It's Wrong to Shield the Executioner

By Jeralyn, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 10:12:27 AM EST
Tags: lethal injection (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Remember the dyslexic Missouri doctor who botched the drug dosages in dozens of executions?

The New York Times today opines on the practice of states like Missouri that "hood the executioner."

Missouri's ultimate response was to pass a law protecting the identity of the doctor administering the drugs and his ability to practice medicine even if he screws up:

Last month, however, Missouri’s governor signed a law that makes it a crime to reveal the identities of current or former executioners — as The St. Louis Post-Dispatch did in the case of the doctor who claimed dyslexia. It allows executioners to sue those who expose them and forbids medical licensing boards to punish doctors or nurses who participate in executions.

As the Times says,

Under the new secrecy law, Missouri’s capital punishment system may plunge deeper into incompetence and cruelty, and it will be harder for citizens to stop it.

Bottom line:

We oppose capital punishment for a host of reasons, including that it is unconstitutional. Even those who support executing their citizens must see the need to ensure that the process is not barbarically cruel and is fully open to public scrutiny.

One quibble with the Times. It cites Adam Liptak's recent articles on lethal injection. If the Times is serious about exposing the injustice of lethal injections, it ought to take Liptak's articles out from behind its "Times Select" firewall so everyone can read them.

More...

I thought the Times Select was for columns and opinion pieces. If the paper is now going to include investigative journalism among its "pay to read" pieces, those articles are going to lose significant exposure. Isn't exposure the point of investigative journalism?

It's a shame for Liptak who worked hard on the series about executions and for vast majority of us who won't pay for Times Select.

As a blogger, I like to source, quote from and link to news articles I write about. TalkLeft would have been a perfect forum to tout Liptak's articles. Because it was behind the paid wall, that wasn't possible. I hope the Times reconsiders its Times Select policy and restricts it to opinion pieces.

< Bush Signs FISA Amendment Into Law | The Torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Others >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

It's Wrong to Shield the Executioner | 10 comments (10 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Dangerous loophole (none / 0) (#1)
by Al on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 01:01:55 PM EST

It allows executioners to sue those who expose them and forbids medical licensing boards to punish doctors or nurses who participate in executions.

So if a doctor violates their Hippocratic Oath by carrying out an execution, the government can prevent a professional body from withdrawing their license to practice medicine, simply by not telling them who the individual is. As a result, a person who uses their medical knowledge to kill people is allowed to practice medicine.

Al (none / 0) (#2)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 05:37:20 PM EST

the government can prevent a professional body from withdrawing their license to practice medicine,

I think you will find that it is the government who issues the license to practice medicene.


Ignorant as always (none / 0) (#4)
by Sailor on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 06:36:57 PM EST

The CIVILIAN licensing boards are who certifies doctors.

Gee mr mengele, you should really be more aware of how things happen in a free country.


You keep stepping on it (none / 0) (#5)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 07:24:36 PM EST

The Medical Board of California is the State agency that licenses medical doctors, investigates complaints, disciplines those who violate the law, conducts physician evaluations, and facilitates rehabilitation where appropriate.

I may not be a scientist, but I sure can Google!
;-)


not even close (none / 0) (#7)
by Sailor on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 10:21:45 PM EST

as I sadi, being certified by your CIVILIAN board is what allows you to get a state LICENSE and the BOARD will pull ones certification in which case they couldn't practice in ANY state.

IOW, your original statement you were trying to contradict Al who wrote

So if a doctor violates their Hippocratic Oath by carrying out an execution, the government can prevent a professional body from withdrawing their license to practice medicine, simply by not telling them who the individual is.,

And no, the gov't can't prevent that. And they should know who the killer is so they can make sure he can no longer practice medecine.


sailor lloves strawmen (none / 0) (#9)
by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 07, 2007 at 09:26:02 AM EST

As I said, it is the government that issues you the license to practice.

The Medical Board of California is the State agency that licenses medical doctors, investigates complaints, disciplines those who violate the law, conducts physician evaluations, and facilitates rehabilitation where appropriate

If that doesn't happen, you don't get one no matter what the board says.

Grow up and quit parsing.


: not parsing, just correcting your ignorance (none / 0) (#10)
by Sailor on Tue Aug 07, 2007 at 12:33:40 PM EST

if you aren't certified by a civilian board you don't get your license, if the civilian board yanks yur license the state does too.
drs who kill people don't ge to keep their certification, so the executioners should be reported to their boards and have their licenses yanked.

A question (none / 0) (#3)
by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 05:39:23 PM EST

Under the new secrecy law, Missouri's capital punishment system may plunge deeper into incompetence and cruelty, and it will be harder for citizens to stop it.

Unless you want to harass the person, why would you need to know who he is and where he lives??

: To take away their license (none / 0) (#6)
by Al on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 09:29:52 PM EST

My understanding is that a doctor may not kill someone, and that is the reason why medical doctors do not administer the drugs in an execution by lethal injection. Perhaps a lawyer in this blog can enlighten us further.

Hippocratic oath (none / 0) (#8)
by diogenes on Mon Aug 06, 2007 at 11:03:07 PM EST

The original Hippocratic oath also forbade abortion, so I guess that what doctors can do is defined by what governments allow them to do, not by oaths.
In New York, the state issues licenses; doctors can lose their licenses if brought before the Office of Professional Medical Conduct in a hearing before two physicians and one "civilian". That office is run by the state.
This all smacks of people who oppose abortion trying to stigmatize "abortion doctors" rather than pass laws in a democratic manner.