Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Informed consent and the refusal of medical treatment in the correctional setting

Informed consent and the refusal of medical treatment in the correctional setting International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine 13 (2000) 51–67 IOS Press Frederick R. Parker Jr. ∗∗ and Charles J. Paine Center for Bioethics and Health Law, One University Place, Business Education Building, Room 119H, Shreveport, LA 71115, USA 1. Introduction It was not until the nineteenth century that Western nations came to replace mutilation, corporal punishment, and banishment as the favored methods of criminal punishment with the more humane concept of imprisonment [1]. Even then, however, a convicted inmate was viewed as nothing more than a slave of the state, entitled only to the most basic of human rights and subject to the whim and peril of his jailor’s desire [2]. The shift to imprisonment gradually was accompanied by the additional humanitarian demand that prisons avail their charges of some minimum standard of human decency and necessity, which, by the early part of the twentieth century, had come to encompass the provision of medical care [3]. The courts later came to acknowledge this as a fundamental right grounded in the Eighth Amendment’s proscription against cruel and unusual punishments [4]. Although the scope of a prisoner’s constitutional right to medical care has been the subject of much http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine IOS Press

Informed consent and the refusal of medical treatment in the correctional setting

Download PDF
17 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/ios-press/informed-consent-and-the-refusal-of-medical-treatment-in-the-C3paKS2bvu

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
IOS Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by IOS Press, Inc
ISSN
0924-6479
eISSN
1878-6847
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine 13 (2000) 51–67 IOS Press Frederick R. Parker Jr. ∗∗ and Charles J. Paine Center for Bioethics and Health Law, One University Place, Business Education Building, Room 119H, Shreveport, LA 71115, USA 1. Introduction It was not until the nineteenth century that Western nations came to replace mutilation, corporal punishment, and banishment as the favored methods of criminal punishment with the more humane concept of imprisonment [1]. Even then, however, a convicted inmate was viewed as nothing more than a slave of the state, entitled only to the most basic of human rights and subject to the whim and peril of his jailor’s desire [2]. The shift to imprisonment gradually was accompanied by the additional humanitarian demand that prisons avail their charges of some minimum standard of human decency and necessity, which, by the early part of the twentieth century, had come to encompass the provision of medical care [3]. The courts later came to acknowledge this as a fundamental right grounded in the Eighth Amendment’s proscription against cruel and unusual punishments [4]. Although the scope of a prisoner’s constitutional right to medical care has been the subject of much

Journal

The International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine – IOS Press

Published: Jan 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.