Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I found this article interesting. Does it violate the medical ethic to "do no harm" for a physician to administer lethal drugs to a man sentenced to die? Should a doctor willing to do this be allowed to practice medicine?
Physicians shouldn't be executioners. My understanding is that doctors currently attend executions to confirm death not to initiate them. This will be Missouri's first death by Propofol as traditional death drugs are no longer available from drug manufacturers due to public pressure. Texas is running out of it's pancuronium bromide and will also be switching to Propofol.
I don't know why an anesthesiologist is needed. It's not like they have to monitor the dose carefully to put the convict under but back off from killing him. Who inserts the needle and throws the switch currently? A medical professional?
If physicians aren't willing to do the deed I'd be more than happy to use my professional skills as a firearms instructor and marksman to carry out the sentence of these dregs of humanity.
If physicians aren't willing to do the deed I'd be more than happy to use my professional skills as a firearms instructor and marksman to carry out the sentence of these dregs of humanity.
If the state is going to execute someone a firing squad is much more humane, quicker, and cheaper than lethal injection.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/desc...cution-methods
"Medical ethics preclude doctors from participating in executions. However, a doctor will certify the inmate is dead. This lack of medical participation can be problematic because often injections are performed by inexperienced technicians or orderlies. If a member of the execution team injects the drugs into a muscle instead of a vein, or if the needle becomes clogged, extreme pain can result. Many prisoners have damaged veins resulting from intravenous drug use and it is sometimes difficult to find a usable vein, resulting in long delays while the inmate remains strapped to the gurney.
If the state is going to execute someone a firing squad is much more humane, quicker, and cheaper than lethal injection.
Descriptions of Execution Methods | Death Penalty Information Center
"Medical ethics preclude doctors from participating in executions. However, a doctor will certify the inmate is dead. This lack of medical participation can be problematic because often injections are performed by inexperienced technicians or orderlies. If a member of the execution team injects the drugs into a muscle instead of a vein, or if the needle becomes clogged, extreme pain can result. Many prisoners have damaged veins resulting from intravenous drug use and it is sometimes difficult to find a usable vein, resulting in long delays while the inmate remains strapped to the gurney.
Well then they should do it that way. Some .50 BMG would leave little to chance.
I found this article interesting. Does it violate the medical ethic to "do no harm" for a physician to administer lethal drugs to a man sentenced to die? Should a doctor willing to do this be allowed to practice medicine?
Why is a physician needed? Would you use a lousy marksman for a firing squad? Someone who did not know a hangman's knot for a hanging?
1. not every "predicted" dose will be lethal. What do you do if the "prescribed dose" is inefficient?
2. what if the IV is infiltrated? What do you do?
3. a physician needs to be available anyway to determine death. Should one not get "two for the price of one" and use the expertise in use of anesthetic drugs and ability to determine death?
The term "primum non nocere" (the "c" is pronounced "k" in latin), refers to a physician patient relationship. In the realm of a someone being executed, the goal is execution, not life preservation, therefore there is no physician/patient role.
I agree with the ACLU that the death penalty should end but I hate when groups take up causes like this.
The problem isn't how they are killed but rather that they are. It's going to accomplish nothing to cause the state to revert back to the electric chair or something.
I found this article interesting. Does it violate the medical ethic to "do no harm" for a physician to administer lethal drugs to a man sentenced to die? Should a doctor willing to do this be allowed to practice medicine?
That makes little sense - the medical license is issued by the state, and the execution is ordered by the very same state.
However, I'm with the ACLU, I think the execution should be as painful as possible, and I'm sure it doesn't take a rocket scientist to jab a dude with a syringe full of poison.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
