Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:08:50.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Medical Care for Prisoners: The Evolution of a Civil Right

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Wendy K. Mariner
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

The standard of medical care provided in prisons has emerged recently as an important issue in the areas of public health and prisoners' rights. Prison conditions have long been of concern to both the medical and legal professions. However, little progress was made in prison health care until the early 1970s when the federal courts began to recognize civil rights actions by prisoners pressing for adequate medical care. This article discusses the problems involved with providing medical care in prisons, the development of constitutional standards for prison medical services, and, collaterally, the difficulties encountered when pursuing prison reform by means of federal litigation.

Type
Article
Information
Medicolegal News , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , April 1981 , pp. 4 - 8
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

See, e.g., Derro, R.A., Admission Health Evaluation of Inmates of a City-County Workhouse, Minnesota Medicine 61:333–37.(1978).Google ScholarPubMed
See, e.g., Derro, R.A., Health Problems in a City-County Workhouse, Public Health Reports 93:379–85. (1978); Engenbretsen, B., Olson, J.W., Primary Care in a Penal Institution: A Study of Health Care Problems Encountered, Medical Care 13:775–81 (1975); King, L., Geis, G., Tuberculosis in a Large Urban Jail, Journal of the American Medical Association 237:791–92 (1977); Novick, L.F., et al, Health Status of the New York City Prison Population, Medical Care 15:204–16 (1977); Stead, W.W., Undetected Tuberculosis in Prison, Journal of the American Medical Association 240:2544–47 (1978).Google Scholar
See Novick, L.F., Remmlinger, E., A Study of 128 Deaths in New York City Correctional Facilities (1971–1976): Implications for Prisoner Health Care, Medical Care 16:749–56. (1978).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldsmith, S.B., The Status of Prison Health Care: A Review of the Literature, Public Health Reports 89:569–75. (1974); Goldsmith, S.B., Prison Health: Travesty of Justice (Prodist, New York, NY) (1975); Jervis, N., Prison Health Reform: Four Case Studies (Health Policy Advisory Center, New York, NY) (1975).Google ScholarPubMed
Manual of Correctional Standards (American Correctional Association, Rockville, MD) (1977).Google Scholar
Standards for Health Services in Correctional Institutions (American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C.) (1976).Google Scholar
Report on the 1972 AMA Survey of U.S. Jail Systems (American Medical Association, Chicago, IL) (1973); Standards for Health Services in Prisons, Revised edition (American Medical Association, Chicago, IL) (1979).Google Scholar
Medical and Health Care in Jails. Prisons and Other Correctional Facilities (American Bar Association, American Medical Association, Washington, DC) (1974); Medical and Health Care in Jails, Prisons and Other Correctional Facilities: A Compilation of Standards and Materials(American Bar Association, Washington, DC) (1973).Google Scholar
Dubler, N.N., Legal Issues in Corrections, Proceedings of the 3rd National Conference on Medical Care and Health Services in Correctional Institutions (American Medical Association, Chicago, IL) (1979), at 68.Google Scholar
Brecher, E.M. Dellapenna, R. D., Health Care in Correctional Institutions (American Correctional Association, College Park, MD) (1975).Google Scholar
Sissons, P.L., The Place of Medicine in the American Prison: Ethical Issues in the Treatment of Offenders, Journal of Medical Ethics 2:173–79. (1976).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Comment, The Rights of Prisoners to Medical Care and the Implications for Drug-Dependent Prisoners and Pre-trial Detainees, University of Chicago Law Review 42(4):705, 707–09 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See Martinez, Procunier v., 416 U.S. 396, 404–06 (1974) (class action brought by prisoners to protest mail censorship and qualified ban on interviews with law students and paralegals; federal court considered these incidental restrictions on free speech, and permissible given state interest).Google Scholar
See Beto, Campbell v., 460 F.2d 765, 767–68 (5th Cir. 1972) (qualifying that courts should “be ever vigilant to assure that the conditions of incarceration do not overstep the bounds of federal constitutional limitations”); Alabama, Newman v., 503 F.2d 1320, 1328–29 (5th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 948 (1975); Anderson, Battle v., 564 F.2d 388, 392–93 (10th Cir. 1977).Google Scholar
Pate, Cooper v., 378 U.S. 546 (1964).Google Scholar
42 U.S.C. §1983 provides: “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress….”Google Scholar
Pape, Monroe v., 365 U.S. 167, 183 (1961); Swenson, Wilwording v., 404 U.S. 249, 251–52 (1971) (prisoner's complaints relating to conditions of confinement, in petition for habeus corpus, treated as claim for relief under §1983, to which exhaustion requirements not applicable). But see Pursue, Huffman v., 420 U.S. 592, 609 (1975) (requiring exhaustion of state appellate remedies where state litigation was pending at time of federal suit; but state remedy need not be sought and refused before federal remedy can be invoked).Google Scholar
See Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 667 (1962) (state law compelling imprisonment for criminal “status” of drug addiction, without proof of use of narcotics within the state or of anti-social behavior, held to inflict cruel and unusual punishment even for ninety-day sentence).Google Scholar
Granucci, A.F., “Nor Cruel and Unusual Punishments Inflicted:” The Original Meaning, California Law Review 57:839, 842, 844 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulles, Trop v., 356 U.S. 86, 100–101 (1958).Google Scholar
Comment, Inadequate Medical Treatment of State Prisoners: Cruel and Unusual Punishment? American University Law Review 27(1):92, 93–95 (Fall 1977).Google Scholar
Williamson, Spicer v., 132 S.E. 291, 293 (N.C. 1926) (Board of County Commissioners found to have duty to provide necessary medical care for prisoner in custody of sheriff, in suit to recover unpaid medical expenses).Google Scholar
Johnston, Coleman v., 247 F.2d 273, 275 (7th Cir. 1957).Google Scholar
443 F.2d 921 (2d Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 983 (1971).Google Scholar
Id. at 923–24.Google Scholar
Church v. Hegstrom, 416 F.2d 449, 451 (2d Cir. 1969) (“mere negligence in giving or failing to provide medical treatment alone will not suffice”).Google Scholar
U.S. ex rel. Hyde v. McGinnis, 429 F.2d 864, 868 (2d Cir. 1970) (physician's actions at most rising to no more than mere negligence).Google Scholar
Williams v. Vincent, 508 F.2d 541, 544–45 (2d Cir. 1974).Google Scholar
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 (1976).Google Scholar
Gamble v. Estelle, 516 F.2d 937, 938–40 (5th Cir. 1975).Google Scholar
Estelle v. Gamble, supra note 29, at 107.Google Scholar
Id. at 104–05.Google Scholar
Turner, W.B., When Prisoners Sue: A Study of Prisoner Section 1983 Suits in the Federal Courts, Harvard Law Review 92:610, 662 (1979).Google Scholar
Holt v. Sarver, 309 F.Supp. 362, 364 (E.D. Ark. 1970), aff'd, 442 F.2d 304 (8th Cir. 1971).Google Scholar
Id. at 372–73.Google Scholar
Alabama, Newman v., 349 F.Supp. 278 (M.D. Ala. 1972), aff'd in part, 503 F.2d 1320 (5th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 948 (1975).Google Scholar
Id. at 283–86.Google Scholar
Id. at 285–86.Google Scholar
Ward, Todaro v., 565 F.2d 48, 53 (2d Cir. 1977), affirming 431 F.Supp. 1129 (S.D. N.Y. 1977).Google Scholar
Id. at 50–51.Google Scholar
Lamm, Ramos v., 485 F.Supp. 122, 142–47 (D.Colo. 1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Lightfoot v., 486 F.Supp. 504, 512, 514–15. (S.D. Ill. 1980).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Sarver, Holt v., supra note 34.Google Scholar
Locke, Pugh v., 406 F.Supp. 318 (M.D. Ala. 1976), aff'd as modified sub nom. Alabama, Newman v., 559 F.2d 283 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 438 U.S. 915 (1978); Walker, Lightfoot v., supra note 42, at 526–29.Google Scholar
Medical and Health Care in Jails, Prisons and Other Correctional Facilities (American Bar Association, Committee on Correctional Facilities and Legal Services) (1974) at 7, 16, 19.Google Scholar
Ward, Todaro v., supra note 39, at 1138; Garrahy, Palmigiano v., 443 F.Supp. 956, 961, n.2 (D.R.I. 1977), remanded in 599 F.2d 17 (1st Cir. 1979).Google Scholar
Robbins, I.P. Buser, M.B., Punitive Conditions of Prison Confinement: An Analysis of Pugh v. Locke and Federal Court Supervision of State Penal Administration Under the Eighth Amendment, Stanford Law Review 29:893, 926–30. (May 1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciccone, Ramsey v., 310 F.Supp. 600, 605 (W.D.Mo. 1970).Google Scholar
Gamble, Estelle v., supra note 29, at 116.Google Scholar
Craven, Mayfield v., 299 F.Supp. 1111, 1113 (E.D. Cal. 1969), aff' d 433 F.2d 873 (9th Cir. 1970); Lockhart, Freeman v., 503 F.2d 1016, 1017 (8th Cir. 1974).Google Scholar