Diabetes Behind Bars: Dissecting Diabetic Deliberate Indifference and Delivering Inmates a More Workable Standard Under the Fourth Amendment

Abstract

This Note examines the inadequacies of the current Eighth Amendment framework in safeguarding the constitutional rights of diabetic inmates. It contends that the subjective element of the two-pronged Eighth Amendment claim—often used to assess deliberate indifference—leads to unfair and inconsistent outcomes. To address these shortcomings, this Note draws inspiration from the objective analysis employed in Fourth Amendment excessive force claims, specifically referencing the Supreme Court’s decision in Graham v. Connor. This new framework eliminates the subjective element, and instead replaces it with three objective factors courts should consider when evaluating Eighth Amendment violations related to diabetic medical care. Through legal analysis and application of the new proposal, this Note argues that this departure from the current framework is crucial to ensure that the Eighth Amendment effectively prohibits cruel and unusual punishment for diabetic inmates. Ultimately, the proposed shift in legal framework aims to uphold inmates’ constitutional right to healthcare; a repeated guarantee outlined in various cases decided by the United States Supreme Court