NCJ Number
101544
Journal
New York University Law Review Volume: 58 Issue: 5 Dated: (November 1983) Pages: 1157-1230
Date Published
1983
Length
74 pages
Annotation
This note examines the privacy and due process rights of hunger-striking inmates and the justifiability of forced feeding.
Abstract
The Federal Government and several States have adopted regulations explicitly authorizing forced feeding, and most courts have approved it despite claimed rights to refuse treatment. However, in Zant v. Prevatte, the Georgia Supreme Court held that forced feeding is too great an infringement of privacy under any circumstances. In accord with this decision, it is argued that forced feeding infringes on the fundamental liberty interest of privacy and that inmates retain this interest despite the prison context. Further, traditional State interests in forced medical treatment (e.g., preservation of life, suicide prevention) are not sufficiently compelling to justify forced feeding -- only the interest in maintaining prison security is. Consequently hunger-striking inmates must be afforded procedural due process protections to determine the balance between conflicting State and individual interests. These should include a court hearing, notice of hearing, disclosure of adverse evidence, opportunity to be heard in person and present witnesses and documentary evidence, confrontation and examination of adverse witnesses, written statement of evidence and rationale for forced feeding, and the right to counsel. 474 notes.