Select header/footer to go to
Table of Contents
Think
Assess
Patient: Autonomy
Practitioner: Beneficence & Nonmaleficence
Public Policy: Justice
Conclude
1x Speed
2x Speed
Select Button
In nothing do medical practitioners more nearly approach the gods than in giving health.
~ Marcus Tullius Cicero
Lethal Dilemma
Examining the Medical Profession’s Stance on Executions
Detective Garcia stepped into the autopsy room, where Dr. Patel was examining the body of the executed prisoner. The prisoner had been put to death by lethal injection, and Garcia was here to investigate the cause of death.
As Dr. Patel explained the procedure of the execution, Garcia couldn’t help but think about the medical profession’s stance on capital punishment. Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is legal in 24 states, American Samoa, the federal government, and the military, but it is widely considered unethical for medical practitioners to participate in any form of execution.
The American Medical Association (AMA) and the American College of Physicians (ACP) both prohibit practitioner involvement in executions, including determining competence, administering drugs, and monitoring vital signs. This is because participation in capital punishment is a fundamental contradiction with the medical profession’s principles of beneficence (do good) and nonmaleficence (do no harm), as it does not prioritize patient-centered care or the maximization of the patient’s best interests.
Furthermore, the medical profession’s focus on the principle of autonomy and the acquiring of informed consent means that the lack of prisoner choice in capital punishment makes it a violation of patient autonomy. The medical profession should not be redefined by a political ideology of retribution and must prioritize the health and well-being of patients.
As Detective Garcia listened to Dr. Patel’s findings, he couldn’t help but wonder if the involvement of medical practitioners in executions was not only unethical but also potentially dangerous. The medical profession’s foundational principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence require practitioners to prioritize patient-centered care and to do no harm, which could be compromised in an execution scenario.
Despite the legal permissibility of capital punishment in some states, the medical profession must stand firm in its commitment to healing and the avoidance of harm. Upholding social trust, reputation, and professional obligations is crucial in promoting the medical profession’s primary objective - the healing and well-being of patients.
As Garcia left the autopsy room, he made a mental note to bring up the issue of practitioner involvement in capital punishment to the appropriate authorities. The medical profession’s principles must be upheld, even in the face of legal or political pressures.
Abstract
Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is a government-sanctioned punishment for committing a capital offense and is legal in 24 states, American Samoa, the federal government, and the military. The American Medical Association (AMA) and the American College of Physicians (ACP) prohibit practitioner involvement in any form of execution, including determining competence, administering drugs, and monitoring vital signs. The medical profession’s principles of beneficence (do good) and nonmaleficence (do no harm) would be violated by participation in an execution, which has no regard for the principle of patient autonomy. The medical profession’s ideology as a healing art should not be redefined by a political ideology of retribution, and practitioners must prioritize patient-centered care for the maximum benefit of the patient.
**
Think
[6:1] Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is a government-sanctioned punishment for committing a capital offense. Etymologically, the word “capital” comes from the Latin word “caput,“ which means head, and was used to describe an execution by beheading. Historically, executions have been carried out by hanging, shooting, lethal injection, stoning, electrocution, and gassing.
[6:2] Twenty-three states plus Washington DC have abolished the death penalty, and three states have a governor-imposed moratorium. Virginia was the 23rd state to abolish the death penalty as of March 2, 2022. As a result, there are currently only 24 states left where the death penalty is still legal.
[6:3] Capital punishment is not coherent with the patient-practitioner relationship. The patient-centered purpose and function of the social contract are to maximize the patient’s best interests as determined by the patient’s reasonable goals, values, and priorities. For a practitioner to participate in capital punishment would be a contradiction of the social contract, potentially damaging the social trust in the medical profession as a healing art.
Assess
Patient: 1) Autonomy
[6:4] Patient medical decision-making focuses on the principle of autonomy and the acquiring of informed consent. Capital punishment has no process or interest in getting the prisoner’s informed consent authorization to be executed. Since there is no prisoner choice, there is no disclosure to the prisoner of risks and benefits, and there is no rational assessment for determining what will maximize the patient’s, or in this case, the prisoner’s best interests; therefore, it logically follows that capital punishment has no regard for the principle of patient autonomy.
Practitioner: 2) Beneficence & 3) Nonmaleficence
[6:5] Patient-centered evidence-based medicine for health and wellness is how the art of medicine is defined and understood by the medical profession and the community. Capital punishment and executions, even if legal, is an incontrovertible contradiction with:
- 1. the art of medicine’s goals and objectives of health and wellness, and
- 2. the professional principles of beneficence (do good) and nonmaleficence (do no harm).
[6:6] The American College of Physicians (ACP) prohibits any practitioner engagement in cruel or unusual punishment such as capital punishment and other types of disciplinary activities beyond those permitted by the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.
[6:7] The American Medical Association (AMA) states:
A physician [practitioner] must not participate in a legally authorized execution.
The American College of Physicians (ACP) states:
Participation by physicians [practitioners] in the execution of prisoners except to certify death is unethical.
[6:8] But even in the certification of death, the American Medical Association (AMA) clarifies this statement by stating that the certification of death can only occur if the condemned prisoner has already been declared dead by another person.
[6:9] The American Medical Association (AMA) defines practitioner participation in executions to include the following prohibitory categories:
- 1. causing death,
- 2. assist, supervise, or contribute in any way towards the ability of another to cause death, and
- 3. automatic causation of death.
[6:10] The American Medical Association (AMA) has a list of forbidden practices that includes but is not limited to the following:
- 1. Determining the competence of a person for execution.
- 2. Treating an incompetent person to make the person competent enough to be executed.
- 3. Administering any drugs for the use and purpose of execution.
- 4. Monitoring vital signs.
- 5. Attending or even observing an execution.
- 6. Providing technical advice.
- 7. Selecting injection sites or starting an intravenous line.
- 8. Prescribing, preparing, administering, or supervising injection of drugs.
- 9. Inspecting or maintaining lethal injection devices.
- 10. Consulting or supervising personnel who perform executions.
[6:11] Although the condemned are under a legal court order to die, it is still unethical and unprofessional for any practitioner to participate or even be associated with an execution. This is because the medical profession’s foundational principles of beneficence (do good) and nonmaleficence (do no harm) would be violated or contradicted by any form of participation in an execution.
Public Policy: 4) Justice
[6:12] It is essential to understand that just because “something” is illegal, that does not necessarily make that action immoral or unprofessional. In like fashion just because “something” is legal, that does not necessarily make that action moral or professional. Capital punishment is in this latter category. Although it is a legal penalty in 24 states, American Samoa, the federal government, and the military, that legality in and of itself is not a mandate for practitioners or the medical profession to be federal or state henchmen.
[6:13] Medicine’s professional ideology as a healing art is not redefined by a political ideology of retribution. It is imperative that everyone in society can always trust that their practitioners will only provide appropriate medical care for the benefit of the sick and that the practitioner’s focus will be patient-centered for the maximization of the patient’s best interests as determined by the patient’s reasonable goals, values, and priorities.
Conclude
[6:14] Any participation in capital punishment or executions is a fundamental contradiction with the medical profession being a healing art and a violation of the professional principle of nonmaleficence (do no harm). A practitioner, under no circumstances, is to participate or even be associated with an execution. Social trust, reputation, and professional obligations are of paramount importance for promoting the healing art of medicine.
[6:15] In summary, the medical profession’s participation in capital punishment or executions is a fundamental contradiction to its role as a healing art and a violation of its principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Practitioners are strictly prohibited from participating or even being associated with executions. Upholding social trust, reputation, and professional obligations is crucial in promoting the medical profession’s primary objective - the healing and well-being of patients.
(See also: 5. Assisted Suicide, 11. Death With Dignity - Practitioner-Assisted Dying, 17. Euthanasia, 27. Interrogations, and 58. Torture)
**
6. Review Questions
1. If a practitioner is practicing medicine in a state where capital punishment is mandated and if capital punishment does not violate the practitioner’s conscience, then it is permissible for the practitioner to participate in legal and humane executions.
2. Although the condemned are under a legal court order to die, it is still unethical and unprofessional for any practitioner to participate or even be associated with an execution.
3. It is imperative that everyone in society can always trust that their practitioners will only provide appropriate medical care for the benefit of the sick and that the practitioner’s focus will be patient-centered for the maximization of the patient’s best interests as determined by the patient’s reasonable goals, values, and priorities.
4. A practitioner, under no circumstances, is to participate or even be associated with an execution. Social trust, reputation, and professional obligations are of paramount importance for promoting the healing art of medicine.
**
CORRECT! 🙂
[6:3] Capital punishment is not coherent with the patient-practitioner relationship. The patient-centered purpose and function of the social contract are to maximize the patient’s best interests as determined by the patient’s reasonable goals, values, and priorities. For a practitioner to participate in capital punishment would be a contradiction of the social contract, potentially damaging the social trust in the medical profession.
Wrong 😕
[6:3] Capital punishment is not coherent with the patient-practitioner relationship. The patient-centered purpose and function of the social contract are to maximize the patient’s best interests as determined by the patient’s reasonable goals, values, and priorities. For a practitioner to participate in capital punishment would be a contradiction of the social contract, potentially damaging the social trust in the medical profession.
CORRECT! 🙂
[6:11] Although the condemned are under a legal court order to die, it is still unethical and unprofessional for any practitioner to participate or even be associated with an execution. This is because the medical profession’s foundational principles of beneficence (do good) and nonmaleficence (do no harm) would be violated or contradicted by any form of participation in an execution.
Wrong 😕
[6:11] Although the condemned are under a legal court order to die, it is still unethical and unprofessional for any practitioner to participate or even be associated with an execution. This is because the medical profession’s foundational principles of beneficence (do good) and nonmaleficence (do no harm) would be violated or contradicted by any form of participation in an execution.
CORRECT! 🙂
[6:13] Medicine’s professional ideology as a healing art is not redefined by a political ideology of retribution. It is imperative that everyone in society can always trust that their practitioners will only provide appropriate medical care for the benefit of the sick and that the practitioner’s focus will be patient-centered for the maximization of the patient’s best interests as determined by the patient’s reasonable goals, values, and priorities.
Wrong 😕
[6:13] Medicine’s professional ideology as a healing art is not redefined by a political ideology of retribution. It is imperative that everyone in society can always trust that their practitioners will only provide appropriate medical care for the benefit of the sick and that the practitioner’s focus will be patient-centered for the maximization of the patient’s best interests as determined by the patient’s reasonable goals, values, and priorities.
CORRECT! 🙂
[6:14] Any participation in capital punishment or executions is a fundamental contradiction with the medical profession being a healing art and a violation of the professional principle of nonmaleficence (do no harm). A practitioner, under no circumstances, is to participate or even be associated with an execution. Social trust, reputation, and professional obligations are of paramount importance for promoting the healing art of medicine.
Wrong 😕
[6:14] Any participation in capital punishment or executions is a fundamental contradiction with the medical profession being a healing art and a violation of the professional principle of nonmaleficence (do no harm). A practitioner, under no circumstances, is to participate or even be associated with an execution. Social trust, reputation, and professional obligations are of paramount importance for promoting the healing art of medicine.
6. Clinical Vignettes
1. A practitioner is practicing medicine in a state where capital punishment is mandated. Although capital punishment does not violate the practitioner's conscience, it is still impermissible for the practitioner to participate in legal executions because 1) capital punishment is not compatible with the patient-practitioner relationship, 2) capital punishment is not compatible with the patient's best interests as determined by the patient's reasonable goals, values, and priorities, and 3) capital punishment is not compatible with the social contract of the medical profession being a healing art. Which of the following is true:
2. Mr. Blake Shah, a 38-year-old prisoner is about to undergo a state-sanctioned execution. The healthcare practitioner is asked to be involved in some capacity. Which of the following actions is NOT prohibited by the American Medical Association (AMA)?
3. Mr. Nathan Perez, a 52-year-old prisoner is a death row inmate who has exhausted all legal appeals and is scheduled to be executed in two weeks. The prison warden has approached a practitioner to administer the lethal injection for the execution. What should the practitioner do?
4. Mr. Marcus Evans, a 28-year-old prisoner presents to the clinic with a history of chronic pain and discomfort. The patient's medical history reveals that they have been convicted of a crime and are facing the possibility of capital punishment. Despite their current situation, the patient's main concern is finding relief from pain and discomfort. Which of the following best reflects the practitioner's role?
5. Ms. Olivia Turner, a 54-year-old prisoner is scheduled for lethal injection as capital punishment. The patient's practitioner is asked to assist in the execution. The practitioner recognizes that participating in the execution would go against the medical profession's definition of a healing art, is a contradiction with the professional principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence, and would socially weaken the community's trust in the medical profession. What should the practitioner do in this situation?
Wrong 😕
Explanation: The four principles of bioethics are autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, and capital punishment is incompatible with all four principles [6:1]. Capital punishment is not compatible with the principle of autonomy because it denies the condemned individual the right to make decisions about their own life and death [6:4]. It is not compatible with the principle of beneficence because it is not promoting the condemned individual’s best interests [6:5]. It is not compatible with the principle of nonmaleficence because it intentionally causes harm, suffering, and death [6:1]. It is not compatible with the principle of justice because it disproportionately affects marginalized and vulnerable populations, and it does not contribute to the overall well-being of society [6:1]. Therefore, a practitioner practicing medicine in a state where capital punishment is mandated is faced with an ethical dilemma, as they must balance their legal obligations with their ethical obligations as a practitioner [6:1]. While capital punishment may not violate the practitioner's conscience, it is still incompatible with the fundamental values and goals of medicine [6:2, 6:7].
CORRECT! 🙂
Explanation: The four principles of bioethics are autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, and capital punishment is incompatible with all four principles [6:1]. Capital punishment is not compatible with the principle of autonomy because it denies the condemned individual the right to make decisions about their own life and death [6:4]. It is not compatible with the principle of beneficence because it is not promoting the condemned individual’s best interests [6:5]. It is not compatible with the principle of nonmaleficence because it intentionally causes harm, suffering, and death [6:1]. It is not compatible with the principle of justice because it disproportionately affects marginalized and vulnerable populations, and it does not contribute to the overall well-being of society [6:1]. Therefore, a practitioner practicing medicine in a state where capital punishment is mandated is faced with an ethical dilemma, as they must balance their legal obligations with their ethical obligations as a practitioner [6:1]. While capital punishment may not violate the practitioner's conscience, it is still incompatible with the fundamental values and goals of medicine [6:2, 6:7].
CORRECT! 🙂
Explanation: Any participation or appearance of approval of capital punishment is prohibited by the American Medical Association (AMA) [6:7] and the American College of Physicians (ACP) [6:6], as well as the medical profession as a whole [6:11]. Competency is a legal definition, not a medical determination [6:1]. Practitioners determine decisional capacity, not competency [6:7]. Prescribing or administering a lethal drug is prohibited by the AMA [6:10]. Assisting with an execution, is prohibited because it violates the principle of nonmaleficence and goes against the fundamental goals of medicine [6:5]. Monitoring vital signs or observing an execution is prohibited because it involves a healthcare practitioner participating in a non-medical procedure that is not compatible with the patient-practitioner relationship [6:10]. Providing technical advice or supervising is also prohibited because it involves a healthcare practitioner assisting in a procedure that is not compatible with the professional obligations of medicine [6:10]. Therefore, the only correct answer is one not related to the ethical dilemma of healthcare practitioners' involvement in state-sanctioned executions, which in this case is the promotion of medicine as a healing art [6:13].
Wrong 😕
Explanation: Any participation or appearance of approval of capital punishment is prohibited by the American Medical Association (AMA) [6:7] and the American College of Physicians (ACP) [6:6], as well as the medical profession as a whole [6:11]. Competency is a legal definition, not a medical determination [6:1]. Practitioners determine decisional capacity, not competency [6:7]. Prescribing or administering a lethal drug is prohibited by the AMA [6:10]. Assisting with an execution, is prohibited because it violates the principle of nonmaleficence and goes against the fundamental goals of medicine [6:5]. Monitoring vital signs or observing an execution is prohibited because it involves a healthcare practitioner participating in a non-medical procedure that is not compatible with the patient-practitioner relationship [6:10]. Providing technical advice or supervising is also prohibited because it involves a healthcare practitioner assisting in a procedure that is not compatible with the professional obligations of medicine [6:10]. Therefore, the only correct answer is one not related to the ethical dilemma of healthcare practitioners' involvement in state-sanctioned executions, which in this case is the promotion of medicine as a healing art [6:13].
Wrong 😕
Explanation: Administering the lethal injection goes against the fundamental principles of medicine and the ethical responsibilities of healthcare practitioners [6:5][6:14]. Practitioners have a duty to prioritize the well-being of their patients, to do no harm, and to adhere to professional standards of care [6:5]. Administering the lethal injection for an execution violates these principles, as it intentionally causes harm and suffering to a patient and is not a medically necessary or beneficial procedure [6:5][6:14]. The American Medical Association (AMA) and other professional medical organizations have specifically prohibited healthcare practitioners from participating in executions, recognizing that it violates the patient-practitioner relationship and undermines public trust in the medical profession [6:1][6:14]. Therefore, in this scenario, the practitioner should refuse to participate in the execution and inform the prison warden of their ethical responsibilities and professional obligations as a healthcare practitioner [6:1][6:14].
CORRECT! 🙂
Explanation: Administering the lethal injection goes against the fundamental principles of medicine and the ethical responsibilities of healthcare practitioners [6:5][6:14]. Practitioners have a duty to prioritize the well-being of their patients, to do no harm, and to adhere to professional standards of care [6:5]. Administering the lethal injection for an execution violates these principles, as it intentionally causes harm and suffering to a patient and is not a medically necessary or beneficial procedure [6:5][6:14]. The American Medical Association (AMA) and other professional medical organizations have specifically prohibited healthcare practitioners from participating in executions, recognizing that it violates the patient-practitioner relationship and undermines public trust in the medical profession [6:1][6:14]. Therefore, in this scenario, the practitioner should refuse to participate in the execution and inform the prison warden of their ethical responsibilities and professional obligations as a healthcare practitioner [6:1][6:14].
Wrong 😕
Explanation: Healthcare practitioners have a fundamental duty to provide medical care that is based on the patient's best interests as determined by the patient's reasonable goals, values, and priorities [6:3]. The fact that the patient is a prisoner facing the possibility of capital punishment does not change this fundamental obligation. Healthcare practitioners are bound by professional and ethical standards that prioritize the well-being of the patient [6:5], and the American Medical Association (AMA) specifically states that practitioners must provide medical care without discrimination or prejudice based on factors such as race, gender, or criminal history [6:7]. Therefore, the practitioner's role in this scenario is to provide the patient with the standard of medical care they would provide to any other patient experiencing chronic pain and discomfort. The practitioner should not prioritize the patient's punishment, deny treatment, or allow their political beliefs to influence their medical decision-making [6:13]. Instead, they should prioritize the patient's health and well-being, and work with the patient to determine the best course of treatment based on their medical needs and values.
CORRECT! 🙂
Explanation: Healthcare practitioners have a fundamental duty to provide medical care that is based on the patient's best interests as determined by the patient's reasonable goals, values, and priorities [6:3]. The fact that the patient is a prisoner facing the possibility of capital punishment does not change this fundamental obligation. Healthcare practitioners are bound by professional and ethical standards that prioritize the well-being of the patient [6:5], and the American Medical Association (AMA) specifically states that practitioners must provide medical care without discrimination or prejudice based on factors such as race, gender, or criminal history [6:7]. Therefore, the practitioner's role in this scenario is to provide the patient with the standard of medical care they would provide to any other patient experiencing chronic pain and discomfort. The practitioner should not prioritize the patient's punishment, deny treatment, or allow their political beliefs to influence their medical decision-making [6:13]. Instead, they should prioritize the patient's health and well-being, and work with the patient to determine the best course of treatment based on their medical needs and values.
CORRECT! 🙂
Explanation: Participating in a lethal injection as capital punishment would be a violation of the medical profession's core principles and ethical responsibilities. [6:1] As a healthcare practitioner, the practitioner's primary duty is to promote the patient's health and well-being, and participating in the execution goes against this obligation. The American Medical Association (AMA) has made it clear that healthcare practitioners should not participate in executions, as it undermines the patient-practitioner relationship and weakens public trust in the medical profession. [6:2] Therefore, the practitioner should refuse to participate in the execution and disassociate themselves from it entirely. [6:11] Refusing to participate in the execution sends a message that the medical profession does not condone such practices and reinforces the fundamental principles of medicine. [6:14]
Wrong 😕
Explanation: Participating in a lethal injection as capital punishment would be a violation of the medical profession's core principles and ethical responsibilities. [6:1] As a healthcare practitioner, the practitioner's primary duty is to promote the patient's health and well-being, and participating in the execution goes against this obligation. The American Medical Association (AMA) has made it clear that healthcare practitioners should not participate in executions, as it undermines the patient-practitioner relationship and weakens public trust in the medical profession. [6:2] Therefore, the practitioner should refuse to participate in the execution and disassociate themselves from it entirely. [6:11] Refusing to participate in the execution sends a message that the medical profession does not condone such practices and reinforces the fundamental principles of medicine. [6:14]
**
6. Cases: 6a, 6b
Instructions
1. Read Prompt, 2. Think, Assess, & Conclude (TAC), then 3. Select an answer that mirrors the TAC conclusion.
Note: After success, select each of the wrong answers to understand why each of them is wrong.
6a
The state contacts a practitioner for help in the instruction of correctional personnel on how to start an IV drip for legally authorized executions. The practitioner is politically in favor of the death penalty and would like to assist.
Think
Assess
Patient: Autonomy
Practitioner: Beneficence & Nonmaleficence
Public Policy: Justice
Conclude
**
6b
The state wants a practitioner “… to monitor prisoners’ vital signs during executions, to comfort the prisoners, and to ensure that the prisoners experience minimal suffering while dying.”
Think
Assess
Patient: Autonomy
Practitioner: Beneficence & Nonmaleficence
Public Policy: Justice
Conclude
***
Wrong 😕
A. It is permissible for a practitioner to assist in executions.
Although it may be legally permissible in some states for a practitioner to assist in executions, it is categorically not permissible as a healthcare professional. The healthcare profession believes that being an executioner is a logical contradiction with what it means to be a healthcare professional and would also result in negative patient, and sociological consequences.
CORRECT! 🙂
THINK (Question)
Is it permissible for a practitioner to assist in executions?
ASSESS
- • Patient Autonomy (informed consent)
Capital punishment has no process or interest in getting the prisoner’s informed consent or authorization to be executed. - • Practitioner Beneficence (do good) &Nonmaleficence (do no harm)
The medical profession has categorically determined that it is never permissible to have any association with executions. Executions are antithetical with the healing art of medicine. For a practitioner to participate in capital punishment would be a contradiction of the social contract, potentially damaging the social trust in the medical profession.
The American Medical Association (AMA) states:
A physician [practitioner] must not participate in a legally authorized execution.
The American College of Physicians (ACP) states:
Participation by physicians [practitioners] in the execution of prisoners except to certify death is unethical.
[6:8] But even in the certification of death, the American Medical Association (AMA) clarifies this statement by stating that the certification of death can only occur if the condemned prisoner has already been declared dead by another person.
The American Medical Association (AMA) has a list of forbidden practices that includes but is not limited to the following:
1. Determining the competence of a person for execution.
2. Treating an incompetent person to make the person competent enough to be executed.
3. Administering any drugs for the use and purpose of execution.
4. Monitoring vital signs.
5. Attending or even observing an execution.
6. Providing technical advice.
7. Selecting injection sites or starting an intravenous line.
8. Prescribing, preparing, administering, or supervising injection of drugs.
9. Inspecting or maintaining lethal injection devices.
10. Consulting or supervising personnel who perform executions. - • Public-Policy Justice (be fair)
It is essential to understand that just because “something” is illegal, that does not necessarily make that action immoral or unprofessional. In like fashion just because “something” is legal, that does not necessarily make that action moral or professional.
CONCLUDE
It is not permissible for a practitioner to assist in executions.
Wrong 😕
C. It is a practitioner’s moral choice as to whether or not to assist in executions.
Practitioners are professionally bound to abide by the medical standards of care. Assisting in executions is not a medical standard of care and has been judged to be medically unprofessional by the medical profession.
Wrong 😕
D. If executions are legal, then that makes executions morally permissible.
It is essential to understand that just because “something” is illegal, that does not necessarily make that action immoral or unprofessional. In like fashion just because “something” is legal, that does not necessarily make that action moral or professional.
Wrong 😕
A. If the practitioner's role is for the benefit or the prisoner's best interest, then it logically follows that those services would be professionally permissible for an execution.
The medical profession has categorically determined that any association with an activity intended to harm a person is rationally incompatible with the definition of the practice of medicine as a healing art and would also result in undesirable consequences regarding the patient-practitioner relationship and the public’s perception of the medical profession.
Wrong 😕
B. Social and political viewpoints should determine a practitioner's professional responsibilities regarding whether or not to participate.
Ideally, the practice of medicine can be conducted independently of one’s social and political viewpoints maximizing the patient’s best interests and promoting a positive social image of the medical profession.
CORRECT! 🙂
THINK (Question)
Is it permissible for a medical practitioner to have any part, association, or even presence with capital punishment?
ASSESS
- • Patient Autonomy (informed consent)
Capital punishment has no process or interest in getting the prisoner’s informed consent or authorization to be executed. - • Practitioner Beneficence (do good) &Nonmaleficence (do no harm)
The medical profession has categorically determined that it is never permissible to have any association with executions. Executions are antithetical with the healing art of medicine. The American Medical Association (AMA) has a list of forbidden practices that includes but is not limited to the following:
1. Determining the competence of a person for execution.
2. Treating an incompetent person to make the person competent enough to be executed.
3. Administering any drugs for the use and purpose of execution.
4. Monitoring vital signs.
5. Attending or even observing an execution.
6. Providing technical advice.
7. Selecting injection sites or starting an intravenous line.
8. Prescribing, preparing, administering, or supervising injection of drugs.
9. Inspecting or maintaining lethal injection devices.
10. Consulting or supervising personnel who perform executions. - • Public-Policy Justice (be fair)
Capital punishment is federally allowed, and several states still permit it.
However, the question that needs to be addressed by society, not the practitioner, is what is the purpose of punishment: reciprocity (eye for an eye), revenge (anger), deterrence (fear), or reformation (to educate)? Certainly capital punishment has nothing to do with reformation. If a person is incorrigible, or unable to be educated, is putting that person to death the appropriate social response?
CONCLUDE
The medical professions has defined itself in such a way that it is not permissible for a medical practitioner to have any part, association, or even presence with capital punishment.
Wrong 😕
C. Practitioners have the same rights and liberties in medicine as U.S. citizens; therefore, if executions are legal, then it is solely up to the practitioner's free will as to whether or not to monitor a prisoner's vital signs during their execution.
The medical profession has determined that any participation in capital punishment is incompatible with the practice of medicine. Having higher moral and behavioral expectations is what it means to be part of a profession.
