousands of 911 calls from the campus over recent years and say morale and retention are suffering amid higher patient acuity and turnover.
State oversight and the campus
Tewksbury is a state‑run campus that includes long‑term medical units overseen by the Department of Public Health and psychiatric wards operated by the Department of Mental Health, according to Mass.gov. The state location page notes that the hospital runs roughly 370 beds across clinical and behavioral programs and sits on a large multi‑agency campus. That split oversight helps explain why any change to safety‑equipment policy would require coordination among clinical leaders, security staff and state officials.
Evidence and the tradeoffs
Federal reviews of corrections and detention settings have found that access to non‑lethal options can reduce staff injuries in some circumstances while also highlighting medical and safety risks, according to the Government Accountability Office. Advocates for restricting chemical agents point to clinical dangers for medically fragile patients, while frontline workers argue that limited, trained use of pepper spray and restraints can avert more serious harm. The debate at Tewksbury centers on training, oversight and whether practical alternatives such as more staff, upgraded locks and better technology can be put in place quickly.
What officials are doing now
State public‑health officials have been conducting a broader review of safety at the campus, and the Department of Public Health launched a formal security assessment after violent incidents last year, The Boston Globe reported. The review has examined infrastructure, equipment, policies and training and has led to coordination with local police, according to reporting and local agency statements. Union leaders say they will push for any changes to security equipment to be linked to concrete increases in staffing and training before those changes take effect.
Union officials and staff say they plan to keep up the pressure on state leaders while they watch for a formal policy decision, GBH News reported. For now, workers say the coming weeks will be tense as the Department of Public Health weighs what advocates describe as a risky trade‑off between clinical safety and immediate staff protection.
