Scheduled execution of Virginia woman raises issue of medical ethics

[caption id="attachment_7712" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Lethal injection"][/caption]

Carol Forsloff - On July 29 an execution date of September 23 was set for Teresa Lewis,
40, which if conducted will make her the first woman executed in
Virginia in 100 years and raises ethical concerns for health
professionals.

Lewis is scheduled to die for plotting to have her husband and stepson killed in 2002 so she could get the $250,000 life insurance policy from the death.

Virginia allows those sentenced to die to choose between electrocution or lethal injection.
Medical ethics require physicians and other health professionals to do
no harm, which creates conflict when these same people are forced to
assist with executions.  Medical personnel are required to be on hand
for the pronouncement of death.

This year again there have been death penalty cases, where lethal
injection has been the method to carry out the order of the court.

Health officials are required by law to be involved and in some cases have carried out the killings.

The difficulty of this is being discussed in high profile meetings of
medical personnel.  Some hospitals even refuse to allow doctors who have
assisted at executions to be involved in hospital care.

Most people mistakenly believe death by lethal injection will be the safer, less painful way to death and choose it.  Furthermore many states have that as the singular option.

But medical people know it is a painful way to do.  The drug that kills
is a painful one; the paralyzing drug administered before it presents
the profile of the still, quiet individual and masks the actual
suffering that takes taking place.

These are the ethical codes related to capital punishment and lethal
injection, which has been shown medically to be cruel and unusual,
according to those who have witnessed the practice:

Ethical Codes related to capital punishment

• American Medical Association: A
  physician, as a member of a profession dedicated to preserving life
  when there is hope of doing so, should not be a participant in a legally
  authorized execution.


• American Nurses Association: The
  American Nurses Association (ANA) is strongly opposed to nurse
  participation in capital punishment. Participation in executions is
  viewed as contrary to the fundamental goals and ethical traditions of
  the profession. (Summary, login required to view full statement)


• American College of Physicians: Participation by physicians in the execution of prisoners except to certify death is unethical.


• American Public Health Association: The
  APHA publicly reaffirm its March 1994 collaborative statement to all
  health professional societies and state licensing and discipline boards
  that health professional participation in executions or pre-execution
  procedures is a serious violation of ethical codes and should be grounds
  for active disciplinary proceedings including expulsion from society
  membership and license revocation.


• National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians: The
  National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians (NAEMT) is
  strongly opposed to participation in capital punishment by an EMT,
  Paramedic or other emergency medical professional. Participation in
  executions is viewed as contrary to the fundamental goals and ethical
  obligations of emergency medical services.


• American Society of Anesthesiologists: Although lethal injection mimics certain technical aspects of the practice of anesthesia, capital punishment in any form is not the practice of medicine
  ... ASA continues to agree with the position of the American Medical
  Association on physician involvement in capital punishment. ASA strongly
  discourages participation by anesthesiologists in executions. (emphasis
  in original)

But some argue
that it is a whole different thing, from healing and administering the
death penalty; and that the two should not be equated in any way, so the
ethical issue really doesn't exist.  One of these death writers renders
this as the argument used:   "Lethal injection is not a medical
procedure. It is a criminal justice sanction authorized by law.
Therefore, there should be no ethical conflict with medical codes of
conduct. "


Dr. Marc Stern, however, is hailed by death penalty opponents as being in line with true medical ethics. 


As the head doctor for Washington state’s 16,000 prison inmates, it was
Dr. Stern's job to make sure the lethal injection table was working
adequately before each execution. He decided this was ludicrous and told
his boss, "I can't do this. I won't do this. I'm not allowed to do
this." He explains he is against the death penalty although he is no
activist particularly. Stern just doesn’t think it’s right for
health-care staffers to be involved in preparing for executions.
He resigned rather than having to do it because of the mistakes and
problems he witnessed during his tenure, including practice sessions on a
table top in someone's home..


In 2006 the execution of convicted killer and rapist Michael Morales was
delayed when two court-appointed anesthesiologists refused to take part
in administering the drugs for a lethal injection, after attorneys for
the condemned man cited it to be cruel and unusual punishment.


Furthermore, not all medical professionals support the view of those who
believe they are bound by the ethics not to be involved. Indeed the
dilemma, according to experts, is that capital punishment could end as a
result of these issues.