N.D.Tex.: Forced catheterization for a urine sample of a prisoner on a hunger strike was not unreasonable search

Forced catheterization for a urine sample of a prisoner on a hunger strike was not an unreasonable search where it was clearly medically necessary. Hurrey v. Unknown Tech Med. Person “A”, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106035 (N.D. Tex. September 15, 2010):

Plaintiff appears to argue that court authorization was necessary for the forced catheterization; however, a court order is not required for an involuntary medical procedure. Prison officials are not required to allow an inmate to harm himself or commit suicide by fasting. Even force-feeding an inmate under those circumstances is not a violation of his civil rights. See, e.g., Martinez v. Turner, 977 F.2d 421, 423 (8th Cir. 1992) (rejecting claim that force-feeding an inmate after seven days on a hunger strike was unconstitutional). A forced catheterization on the seventeenth day of a hunger strike to monitor plaintiff’s well-being is not constitutionally offensive. Although plaintiff maintains he was simply trying to lose weight, prison officials had no way of determining why plaintiff was no longer eating, or, more importantly, whatever his goal, whether he was harming himself. Even if they had known plaintiff was trying to lose weight, that would not relieve them of the duty to provide medical care for plaintiff’s serious medical needs, including a determination of whether his self-imposed fast was doing serious harm to his body.