Posted on 05/15/2007 3:46:48 PM PDT by eartotheground
Despite organized medicine's efforts to keep doctors away from the death chamber, judicial tussles draw them into the process. Organized medicine repeatedly has declared it unethical for doctors to participate in capital punishment. Still, some federal judges, politicians and prison officials largely have disregarded these ethical statements, saying doctor participation is necessary for lethal injection to withstand constitutional scrutiny.
The death penalty is on hold in 13 of the 38 states where it is allowed. In 11 of those states, the stays are related to questions over whether lethal injection protocols could sometimes leave the condemned conscious as paralytic and heart-stopping drugs are given.
In California, Missouri and North Carolina, federal judges have ordered prison officials to involve physicians to ensure the prisoner remains unconscious for the entire process.
While a small contingent of doctors says physician participation in executions can be ethical and humane, prison officials in those three states have said they cannot find doctors willing to aid. Most physicians are trying to ensure their profession steers clear of the execution chamber.
American Medical Association policy says physicians should not be present at executions in a professional capacity, take part in the execution process or offer "technical advice regarding execution." Physicians may certify death only after another individual has found the prisoner is dead.
Yet 15 states still require physician presence during executions; 17 states allow doctors to assist in the procedures. Only Illinois and Kentucky bar any kind of physician participation. A California Medical Assn.-led attempt to pass a similar law failed last year, but there have been other successes.
Physicians who advocate punishment for physicians involved in executions may possibly not have their priorities in order "Physicians resist push for execution involvement" (May 14, 2007). I am not an expert on capital punishment. I can tell you that patience with the prisoners' rights movement is wearing thin down here in Florida, what with small children being raped and buried alive, etc. I can also tell you that there are many physicians who are much more deserving of punishment, even incarceration. Medical expert witnesses routinely lie on the witness stand. However, I have yet to see a physician go to prison for perjury. Corporate crime in the realm of managed care organizations seems a worthy area of concern for the AMA. For a "hypothetical" example, a physician-officer of a managed care organization who manipulates the dates of stock options of his own company in order to yield a profit of, say, $1 billion or so, might be considered a candidate for a few nights in a Federal prison cell. The AMA might attract a wider membership if it concentrated on punishing physicians who commit crimes such as these.
No problem, we can just bring back the electric chair.
No physician should be coerced into participating in executions, whether the executed are born or unborn.
I never joined the AMA because of their rank hypocrisy. I can’t stomach an organization that claims it is “unethical” to assist in an execution, yet promotes partial birth abortion.
Why don’t we just get abortion doctors to assist in capital punishment cases? They’re obviously experienced. Perhaps this service can be an outreach of Planned Parenthood. It fits in with their mission. Kind of a two for one—a death and permanent contraception.
Glad that's put to rest.
Executions should be up to the families of the victims, not the government. Case closed. If there is no immediate family, then the killer should be forced to listen to a Hillary Clinton speech until dead.
But its ok and profitable to perform late term ABORTIONS by killing an almost born BABY!
Alas, the Constitution prohibits cruel or inhumane punishment.
The AMA swung far left long ago.
As a physician, I feel that all of these activities, including physician assisted suicide, are unethical.
So, like, it’s ok with them to do partial birth abortions but to put down a criminal is a moral problem with them????
H-5.982 Late-Term Pregnancy Termination Techniques
(1) The term ‘partial birth abortion’ is not a medical term. The AMA will use the term “intact dilatation and extraction”(or intact D&X) to refer to a specific procedure comprised of the following elements: deliberate dilatation of the cervix, usually over a sequence of days; instrumental or manual conversion of the fetus to a footling breech; breech extraction of the body excepting the head; and partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the fetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus. This procedure is distinct from dilatation and evacuation (D&E) procedures more commonly used to induce abortion after the first trimester. Because ‘partial birth abortion’ is not a medical term it will not be used by the AMA.
(2) According to the scientific literature, there does not appear to be any identified situation in which intact D&X is the only appropriate procedure to induce abortion, and ethical concerns have been raised about intact D&X. The AMA recommends that the procedure not be used unless alternative procedures pose materially greater risk to the woman. The physician must, however, retain the discretion to make that judgment, acting within standards of good medical practice and in the best interest of the patient.
(3) The viability of the fetus and the time when viability is achieved may vary with each pregnancy. In the second-trimester when viability may be in question, it is the physician who should determine the viability of a specific fetus, using the latest available diagnostic technology.
(4) In recognition of the constitutional principles regarding the right to an abortion articulated by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, and in keeping with the science and values of medicine, the AMA recommends that abortions not be performed in the third trimester except in cases of serious fetal anomalies incompatible with life. Although third-trimester abortions can be performed to preserve the life or health of the mother, they are, in fact, generally not necessary for those purposes. Except in extraordinary circumstances, maternal health factors which demand termination of the pregnancy can be accommodated without sacrifice of the fetus, and the near certainty of the independent viability of the fetus argues for ending the pregnancy by appropriate delivery.
(5) The AMA urges the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as well as state health department officials to develop expanded, ongoing data surveillance systems of induced abortion. This would include but not be limited to: a more detailed breakdown of the prevalence of abortion by gestational age as well as the type of procedure used to induce abortion at each gestational age, and maternal and fetal indications for the procedure. Abortion-related maternal morbidity and mortality statistics should include reports on the type and severity of both short- and long-term complications, type of procedure, gestational age, maternal age, and type of facility. Data collection procedures should ensure the anonymity of the physician, the facility, and the patient.
(6) The AMA will work with appropriate medical specialty societies, government agencies, private foundations, and other interested groups to educate the public regarding pregnancy prevention strategies, with special attention to at-risk populations, which would minimize or preclude the need for abortions. The demand for abortions, with the exception of those indicated by serious fetal anomalies or conditions which threaten the life or health of the pregnant woman, represent failures in the social environment, education, and contraceptive methods. (BOT Rep. 26, A-97)
Ok, so what you are saying is that in the third trimester a baby is not chopped into pieces and pulled out, right?? In any event it’s murder by a doctor and those doctor’s that can’t abide in executing a murderer is hypocritical,right??????
I’m just showing you what the AMA says. I don’t agree with it. I didn’t say it.
Regards,
jane
If the firing squad and hanging was good enough for the founding fathers, it is good enough now. The founders woul bitch slap the pansies who complain the the condemned men “may feel pain”. Since when is pain unconstitutional?
It’s the ‘cruel and unusual’ part that gets these people going ... when the Constitution was written guess what they did to people in say England ... drawn, quartered, guts ripped out, etc ... that’s what the Constitution was addressing ....putting someone to sleep then stopping their breathing and heart is not cruel ... imagine what they did to their victims .... old proverb: The anticipation of death is worse than death itself .....
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.