Participation of medical professionals in American executions

Participation of licensed medical professionals in American executions is a highly controversial topic, on the grounds of both its moral and legal implications.

The practice is proscribed by the American Medical Association, a defined in its Code of Medical Ethics:

A physician, as a member of the profession dedicated to preserving life when there is hope of doing so, should not be a participant in a state execution

. The practice has also been personally reviewed by the president of the American Society of Anaesthesiologists.

Proponents of the practice argue that if medical professionals are not present, executions are more likely to be botched, and that the there is a higher risk of potential unnecessary suffering to the condemned prisoner, something which, whilst does occur, albeit infrequently, in American executions, is a violation of the Eighth amendment to the United States Constitution, which explicitly forbids "cruel and unusual punishment"; U.S. Supreme Court cases discussing the Constitutionality often involve testimony of such professionals; one example of such a case being the 2008 Baze v. Rees case, which affirmed the Constitutionality of lethal injection as a method of capital punishment, despite claims by defense attorneys that the single-chemical used for animal euthanasia is more humane.

Opponents argue that the participation of medical professionals allows the continuation of capital punishment to go ahead unchallenged, and that even with physicians and other such professionals being present, botched executions can, and still do, occur. Proof of this is in the fact that all executions that have gone ahead in the United States have been overseen by medical professionals, thus including those that were botched.

External links

• []