PRESS RELEASE
from Citizens United for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (www.CUADP.org)
on behalf of Doctors Freedman, Groner and Halpern
For Immediate Release – June 4, 2006
Physician Ethicists Call on the American Medical
Association to Launch a National Educational
Campaign on the Ethical Guidelines for Physician Involvement in Executions.
Contact:
Jonathan I. Groner MD,
Associate Professor of Surgery,
The Ohio State University College of Medicine and Public Health
The following statement is attributable to these individuals:
* Alfred M. Freedman MD, Professor and Chairman Emeritus, Department of Psychiatry, New York Medical College, and past president of the American Psychiatric Association
* Jonathan I. Groner MD, Associate Professor of Surgery at the Ohio State University College of Medicine and Public Health
* Abraham L. Halpern MD, Professor emeritus of psychiatry, New York Medical College. and past president of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law In advance of the upcoming American Medical
Association House of Delegates meeting in
Chicago, which begins on June 10, Dr.s Freedman,
Groner, and Halpern have issued the following statement:
“A total of six lethal injection executions are
scheduled this month in Oklahoma, Texas, and
Virginia, and a physician will be in the death
chamber at each execution. In fact, in the last
3 years, 99% of executions were carried out by
lethal injection, and it is likely that a
physician was present at most, if not all, of these executions.
“For over a decade, the AMAs ethics guidelines
have forbidden physician participation in lethal
injection. However, these guidelines have never
been properly publicized, and only a small
minority of physicians are even aware of their existence.
“Therefore, we call on the AMA house of delegates
to support a resolution to launch a national
educational campaign on the ethical guidelines
for physician involvement in executions.
The proposed resolution:
SUBJECT: Ethics and Physician Participation in Legal Executions
Whereas, there is widespread participation by
physicians in legally authorized executions,
notwithstanding the Code of Medical Ethics,
specifically, CEJA Opinion 2.06; and
Whereas, there is a lack of knowledge by
physicians of the Code of Medical Ethics, in
regard to physician participation in executions; and
Whereas, in many instances the unethical
participation of physicians in executions is the
result of lack of knowledge and awareness of
ethical standards for physicians taking part in executions; therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that our American Medical Association
launch a campaign of education, in collaboration
with State and County Medical Societies,
concerning actions allowed and disallowed by the
Code of Medical Ethics in connection with physician involvement in
executions.
Background information:
Like many other execution methods, lethal injection was designed with
physician input. However, unlike other methods, lethal injection was
intended to mimic a medical procedure: the intravenous induction of
general anesthesia.
For over a decade, The AMA has published a
well-articulated position against physician
participation against capital punishment in its
Code of Medical Ethics. However, this position
has never been publicized. In fact, a 2001 study
showed that only 3% of doctors surveyed were even aware of these guidelines.
The AMA guidelines forbid physicians from
monitoring vital signs, meaning that a physician
cannot pronounce death (since pronouncing death
involves examining for the presence or absence of
vital signs). The guidelines also forbid
physicians from making recommendations on how an execution should be
performed:
Physician participation in an execution includes,
but is not limited to, the following actions:
prescribing or administering tranquilizers and
other psychotropic agents and medications that
are part of the execution procedure; monitoring
vital signs on site or remotely (including
monitoring electrocardiograms); attending or
observing an execution as a physician; and
rendering of technical advice regarding execution.
With regard to lethal injection, the AMA guidelines state:
In the case where the method of execution is
lethal injection, the following actions by the
physician would also constitute physician
participation in execution: selecting injection
sites; starting intravenous lines as a port for a
lethal injection device; prescribing, preparing,
administering, or supervising injection drugs or
their doses or types; inspecting, testing, or
maintaining lethal injection devices; and
consulting with or supervising lethal injection personnel.
Recently, litigation by death row inmates has
sought to establish that lethal injection is
cruel and unusual (and therefore
unconstitutional) because it is a sophisticated
medical procedure performed by individuals with
no medical training. In response, prison
officials have made physicians even more integral
to the execution process. For example, the
lethal injections in Missouri in the early 1990s
were supervised by the head of prison
maintenance. Now they are performed by a surgeon
and a nurse. Several doctors have been involved
in Georgias executions. In Connecticut, a
licensed and practicing physician must assess
the qualifications of those inserting the IVs and
administering the drugs. And in two recent court
cases — in California and North Carolina a
judge demanded that anesthesiologists be present
to monitor the execution and intervene if
necessary. In the California case, the
anesthesiologists refused and the execution did
not occur. In North Carolina, the prison
officials used a brain wave monitor on the inmate
during the lethal injection. The judge permitted
the substitution of the monitor for the anesthesiologist.
In addition, there have been calls in the press
to make lethal injection “better” by bringing
more medical expertise to the death chamber (see
June 2, 2006 editorial in the Austin-American
Statesman, which calls for prison officials to
“seek expertise or advice from medical
professionals” in order to improve the Texas
execution protocol). This clearly constitutes
rendering technical advice and is not ethical
according to the AMA guidelines. Hence, we have
the “Hippocratic paradox” where the only way to
make lethal injection better is to force
physicians to violate their ethical principles.
The proposed AMA resolution seeks to promote
public dissemination of the AMA guidelines so
that every physician will know his or her ethical
obligations concerning legal executions. When
doctors participate in executions, it disgraces
the entire medical community. Even death penalty
supporters are often dismayed (if not horrified)
to learn that there are doctors who care for
people during the day and kill them during the night.
***************
SENT BY:
Citizens United for Alternatives to the Death Penalty
http://www.CUADP.org
800-973-6548
MoPress 