The absence of cruelty is not the presence of humanness: physicians and the death penalty in the United States
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 7 (1):13- (2012)
The death penalty by lethal injection is a legal punishment in the United States. Sodium Thiopental, once used in the death penalty cocktail, is no longer available for use in the United States as a consequence of this association. Anesthesiologists possess knowledge of Sodium Thiopental and possible chemical alternatives. Further, lethal injection has the look and feel of a medical act thereby encouraging physician participation and comment. Concern has been raised that the death penalty by lethal injection, is cruel. Physicians are ethically directed to prevent cruelty within the doctor-patient relationship and ethically prohibited from participation in any component of the death penalty. The US Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is not cruel per se and is not in conflict with the 8th amendment of the US constitution. If the death penalty is not cruel, it requires no further refinement. If, on the other hand, the death penalty is in fact cruel, physicians have no mandate outside of the doctor patient relationship to reduce cruelty. Any intervention in the name of cruelty reduction, in the setting of lethal injection, does not lead to a more humane form of punishment. If physicians contend that the death penalty can be botched, they wrongly direct that it can be improved. The death penalty cocktail, as a method to reduce suffering during execution, is an unverifiable claim. At best, anesthetics produce an outward appearance of calmness only and do not address suffering as a consequence of the anticipation of death on the part of the condemned
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peggy Kamuf (2012). Protocol: Death Penalty Addiction. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (s1):5-19.
Michael Keane (2008). The Ethical “Elephant” in the Death Penalty “Room”. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (10):45 – 50.
Elizabeth Rottenberg (2012). Cruelty and its Vicissitudes: Jacques Derrida and the Future of Psychoanalysis. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (s1):143-159.
Michael Naas (2012). The Philosophy and Literature of the Death Penalty: Two Sides of the Same Sovereign. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (s1):39-55.
Adina Nicoleta Gavrilă (2011). Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished? Arguments for and Against the Centuries-Old Punishment. Journal for Communication and Culture 1 (2):82-98.
Kelly Oliver (2012). See Topsy “Ride the Lightning”: The Scopic Machinery of Death. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (s1):74-94.
Marguerite la Caze (2009). Derrida: Opposing Death Penalties. Derrida Today 2 (2):186-199.
Susan A. Bandes, The Heart has its Reasons: Examining the Strange Persistence of the American Death Penalty.
Seema Kandelia, Incestuous Rape and the Death Penalty in the Philippines: Psychological and Legal Implications.
Kas Saghafi (2012). The Death Penalty, in Other Words, Philosophy. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (s1):136-142.
Jay D. Aronson & Simon A. Cole, Science and the Death Penalty: Dna, Innocence, and the Debate Over Capital Punishment in the United States.
Thomas Dutoit (2012). Kant's Retreat, Hugo's Advance, Freud's Erection; or, Derrida's Displacements in His Death Penalty Lectures. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (s1):107-135.
Benjamin S. Yost (2010). Kant's Justification of the Death Penalty Reconsidered. Kantian Review 15 (2):1-27.
Added to index2012-12-04
Total downloads4 ( #195,393 of 1,003,927 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #39,123 of 1,003,927 )
How can I increase my downloads?