 |
|
Mayo Clinic Proceedings provides forum for debate about capital punishment
January 03, 2008ROCHESTER, Minn. -- In a commentary and two editorials published in the September 2007 issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, three anesthesiologists and a medical ethicist discussed whether doctors should participate in capital punishment executions. Since that issue was published, discussions about physician involvement in capital punishment have made their way into the state and federal court systems. And the North Carolina Medical Board has published a statement threatening to discipline physicians who actively participate in executions.
On Jan. 7, 2008, the U. S. Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments as to whether execution by lethal injection, as currently conducted, constitutes a form of cruel and unusual punishment. These new developments, as well as the earlier Proceedings articles, prompted a number of readers to write Proceedings editors and offer additional perspectives on this provocative topic. This lively discussion among physicians, ethicists and others appears in the January 2008 issue of the Mayo Clinic Proceedings and is highlighted below.
Lee Black and Mark Levine, M.D., from the American Medical Association Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, author a commentary entitled "Ethical Prohibition Against Physician Participation in Capital Punishment." This article asserts that physicians must not participate in executions, as this action is contrary to the "core concept of ethics" of the medical profession.
"Although it is easy to view the provision of comfort, appropriate in some venues, as a duty of physicians, it is simply not ethical to participate in an action that has as its sole purpose the death of an individual," says Black and Dr. Levine.
Participation in prisoner executions might cause patients to have difficulty believing that their physicians are always acting in their best interests, explain Black and Dr. Levine. And merely possessing a special set of skills that would allow physicians to ensure a proper and painless execution "does not imply license to use these skills in any manner," they add.
Black and Dr. Levine remind readers that although they welcome discussion about this issue, "Physicians are healers, not executioners."
In a second commentary, Mark Heath, M.D., an anesthesiologist from Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center, offers details about how lethal injections are administered, the effects of the medications used, problems encountered in using this method of execution, and what bearing this information has on the debate over whether execution is, in fact, a medical procedure. Dr. Heath acknowledges that his views on this issue have been influenced by his experiences serving as an expert witness in court, where he testified on behalf of condemned prisoners acting to change execution procedures.
Dr. Heath describes how administration of general anesthesia is necessary to render the prisoner insensitive to pain before staff administer the heart-arresting drug potassium chloride. He explains that this combination of drugs is necessary because injection of concentrated potassium alone would be extremely painful.
"For execution by potassium to be humane, the human central nervous system must be placed in a state such that the prisoner is insensitive to the extreme pain that would necessarily be experienced if he or she were conscious," writes Dr. Heath.
Dr. Heath also points out that prisoners currently involved in litigation on this issue want the Department of Corrections to "either discontinue the use of these two drugs or provide properly qualified and equipped practitioners at the bedside to ensure that adequate anesthetic depth is established and maintained."
Describing a botched execution that took place in Florida, Dr. Heath says it was unfortunate that this procedure was administered by "personnel who did not understand the responsibilities they were assuming" and acknowledges that he is opposed to the death penalty and to physician participation in executions.
Following these two commentaries, the journal includes six letters to the editor from a variety of sources, as well as replies from the writers who first discussed this topic in the September 2007 Proceedings issue.
Mayo Clinic anesthesiologist William Lanier, M.D., Mayo Clinic Proceedings editor-in-chief, and anesthesiologist Keith Berge, M.D., also from Mayo, note in their reply that Proceedings welcomes the opportunity to provide a forum for debating this important and timely issue.
"We physicians and other citizens now have the option of ignoring physician involvement in capital punishment executions or of facing the issue head-on, reconciling our own beliefs and speaking to the present and future of the medical profession," conclude Drs. Lanier and Berge.
Mayo Clinic
"Although it is easy to view the provision of comfort, appropriate in some venues, as a duty of physicians, it is simply not ethical to participate in an action that has as its sole purpose the death of an individual," says Black and Dr. Levine.
Participation in prisoner executions might cause patients to have difficulty believing that their physicians are always acting in their best interests, explain Black and Dr. Levine. And merely possessing a special set of skills that would allow physicians to ensure a proper and painless execution "does not imply license to use these skills in any manner," they add.
Black and Dr. Levine remind readers that although they welcome discussion about this issue, "Physicians are healers, not executioners."
In a second commentary, Mark Heath, M.D., an anesthesiologist from Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center, offers details about how lethal injections are administered, the effects of the medications used, problems encountered in using this method of execution, and what bearing this information has on the debate over whether execution is, in fact, a medical procedure. Dr. Heath acknowledges that his views on this issue have been influenced by his experiences serving as an expert witness in court, where he testified on behalf of condemned prisoners acting to change execution procedures.
Dr. Heath describes how administration of general anesthesia is necessary to render the prisoner insensitive to pain before staff administer the heart-arresting drug potassium chloride. He explains that this combination of drugs is necessary because injection of concentrated potassium alone would be extremely painful.
"For execution by potassium to be humane, the human central nervous system must be placed in a state such that the prisoner is insensitive to the extreme pain that would necessarily be experienced if he or she were conscious," writes Dr. Heath.
Dr. Heath also points out that prisoners currently involved in litigation on this issue want the Department of Corrections to "either discontinue the use of these two drugs or provide properly qualified and equipped practitioners at the bedside to ensure that adequate anesthetic depth is established and maintained."
Describing a botched execution that took place in Florida, Dr. Heath says it was unfortunate that this procedure was administered by "personnel who did not understand the responsibilities they were assuming" and acknowledges that he is opposed to the death penalty and to physician participation in executions.
Following these two commentaries, the journal includes six letters to the editor from a variety of sources, as well as replies from the writers who first discussed this topic in the September 2007 Proceedings issue.
Mayo Clinic anesthesiologist William Lanier, M.D., Mayo Clinic Proceedings editor-in-chief, and anesthesiologist Keith Berge, M.D., also from Mayo, note in their reply that Proceedings welcomes the opportunity to provide a forum for debating this important and timely issue.
"We physicians and other citizens now have the option of ignoring physician involvement in capital punishment executions or of facing the issue head-on, reconciling our own beliefs and speaking to the present and future of the medical profession," conclude Drs. Lanier and Berge.
Mayo Clinic
Embargo Of Release Lifted: Execution By Lethal Injection Is Not Humane Or Painless Suggests Study
Prisoners executed by lethal injection in the US may have experienced awareness and unnecessary suffering because they were not properly sedated, concludes a research letter in this week's issue of THE LANCET. The authors believe the use of lethal injection should cease in order to prevent unnecessary cruelty and a public review into anaesthesia procedures during executions is necessary.
Doctors should play no part in executions
The number of executions in the United States has soared over the past two decades as the acceptability of lethal injection has increased. In this week's BMJ Jonathan Groner describes parallels between America's use of lethal injection and Nazi Germany's "euthanasia" programme, and argues that doctors should not participate in executions under any circumstances. Lethal injection is now the standard method used to perform capital punishment in the United States and, unlike other methods of execution, doctors often have to be involved. Although medical organisations in the United States forbid participation in executions, most doctors are unaware of these guidelines and are willing to
More Capital Punishment Current Events and Capital Punishment News Articles
| Understanding Capital Punishment Law by Linda E. Carter | |
 | At Issue Series - The Ethics of Capital Punishment by Christina Fisanick The current debate surrounding capital punishment is complicated and involves legal, civil, philosophical, and religious issues. This anthology explores the ethical arguments involved, from the rights of the condemned to the rights of their victims, and to the rights of society as a whole.... |
 | Does Capital Punishment Deter Crime? (At Issue Series) by Amy Marcaccio Keyzer |
 | Against the Death Penalty: Christian and Secular Arguments Against Capital Punishment by Gardner C. Hanks Drawing on Old and New Testament resources as well as secular arguments, Gardner C. Hanks shows that the death penalty harms rather than helps any quest for a just, humane society. He demonstrates through research data that the death penalty is an ineffective crime-fighting... |
 | Rites of Execution: Capital Punishment and the Transformation of American Culture, 1776-1865 by Louis P. Masur Between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries, Western societies abandoned public executions in favor of private punishments, primarily confinement in penitentiaries and private executions. The transition, guided by a reconceptualization of the causes of crime, the nature of authority, and the purposes of punishment, embodied the triumph of new sensibilities and the reconstitution of cultural... |
 | The Contradictions of American Capital Punishment (Studies in Crime and Public Policy) by Franklin E. Zimring Why does the United States continue to employ the death penalty when fifty other developed democracies have abolished it? Why does capital punishment become more problematic each year? How can the death penalty conflict be resolved? In The Contradictions of American Capital Punishment, Frank Zimring reveals that the seemingly insoluble turmoil surrounding the death penalty reflects a deep... |
 | Against Capital Punishment: The Anti-Death Penalty Movement in America, 1972-1994 by Herbert H. Haines Built on in-depth interviews with movement leaders and the records of key abolitionist organizations, this work traces the struggle against capital punishment in the United States since 1972. Haines reviews the legal battles that led to the short-lived suspension of the death penalty and examines the subsequent conservative turn in the courts that has forced death penalty opponents to rely less... |
 | Capital Punishment (Current Controversies) |
 | Capital Punishment and Roman Catholic Moral Tradition by E. Christian Brugger What is the Catholic Church’s position on the death penalty? How and why has it changed through the ages? In his engrossing and meticulously researched book, Capital Punishment and Roman Catholic Moral Tradition, E. Christian Brugger traces the history of this thorny moral issue. Part 1 of the book offers a detailed exegesis of the Church’s account of the morality of the death penalty as... |
 | Debating the Death Penalty: Should America Have Capital Punishment? The Experts on Both Sides Make Their Case When news breaks that a convicted murderer, released from prison, has killed again, or that an innocent person has escaped the death chamber in light of new DNA evidence, arguments about capital punishment inevitably heat up. Few controversies continue to stir as much emotion as this one, and public confusion is often the result. This volume brings together seven experts--judges, lawyers,... |
| © 2008 BrightSurf.com |