8/12/2019 There's Just No Safe Way of Ending Somebody's Life - Our Sunday Visitor March 19, 2006 by Stephen James

1/1

News Analysis

OUR SUNDAY VISITOR l MARCH 19, 20

5

NATION

But their actions resurrectedbroader concerns over the moralmplementation of the death

penalty and respect even for theife of a condemned criminal.The doctors,who were in the

execution chamber under courtorder, were supposed to ensurehat Michael Angelo Morales was

rendered fully unconscious beforehe was put to death by lethal injec-ion on Feb. 21. The order wasssued by U.S. District Judgeeremy Fogel in response to con-

cerns that the injections used pancuronium bromide or potas-ium chloride could cause thenmate intense pain.

After the anesthesiologistswalkout forced a postponementof the execution,Fogel immedi-

ately issued a second order autho-rizing the state to execute Moralesusing a single, massive dose ofbarbiturates, provided the drugwas injected by a person or per-ons licensed by the State of

California to inject medicationsntravenously.

Within hours ofthe judges sec-ond order,however,a spokesmanat San Quentin State Prison saidhe execution would be post-

poned indefinitely because thetate could not find any medi-

cal professionals willing to injectmedication intravenously, end-ng the life of a human being.

Further court hearings in the

case are scheduled for May.

New challengesThe chain ofevents that swiftly

flowed from the Morales execu-ion debacle was so sudden and

unexpected that even the U.S.Conference of Catholic BishopsUSCCB) was caught off guard.

Just four months ago, theUSCCB issued an exhaustivetatement,A Culture of Life andhe Penalty of Death, renewingts opposition to the death penalty.

The statement,however,made noreference to potential problemswith the administration of thelethal-injection method.

This is a brand-new area andone that we havent really thoughtof, explained Andrew Rivas, anattorney and policy adviser oncriminal justice issues for theU.S.bishops.We worked so hard

advocating to get rid of the elec-tric chair and the firing squad andhanging that everything waspushed toward lethal injection asa more painless way of doing it.So we really hadnt thought aboutit, what sort of pain is involvedin this.

Theres just no safe way ofending somebodys life,he toldOur Sunday Visitor.

Under the California lethalinjection protocol, known for-mally as San Quentin Institution

Procedure No.770, injection ofthe two chemicals follows an ini-tial injection of sodium thiopen-tal.

The state concedes that with-out the accurate administrationof the first compound,a sedative

to induce unconsciousness, thesecond two doses would causeexcruciating pain. The effectwould be similar to that of boil-ing oil or branding with a red hotiron, according to a ColumbiaUniversity anesthesiology pro-fessor who testified in a court casein Connecticut.

Despite the questions thatensued, Fogel seemed to go outof his way to reassure the gov-ernment and the pro-deathpenalty public that the ultimatepunishment was secure. Courtsin other states,he noted,had pre-viously reviewed and found con-stitutional lethal-injection pro-

tocols similar to Californias.The judge did, however,

acknowledge that the Moralescase presented new evidenceabout the lethal-injection processthat was not considered in ear-lier cases. That new evidenceincluded the sworn declarationsof medical experts and detailedlogs from prior California exe-cutions.

The expert testimony and exe-cution data revealed problemswith the process that have existed,

but remained essentially underthe radar for more than 25 years,according to Fordham Universitylaw professor and death-penaltyresearcher Deborah Denno.

The first case challenging thelethal-injection process was in

1978, and in that case they did-nt even know what drugs wereused; the court said that thedepartment ofcorrections didnteven have to disclose what drugswere being used, Denno toldOSV. The good thing about[Fogel] was that he was moreinvolved that any other judgehas ever gotten in this countryon this issue.Usually judges justturn a blind eye.

Pandoras boxBut in crafting a solution to

the problem, Fogel may haveopened a Pandoras box that maybe difficult if not impossible to

close.Fogel inadvertently exposed

the primary problem with thel e th a l - in j e c t io n pr o c e s s ,explained Denno.Its actually asign of a lack of sophisticationas well as knowledge on his partthat he would even ask doctorsto do that,not realizing that theymight refuse, she said.

Indeed,in response to Fogelsorder, the American MedicalAssociation issued a terse state-ment. The American Medical

Association is alarmed that JudJeremy Fogel has disregardephysicians ethical obligatiowhen he ordered procedures fophysician participation in excutions of California inmates blethal injection.

Now the genie is out of thbottle.The public and the courwill have to confront the fathat although the lethal injetion process used throughothe country is essentially a medical procedure, licensed medcal professionals are rareinvolved.

Meanwhile, evidence contiues to accumulate that withomedical professionals performing the procedure,mistakes havbeen, and will continue to bmade.

The situation now invitesconstitutional challenge to thlethal-injection process itself

in essence,the same type of chalenge that forced a change froelectrocution,lethal gas and othforms ofexecution to lethal injetion, Denno said.

There was always anothexecution method to change toshe said.But this is a unique siuation because there is nanother method to change ttheyve run into a wall here.

Stephen James writes from

California.

Theres just no safe way of ending somebodys lifeConcerns over lethal injections have ethicists questioning whether capital punishment should be administered at all

Death penalty protesters dressed as doctors hold a vigil outside San Quentin Prisonwhere Michael Morales' execution was delayed indefinitely Feb. 21 in San Quentin,Calif. Morales won a reprieve when the state decided it could not comply with a fed-eral judge's order to revise its execution procedures because it found no medicalprofessionals willing to go along with them. PHOTO BY DAVID PAUL MORRIS/GETTY IMAGES

By Stephen James

When two anesthesi-

ologists refused to

participate in a scheduled

execution of a California

death-row inmate last

month, they did so out of

concern for the ethics oftheir

profession.

The condemnedand the fetus

Father Frank Pavone,national director of Priestsfor Life, told Our SundayVisitor that he sees a con-nection between the paininflicted during lethal-injec-tion executions and the painfelt by a fetus whose life isterminated by abortion.

The question of pain feltin executions can only assistthe effort to ban the deathpenalty, just as awarenessof pain felt by fetuses willcertainly discourage abor-tions and make many peo-ple question whether itshould be legal at all, he

said. Morally speaking, thequestion of pain felt by bothfetuses and those on deathrow is related. It is wrong totorture anyone, no matterwhat their age.

The morality of abortionand capital punishment,however, do not dependupon the problem of pain,Father Pavone pointed out.

Deliberately inflictingpain is wrong, but if abortiondid not cause pain, it wouldstill always be wrong, hesaid. Regarding the deathpenalty, the infliction of painis wrong, but even if pain

were not inflicted, the prac-tice should still be opposed though not with theexceptionless character withwhich abortion must beopposed.