View Full Version : Doctors and execution in the US
Peter1469
08-14-2015, 04:07 PM
Doctors and execution in the US (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/health/death-row-stories-execution-methods/index.html)
I can see how doctors don't want to get involved in executions. I see no reason to anyway.
"Death Row Stories (http://www.cnn.com/shows/death-row-stories)" airs Sundays at 10 p.m. ET/PT.
(CNN)Throughout the history of capital punishment in America, states have reviewed and revised execution methods in the interest of finding a more "humane" option.
Hanging was the standard for much of the 19th century, as Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito noted in the court's recent ruling related to capital punishment (http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/29/politics/scotus-opinion-document-glossip-gross/index.html).
New York led the charge in the 1880s to trade the hangman's noose for the electric chair, based on a legislative commission's finding that electrocution was "the most humane and practical method known to modern science (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/136/436/case.html)," and other states followed its lead. In 1921, Nevada adopted a new method -- lethal gas -- after concluding that it was "the most humane manner known to modern science." And other states followed suit.
Though some states kept the firing squad and hanging, electrocution remained the predominant method of state execution for much of the 20th century. After the court upheld capital punishment in 1976, lethal injection was eventually adopted in most states, yet again, in an effort to find a more "humane" way to carry out death sentences.
Read more about this interesting medical ethics issue at the link.
Mac-7
08-14-2015, 04:10 PM
They don't mind killing unborn children.
Peter1469
08-14-2015, 04:12 PM
They don't mind killing unborn children.
Stick to the topic or visit one of the several abortion threads on the Forum.
Mac-7
08-14-2015, 04:14 PM
Stick to the topic or visit one of the several abortion threads on the Forum.
The topic is doctors who don't want to kill human beings, right?
Peter1469
08-14-2015, 04:18 PM
The topic is doctors who don't want to kill human beings, right?
Warning: Stick with the topic. Thread bans to follow.
Mac-7
08-14-2015, 04:20 PM
Warning: Stick with the topic. Thread bans to follow.
In that case I won't post to a thread that is censored.
Peter1469
08-14-2015, 04:21 PM
Notice: Don't respond to Mac in this thread. Stick with the topic.
Cthulhu
08-14-2015, 07:31 PM
Doctors and execution in the US (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/health/death-row-stories-execution-methods/index.html)
I can see how doctors don't want to get involved in executions. I see no reason to anyway.
Read more about this interesting medical ethics issue at the link.
Guillotine would be humane enough, messy but humane.
It also has a historically proven pattern of killing people on the first attempt.
Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.
Redrose
08-14-2015, 07:45 PM
Guillotine would be humane enough, messy but humane. It also has a historically proven pattern of killing people on the first attempt.Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.We put our dog down a while back, an IV in his leg, he was in my arms, the needle went in the IV and he was dead befor the vet pulled the needle out. He went quickly, with no apparent pain or stress, peacefully. If we can do that with our beloved pets, why can't it be done with a death row inmate. Don't tell me we can't use an "animal" drug on a human. The drugs are out there, we just need to implement them.
zelmo1234
08-14-2015, 08:47 PM
With the current system of execution being used in the USA, there is NO reason for it.
By the time you are executed, nobody but the families of the victims remembers what you did, and it is done out of the public eye, in the most human way possible.
There is a reason that Hanging day was a public holiday and all were encouraged to attend.
Redrose
08-14-2015, 09:00 PM
With the current system of execution being used in the USA, there is NO reason for it.
By the time you are executed, nobody but the families of the victims remembers what you did, and it is done out of the public eye, in the most human way possible.
There is a reason that Hanging day was a public holiday and all were encouraged to attend.
There are many famous murderers who were executed that many people remember. John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, Eileen Wornos just to name three. I agree with you about the ones that remain localized in their communities. They become a footnote.
I still believe the death penalty is very much warranted in some cases. The murders that meet the standard are so heinous, the murderer has forfeited his/her right to live among us, even in prison where they could still kill...other inmates or guards.
It wouldn't cause me any heartburn if they were done publicly. All too often the underlying murder(s) is a headline for a few days or weeks then the news turns to the defendant, about his rights and how humane we should be in dealing with him. His(her) crime is almost forgotten.
Lineman
08-14-2015, 09:14 PM
The deterrent to crime that the death penalty was supposed to provide soured when DNA technology started revealing mistake after mistake, and doctors have been paying attention.
It doesnt work. Had it, there would be no death row inmates.
Doctors and execution in the US (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/health/death-row-stories-execution-methods/index.html)
I can see how doctors don't want to get involved in executions. I see no reason to anyway.
Read more about this interesting medical ethics issue at the link.
Redrose
08-14-2015, 09:44 PM
The deterrent to crime that the death penalty was supposed to provide soured when DNA technology started revealing mistake after mistake, and doctors have been paying attention.
It doesnt work. Had it, there would be no death row inmates.
With depraved criminal minds who often think they will never be caught or have to pay, the death penalty is not often a deterrent. It does however prevent repeat offenders. I'd rather see us spend a decade or two in appeals to insure guilt is accurate, than feed their sorry butts for 40-60 years.
The errors of the past should not alter how we deal with some murderers today. In the past they operated with the knowledge they had, blood type and fingerprints and eye witness (very unreliable) were about all they had. DNA now has allowed us to remove all doubt and has freed many on death row.
A small amount of murders meet the standard for death, and an even smaller amount receive that verdict in a penalty phase. The number of people on death row is a minute amount compared to the total murders nationwide. They are the worst of the worst. Today, no one is sentenced to death without a DNA backup.
There are many doctors in the medical profession who have no issues with administering a lethal doseage to a condemned prisoner. Just like those in the abortion field, and those who support euthanasia. They can justify the need.
Cthulhu
08-14-2015, 11:30 PM
We put our dog down a while back, an IV in his leg, he was in my arms, the needle went in the IV and he was dead befor the vet pulled the needle out. He went quickly, with no apparent pain or stress, peacefully. If we can do that with our beloved pets, why can't it be done with a death row inmate. Don't tell me we can't use an "animal" drug on a human. The drugs are out there, we just need to implement them.
Eh...in the billion to one chance that he has some heinous reaction or doesn't die for some freak reason - I want zero grounds for a lawsuit.
Guillotine works every time and is pretty hard to screw up.
Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.
Redrose
08-14-2015, 11:41 PM
Eh...in the billion to one chance that he has some heinous reaction or doesn't die for some freak reason - I want zero grounds for a lawsuit.
Guillotine works every time and is pretty hard to screw up.
Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.
So messy though, all that blood, bodiless heads still talking for a few seconds....yuk! Firing squad works for me too.
Now personally, there were a few murderers I would like to have seen burried alive with their head above the sand, covered in honey and a few thousand red ants poured on him. It's slow and gives them plenty of time to think about what got them there. John Couey was one such beast. He killed Jessica Lunsford, age 9, after raping her multiple times, torturing her, chaining her in a closet for days then burying her alive in a black trash bag, head down in the hole....so "if she tried to dig out she'd be digging in the wrong direction" he told detectives.
When found, her index finger had poked outside the bag and her stuffed animal was in her arms.
Jessica's Law because of this case.
Peter1469
08-14-2015, 11:45 PM
Guillotine would be humane enough, messy but humane.
It also has a historically proven pattern of killing people on the first attempt.
Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.
One of the States proposed using the Guillotine for the death penalty. Nevada perhaps.
Peter1469
08-14-2015, 11:48 PM
Firing squad seems best to me.
Cthulhu
08-14-2015, 11:53 PM
So messy though, all that blood, bodiless heads still talking for a few seconds....yuk! Firing squad works for me too.
Now personally, there were a few murderers I would like to have seen burried alive with their head above the sand, covered in honey and a few thousand red ants poured on him. It's slow and gives them plenty of time to think about what got them there. John Couey was one such beast. He killed Jessica Lunsford, age 9, after raping her multiple times, torturing her, chaining her in a closet for days then burying her alive in a black trash bag, head down in the hole....so "if she tried to dig out she'd be digging in the wrong direction" he told detectives.
When found, her index finger had poked outside the bag and her stuffed animal was in her arms.
Jessica's Law because of this case.
Things like that make me question the cruel and unusual restrictions.
I don't see why the aggressor should die more humanely than the victim. Especially if they have a confession with evidence to verify. Or ironclad evidence like video of the crime in progress.
Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.
Lineman
08-15-2015, 05:36 PM
If the death penalty functioned as it was designed to do, there would be no death sentences.
It is not a deterrent.
exotix
08-15-2015, 05:38 PM
I recommend perusing Oregon's' 'Death with Dignity'
Common
08-15-2015, 05:43 PM
I believe most doctors would find it unethical to be an exectutioner even its considered by medical means. It goes against they entire hypoctratic oath thing if I spelled that right.
Firing squad is the most humane
donttread
08-16-2015, 07:12 AM
Doctors and execution in the US (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/health/death-row-stories-execution-methods/index.html)
I can see how doctors don't want to get involved in executions. I see no reason to anyway.
Read more about this interesting medical ethics issue at the link.
It's almost laughable that only a doc can order a medication EVEN WHEN THE INTENT IS TO KILL. Just write in an exception so that responsible prison staff can do so. Problem solved
Peter1469
08-16-2015, 07:14 AM
It's almost laughable that only a doc can order a medication EVEN WHEN THE INTENT IS TO KILL. Just write in an exception so that responsible prison staff can do so. Problem solved
Or leave medicine out of it. Firing squad. Hanging. Tried and true methods.
Ivan88
08-16-2015, 01:05 PM
They don't mind killing unborn children.
And they don't mind vaccinating kids with chemicals and drugs that fry their brains, alter the immune system and sometimes kill them.
Nor do they mind drugging millions of kids and adults which are also a form of "execution" - population control.
They don't mind giving prisoners bad medical care, nor do they mind bumping off old people with various medical "accidents".
They also support genetically engineered food secreted into the food supply to kill off some more.
They also hate herbs, vitamins and minerals for the maintenance of good health.
Yes, our American Medical Association high priests and their doctors have our best interest in mind.
Now, shall we define what that "best interest" is?
gamewell45
08-16-2015, 01:38 PM
It wouldn't cause me any heartburn if they were done publicly.
i think the problem with that is people will eventually become desensitized to death; children might be exposed and traumatized.
Most civilized societies no longer execute convicted murderers, particularly since there is documented evidence that some prisoners have been wrongly executed, but by then it's too late to reverse what has taken place.
Either way I can understand a doctors refusal to participation in an execution; I believe they take a Hippocratic oath when they become doctors and this is no doubt a factor in their hesitation.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.