Section 1983 & Correctional iability Issues (232)

Section 1983 & Correctional Liability Issues (232)
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

Section 1983 & Correctional iability Issues (232)
Correctional Liability Issues in Section 1983 Cases
The Deliberate Indifference Standard argued by the American Supreme Court that the correct manner for investigating claims of denied medical care as per the Eighth Amendment is deciding deliberate indifference to a plaintiff’s needs by correction officers (Ross, 2014). Psychological Care concerns the psychological requirements of mentally impaired prisoners. The rulings used in this advocate for involuntary medication of mentally ill prisoners with the risk of harm and in order to stand trial.
American with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects prisoners’ issues through their Title II preventing a public institution or officer from discriminating against a disabled prisoner as per the Fourteenth Amendment (Ross, 2014). AIDS issue is provided for since correctional officers faced issues with sorting, accommodation, provision of medical care, and discretion apprehensions of prisoners with AIDS. These rulings dealt with the testing and treatment of such prisoners who are regarded by the ADA as having a disability (Ross, 2014).
Environmental hazards such as passive smoking led to the indifference standard applying to similar suits. Prison and Jail Conditions found to be in violation of the eighth and fourteenth amendments in the totality of circumstances were applied the indifference standard.

Finally, the failure to protect also applies deliberate indifference standard. This applies where correctional officers neglect to act where there exists the substantial risk of harm (Ross, 2014).
Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA)
The PLRA was passed by Congress to decrease the number of superficial lawsuits prisoners file. The American Supreme Court also demanded that prisoners should expend all remedial measures institutionally before filing. The Court further added that any court presented a lawsuit with expended and unexpended claims should proceed with the expended claims instead of dismissing the lawsuit (Ross, 2014).
The Court also added that a plaintiff was not expected under the PLRA to identify every defendant to allow for identification at a consequent lawsuit. The PLRA has led to the amplified filing of habeas corpus petitions concerning penal disputes and confinement states. The PLRA has also eliminated existing consent decrees through court orders except those with ongoing constitutional violations. These decrees are provided for by the act in the case of a court finding harm present in a facility (Ross, 2014).

References
Ross, D. L. (2014). Civil liability in criminal justice. Routledge.