The standard of medical care provided in prisons has emerged recently as an important issue in the areas of public health and prisoners' rights. Prison conditions have long been of concern to both the medical and legal professions. However, little progress was made in prison health care until the early 1970s when the federal courts began to recognize civil rights actions by prisoners pressing for adequate medical care. This article discusses the problems involved with providing medical care in prisons, the development of constitutional standards for prison medical services, and, collaterally, the difficulties encountered when pursuing prison reform by means of federal litigation.

Today's hospitals and health care facilities are being increasingly subjected to pressures to monitor the quality of the health care provided in their institution. One vehicle is the courts which, utilizing the doctrine of hospital corporate liability, have imposed a duty upon the hospital to use reasonable care in the selection and maintenance of physicians on its medical staff. This article will discuss three different approaches from three different states.

The first case is Johnson v. Misericordia Community Hospital, decided by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in January 1981. In its decision, the court sought to answer two questions: “Does a hospital owe a duty to its patients to use due care in the selection of its medical staffand the granting of specialized surgical (orthopedic) privileges?;” and second, “What is the standard of care that a hospital must exercise in the discharge of this duty to its patients…?”