Posted on 02/21/2006 6:14:52 PM PST by Tamar1973
San Francisco - The execution of a man convicted of raping and murdering a 17-year-old girl was postponed Tuesday after two anaesthesiologists who were to ensure a painless death withdrew on ethical grounds.
The execution of Michael Morales, 46, had been scheduled for 12.01 a.m. Tuesday after Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and U.S. courts denied his final appeals.
But the two anaesthesiologists cited concerns over a last-minute ruling by a judge who ordered them to intervene in the event that Morales woke up or appeared to be in pain from the administering of the lethal combination of drugs.
"Any such intervention would be medically unethical. As a result, we have withdrawn from participation in this current process... What is being asked of us is ethically unacceptable," the doctors said in a statement released by authorities in San Quentin Prison.
Judge Jeremey Fogel issued the ruling on Monday to ensure that the three-drug cocktail typically used for executions did not violate the constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual" punishment.
But he also gave prison authorities the option of putting Morales to death by giving him an overdose of sedatives. Officials have rescheduled the execution for Tuesday evening and plan to use this alternative method.
If the execution does not take place before midnight Tuesday the death warrant will expire. A new judge would then have to review the case and decide whether to set another execution date.
Morales has confessed to the 1981 crimes, but claims he was high on alcohol and the hallucinatory drug PCP at the time. The original judge in the case supported his appeal for clemency which was denied by Schwarzenegger on Monday.
In an International Herald Tribune article about this same topic, the "doctor" had the audacity to quote the Hippocratic oath as a justification for not allowing doctors to assist in executions.
These same doctors have no problem with abortion: oh, the hypocritical irony.
They felt he didn't deserve a painless death, too?
No doubt his claim that he was drunk and high when he raped and murdered the 17 year old girl is a comfort to her family. She's still dead, but at least he wasn't sober and straight when he killed her.
If the courts are going to play games like this, I say introduce the perp back into the general prison population and leak word that the first general jailbird to complete the duty which the state is shirking not only get amnesty but extra priveleges like a private cell with cable TV.
I don't care if the anaesthesiologists thought he deserved a painless death or not and I also believe it is the right of the individual anaesthesiologist if he/she wants to participate in this kind of thing but I do think some of the hipocrisy in the medical community is enough to make your head spin.
In Oregon, doctors seem mostly in support of euthanasia and abortion and yet these same doctors groups claim that it's not ok to make sure an execution is not "cruel and unusual?! Where's the consistency here?!
I also agree that in this particular case, it's more about the courts passing the buck rather than being willing to stand up and state the obvious: any effort made to minimize pain and discomfort in the execution process is more than these murderers gave to their own victims and as long as the execution doesn't involve toe nail clippers, chinese water torture or listening to constant streaming audio of yodeling, it's not cruel nor unusual nor unreasonable.
Maybe a generous monthly allowance in the commissary, too?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.