|
|
This writing assignment was completed in English 111. Its purpose was to write an argument paper and prove that my point of view is more valid than the opposite point of view.
Ruthless Treatment For a Humane Appearance
Since capital punishment was re-established in the United States in the year 1976, lethal injection has been used as a frequent method of execution. Lethal injection has become popular because it is efficient, inexpensive, and appears more humane than electrocution. The process of lethal injection involves a three-drug combination administered through an intravenous line in the leg or arm. The first drug dispensed in lethal injection is sodium thiopental that serves the purpose of inducing anesthesia. In essence, it brings about a state of unconsciousness and causes a person unable to feel pain. Pancuronium bromide is the next drug administered in lethal injection. It is part of a class called neuromuscular blockers, which paralyze the body’s skeletal muscles while leaving brain functions unharmed. The final drug dispensed, potassium chloride, induces cardiac arrest by literally stopping the heart. The public’s current argument is that if the second and third drugs were used on a conscious individual, he/she would experience a most merciless death. This method of execution creates a possibility of paralysis that blatantly hides distress and leaves the inmate unable to cry out as he/she slowly suffocates to death. The use of pancuronium bromide in lethal injection is unjust, inhumane, and constitutionally cruel and unusual punishment.
The use of sodium thiopental is crucial in lethal injection, just as it is in major surgeries, in that it induces an insensibility to pain. When undergoing medical procedures that exploit sodium thiopental, patients are able to quickly wake up if they are experiencing complications. According to anesthesiologist, Kyle Janek, “a normal dose for a man weighing 220 pounds would be about 300 milligrams. Yet for lethal injection, the inmate receives 3 grams – or 10 times the normal amount based on body weight” (Janek). Death row inmate, Abu-Ali Abdur’Rahman, complained that if sodium thiopental wore off he would be able to feel pain. The court agreed, however, they “ruled that the method did not violate the Constitution’s eighth amendment because the dose of sodium pentothal [thiopental] used in that state would be fatal” (Oransky 1287). Sodium thiopental has been used for decades in anesthesia and since it used at a much higher dosage than clinically recommended in lethal injection, the inmate should not awaken.
However, there are a few serious complications with the ease of which patients can awaken under sodium thiopental. Rather than maintaining anesthesia, it is only meant to induce it. Anesthesiologist, Dr. Mark J. S. Heath, declares, “sodium thiopental could be inadequate or wear off” That would leave the prisoner conscious, paralyzed, suffocating and subject to extreme pain from the potassium chloride” (Liptak, Critics Say Execution Drug May Hide Suffering). Being that it is efficient for only a few minutes it seems more appropriate that critics of the lethal injection process make it known that sodium thiopental’s effects wear off fast.
In accordance with sodium thiopental, pancuronium bromide serves its own important purpose. It relaxes the chest walls and diaphragm of the already unconscious inmate. After being administered, pancuronium bromides “effects commence within 1 to 3 minutes and last about 45 minutes” (Welsh 77). Pancuronium bromide is dispensed in a higher dosage than what is recommended for anesthesia, 100 milligrams. When it is used in such excessive amounts, pancuronium bromide paralyzes the muscles and diaphragm, therefore stopping the ability to breath. It is used regularly in hundreds of thousands medical procedures every year and is federally approved. Anesthesiologist, Stanley Deutsch, MD is reassuring that from his own experiences, pancuronium bromides use is a pleasing way to be put unconscious and should be considered a very humanitarian method of execution (Groner 66).
One major drawback of the blend of sodium thiopental with pancuronium bromide is that sodium thiopental is not recommended to be used with muscle relaxants. If an inmate is injected with pancuronium bromide after sodium thiopental’s effects wear off, he/she remains conscious but is unable to move or speak. Dr. Sherwin B. Nuland, a professor of medicine at Yale states, “[c]omplete muscle paralysis does not mean loss of pain sensation” (Liptak, Critics Say Execution Drug May Hide Suffering).
Other medical experts question the use of pancuronium bromide in executions because surgical patients injected with the paralyzing drug have been known to awaken during operations but were unable to signal that they were enduring excruciating pain. (Witt)
Also in agreement is an eye surgery patient who was put under and given pancuronium bromide to immobilize the eye. Unfortunately, the anesthesia was ineffective and the patient “testified that the experience was terrifying and torturous. She could not, she said, communicate that she was awake” (Liptak, Critics Say Execution Drug May Hide Suffering). Luckily, she did not suffocate after the surgery continued for hours because she was on a respirator. Pancuronium bromide is heedlessly used in combination with sodium thiopental in about thirty states. The reasoning for the use of pancuronium bromide is not well understood because the other two drugs ease the suffering pancuronium bromide causes. The use of pancuronium bromide endangers those patients who have to undergo surgery as well as unjustly causes suffering to those who are sentenced to death.
Although pancuronium bromide may not have a legitimate purpose, at least in over half the states that allow execution, physicians are required by law to be present. It is comforting to know that “[d]octors are often essential participants in the execution process” (Groner 68). On the other hand, this is not a necessity for all states. Many times prison workers who have no medical training administer the three-drug combination and doctors do not take part because they are obligated under a code of medical ethics. The ethics code does not allow doctors to participate because it is considered aiding the death of a person. In accordance, “the three-chemical method leads to frequent botched executions because untrained or poorly trained prison workers are often unable to find vessels or simply don’t understand how the drugs work” (Oransky 1287). There have been several cases that injection has failed to make a quick, painless death. In 1998 Tyrone X. Gilliam was due for lethal injection. The intravenous line that had begun administering sodium thiopental started to leak. At the end of the procedure, he received too little sedation and was able to feel the excruciating pain of suffocation and heart attack caused by the last two drugs (Levine B5).
An in-depth study was done by David Barron, a lawyer with the Center for Capital Litigation to find out how many inmates were actually conscious while being executed. He retrieved autopsy records of twenty-three prisoners in South Caroline and found from medical records that half of the inmates may have been awake and at least two definitely were. Findings were based on the blood levels of the chemicals used to cause unconsciousness. Barron argues, “state execution protocols do not account for the way people of different sizes absorb anesthetic” (Willing 3A). He recommends that experts adjust formulas to accommodate weight differences.
Many federal judges in capital punishment states have ruled that the chemicals used in lethal injection do not cause undue suffering. Mike Viesca, a spokesman for Texas Department of Criminal Justices states, “[o]ur medical staff has assured us that the combination of drugs we use makes the person incapable of feeling pain while the execution is carried out” (Witt). A spokeswoman for the Tennessee attorney general says that since pancuronium bromide and the three-drug combination “is widely used and so should not be considered cruel and unusual punishment under the Constitution” (Liptak, Critics Say Execution Drug May Hide Suffering).
Even though judges have ruled in favor of the use of pancuronium bromide in lethal injection, its use is banned from animals. Pancuronium bromides use in the euthanizing of animals became prohibited in 2001. That year the American Veterinary Medical Association declared that pancuronium bromide should not be used in conscious animals if it is the only medication given. Wiseman, an administrator at the University of Central Oklahoma stated that, “if the drug is off-limits to animals, it should not be used on humans…” (Moritz 11A). It seems almost ironic that animals are treated better than humans, especially when it comes to killing them. Pancuronium bromide is a drug that has been deemed unsuitable for use on animals and yet it is still being used upon humans.
People who have witnessed lethal injection executions claim that the inmate appears serene and the general consensus is that this method is as humane as medicine can make it. It is in the interest of the public that pancuronium bromide is so widely used because it displays a painless procedure. However, there has been little research done on the process of lethal injection. One individual who issued a study of the chemicals used, law professor Deborah Denno stated, “[t]he drug seems to have no other purpose than to keep a person still (Liptak, Federal Judge Rules Chemicals Used in Executions Are Humane). What is most troubling, is that the protocol for execution has not been changed since it was first reinstated in 1982. The process has only been copied by all other states. More and more judges are ordering a halt to executions ruling that the procedures have been flawed.
Alternatives to the use of pancuronium bromide have recently become apparent. One method, which is now used in animals, is a single dose of a barbituate, sodium pentobarbital. Another substitute is the use of sodium thiopental and potassium chloride without pancuronium bromide. The use of pancuronium bromide is too questionable and the results are uncertain. Experts agree that a humane death could be achieved in other ways than what the method being administered today.
Works Cited Groner, Jonathan. “Lethal Injection and the Medicalization of Capital Punishment in the United States.” Health and Human Rights 6.1 (2002): 65-79. 14 Oct. 2004.
Janek, Kyle. “Attack on Texas’ Lethal Injections is Bogus.” Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. 11 Oct. 2004 <http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/TXInjection.htm>
Levine, Susan. "Md. Rally Opposes Execution." Washington Post 27 May 2004. B5. Newsbank. Newsbank Inc. SVSU Zahnow Library, University Center, MI. 2 Nov. 2004.
Liptak, Adam. "Critics Say Execution Drug May Hide Suffering." New York Times on the Web 07 Oct. 2003. New York Times. Thomson/Gale. SVSU Zahnow Library, University Center, MI. 11 Oct. 2004
---. "Federal Judge Rules Chemicals Used in Executions Are Humane." New York Times on the Web 07 Feb. 2004. New York Times. Thomson/Gale. SVSU Zahnow Library, University Center, MI. 11 Oct. 2004.
Moritz, John. “Paralyzing Drug Used in Lethal Injection Spurs Ethical Debate.” Fort Worth Star-Telegram 23 Feb. 2004. 11A. 2 Nov. 2004.
Oransky, Ivan. “Who and How To Kill Are Focus of U.S. Death Penalty Cases.” The Lancet 18 Oct. 2003: 1287. First Search: Article First. OCLC. SVSU Zahnow Library, University Center, MI. 29 Oct. 2004.
Welsh, James. “The Medical Technology of Execution; Lethal Injection.” International Review of Law Computers and Technology 12 (1998): 75-98. 29 Oct. 2004.
|