THE UNKNOWNS OF THE KNOWLEDGE REQUIREMENT: REVISITING THE DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE STANDARD IN PRISONER HEALTHCARE.
In the 1976 decision Estelle v. Gamble, the Supreme Court held that "deliberate indifference" to significant health needs of prisoners violated the Eighth Amendment. The standard’s knowledge requirement, however, ensured that prisoners were not guaranteed healthcare under the constitutional standard...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology Vol. 115; no. 4; pp. 715 - 783 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Northwestern University
2026
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=191277891&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 191277891 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00914169 CLC jtl: Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology issn: 00914169 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 2026 vid: 115 iid: 4 pid: 1093 pub: Northwestern University artinfo: ui: 191277891 ppf: 715 ppct: 68 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 18MB tig: atl: THE UNKNOWNS OF THE KNOWLEDGE REQUIREMENT: REVISITING THE DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE STANDARD IN PRISONER HEALTHCARE. aug: au: SIMARD-HALM, MALINA J. affil: Yale Law School. Cambridge University, Criminology M.Phil. Yale University. su: United States. Constitution. 8th Amendment United States. Supreme Court Law reform Apathy Prisoners' health Medical care standards Correctional health nursing Constitutional law Estelle v. Gamble sug: subj: Law reform Apathy United States. Constitution. 8th Amendment United States. Supreme Court Prisoners' health Medical care standards Correctional health nursing Constitutional law Estelle v. Gamble ab: In the 1976 decision Estelle v. Gamble, the Supreme Court held that "deliberate indifference" to significant health needs of prisoners violated the Eighth Amendment. The standard’s knowledge requirement, however, ensured that prisoners were not guaranteed healthcare under the constitutional standard; rather, the constitutionality of healthcare in prisons would be tethered to the mental state of prison officials. This Article seeks to demonstrate that correctional standards of healthcare occupy an incoherent space in constitutional law. By analyzing the legal standard and the application of the knowledge requirement, this Article exposes the theoretical inconsistency and inadequacy of the deliberate indifference standard—and offers avenues for reform. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|