CA8: Use of ketamine on agitated person leading to injury was reasonable

The use of ketamine on an intoxicated and suicidal person, and one in probable mental distress, too, was not excessive force, even though she was put into respiratory distress. Buckley v. Hennepin Cty., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 24257 (8th Cir. Aug. 16, 2021)*:

Buckley concedes that her suicidal and intoxicated state made it necessary for paramedics to place her on a medical hold and transport her to the hospital because she was a danger to herself. But she contends that she was not combative when restrained on the gurney and sedation was therefore medically unnecessary. The contemporaneous ambulance run report states that Buckley “attempted kicking, biting and head butting [the paramedics] while she was being removed from her house and taken to the ambulance,” and they sedated her “fearing the patient would injure herself fighting the restraints or get out of lower seat belts and kick responders.” Buckley asserts the report is false and that the paramedics’ sole motivation for sedating her was to enroll her in the ketamine trials and sedate her with ketamine instead of a safer alternative sedative. These are not material fact disputes.

It was not objectively unreasonable for paramedics to administer medical aid to an intoxicated, suicidal, semi-conscious woman who needed medical intervention. The “reasonableness inquiry in an excessive force case is an objective one” and looks only to whether the official’s actions were “objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation.” Graham, 490 U.S. at 397 (quotation omitted) (emphasis added). There is no constitutional right to be sedated with a particular medication. Whether Buckley needed to be sedated, and if so with what sedative, are questions of appropriate medical care that must be resolved in a medical malpractice action under state law. The district court properly dismissed her excessive force claims.