Executing the Death Penalty

[tucker27705]

---

Members do not see this ad.

The initial thread was very interesting, but I think it got a little off topic. I am really interested in knowing what portion of us believe the ABA should attempt to regulate whether we participate in executing the death penalty (forgive the pun).
I haven't done this before, but I am attempting to rig a poll with this post. If it doesn't work. Just post a short answer, yes or no I believe it should/not regulate us by pulling certification. No reasoning or diatribes, please.
Thanks,
Tuck



By the way, I'm against the ABA's asserting such regulation. Just my opinion.

 

[cchoukal]

I personally feel that physicians shouldn't be involved in performing executions, and that executions themselves shouldn't be part of our justice system, mostly because of the many examples of people who are convicted of capital crimes and later found not guilty; we're just not good enough at figuring out who really committed the crime. That said, I don't the ABA has any business getting involved in this. They are a credentialing body and should limit their role to determining the adequacy of someone's training and skill. It's a far stretch, in my opinion to include "participation in capital punishment" as evidence of "inadequate training and skill."

I believe the ASA took a stand on this issue, and I think their doing so is more in line with their mission.

 

[hoyden]

I do not see myself in executing somebody as a physician. Which does not mean I won't kill somebody if it would be needed by circumstances( I think, it is hard to be absolutely sure ))))
ABA has nothing to do with my personal choices and does not have a right to manipulate and micromanage.
However, it does not surprise me that ABA tries to ))))

 

[tucker27705]

Posted this today, and thought there was little response seeing as there are only 2 written posts. But actually 20 votes have been cast, currently 14 to 6, the majority believing the ABA should not threaten our board status if we choose to participate. Interesting.
Thanks for the responses. Keep em coming.
Tuck

 

[Eta Carinae]

undecided

short enough, i hope...

 

[Narcotized]

,

 

[switching2gas]

Although I do think it is a little bit Big Brotherish for the ABA to threaten one's board certification status over this, I can play Devil's advocate enough to understand the reasoning. The ABA would be well within their right to revoke one's board certification based on a track record of repeatedly killing patients under their care; and if one is using their anesthesiology expertise and training to put people to death, one could argue that the condemned is, for however brief a time, a patient of that physician. Therefore, one could then argue that you are, as a physician, actively killing your patients. Although the intent of this physician-patient relationship is inherently different from the ones we more routinely engage in, I do understand how the powers-that-be at the board could choose to define a physician-executioner as someone who willingly, regularly utilizes the physician-patient relationship to do harm.

I don't agree with capital punishment, and do not think that physicians should participate in execution; but I'm not sure I agree with the ABA revoking board certification status on this matter.

 

[Rabbit Hole]

I posted a portion of this in the previous thread.

Despite the politics of the death penalty. I believe that execution by lethal injection is the most humane way to end a life. I also think that if it must be done it should be done right - meaning a physician should oversee the process to make sure there is no pain and awareness. It's a morbid job, but somebody's gotta do it as long as the death penalty is around. The other options - electric chair, hanging, firing squad, guillotine, etc don't seem humane to me.

I don't think think the ABA should revoke board certification for anesthesiologists who participate in lethal injection executions.

 

[WholeLottaGame7]

.

 

[RabbMD]

I just wish the aba was intellectually consistent, and threatened anyone that performed anesthesia for late term abortions with board revocation as well. While the person on death row may be innocent, I know the late term aboertee is. That's of course also in the hippocratic oath if people try to hide behind that.

 

[Eta Carinae]

I just wish the aba was intellectually consistent, and threatened anyone that performed anesthesia for late term abortions with board revocation as well. While the person on death row may be innocent, I know the late term aboertee is. That's of course also in the hippocratic oath if people try to hide behind that.

Oh, 👍

 

[Impromptu]

In East Germany the government didn't force their people to become atheists, except the government wouldn't let someone's children go to college unless the parents had their names removed from their churches...which to me seems a very similar thing to what is being done here.

 

[Narcotized]

.

 

[tucker27705]

It seems the majority of those voting believe the ABA decision was out of line. I wonder if we are a representative sample? If so, it seems our governing board has imposed a decision that does not reflect the majority's opinion on this matter. Is this an example of the "intellectual elite" in action and determining how we should behave and govern our lives/practices since they believe they know better than the majority of their constituents?
Interesting.
Tuck

 

[pgg]

It's scary to me how many jump on the bandwagon of restricting other's personal liberties when it favors their own personal political agenda. History is filled with bad stuff resulting from that mentality. I'm a bit shocked how close the vote is on this thread.

ABA certification is supposed to mean that a diplomate has met their standards within each of the core competencies. So long as "professionalism" is explicitly included as one of them, you have to acknowledge that establishing and enforcing ethical standards is within the scope of their charter.


This is a bad poll (as most polls are).

Do you agree with the ABA's position?

• yes, but prohibiting our participation is appropriate.
• no, prohibiting our participation is inappropriate.

One can disagree with the ABA's position while recognizing that they have the right to take a position. Much of the argument in these two threads has been along the lines of "the ABA has no right to do this" ... yes, yes they do. But this is a different issue than whether or not they made the correct decision.


I disagree with lots of the laws Congress passes, but I sure recognize their right to make those laws and admit those laws regulate my behavior.

 

[pgg]

If so, it seems our governing board has imposed a decision that does not reflect the majority's opinion on this matter. Is this an example of the "intellectual elite" in action and determining how we should behave and govern our lives/practices since they believe they know better than the majority of their constituents?

Could be. Is it a matter of public record which board members favored this policy? Was there a vote?

 

[Arch Guillotti]

holy necro bump

yep. closing.