# Role of EMTs in Ohio executions criticized



## VentMedic (May 19, 2009)

*Role of EMTs in Ohio executions criticized*
By Suzanne Hoholik
The Columbus Dispatch

http://www.ems1.com/ems-products/me...99-Role-of-EMTs-in-Ohio-executions-criticized



> COLUMBUS, Ohio — When the state carries out a death sentence, intermediate-level emergency medical technicians deliver the fatal drugs to condemned prisoners.
> 
> But a Columbus surgeon and longtime opponent of capital punishment contends that these technicians are not allowed to administer the drugs.
> 
> ...


----------



## reaper (May 19, 2009)

I am appalled. They are not trained in giving these drugs, They may give to much and overdose them!

This guy will win his case, because of how the law is written. I personally do not see a problem with it.

Other states have used Paramedics for the procedure. This was because of Nurses and Dr's taking an oath to do no harm. Paramedics do not take this oath, so there is no conflict in it.


----------



## JPINFV (May 19, 2009)

I highly doubt that the concern is an overdose.


As to the poll question, provided that there is an approved dosing protocol, I see no problem with it. If we, as a county, approve the death penalty then we, as health care providers, have an obligation to insure that the execution is properly carried out when it involves pharmaceuticals. Any health care provider who refuses to assist in executions on the grounds of "Do no harm" but approves of the death penalty is a hypocrite. Of course if society wants to return to the firing squad or short drop hangings, then so be it as well.


----------



## Ridryder911 (May 19, 2009)

There are states that utilize Paramedics to perform State sanctioned executions, whiich itself is controversial... If they are going to allow EMT/I's they might as well just have a non-licensed or certified person.. 

R/r911


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

> "These drugs are way out of their scope, and there is risk of pain and suffering."



I highly doubt that pain and suffering was a concern when these people commited their crimes, why do they deserve the mercy of a painless merciful death unless they granted their victim the same?


----------



## JPINFV (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> why do they deserve the mercy of a painless merciful death unless they granted their victim the same?



...because the founders of the constitution included the 8th amendment. 



> Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, *nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted*.


----------



## Aidey (May 19, 2009)

Sasha, the problem goes beyond pain and suffering too. If the execution is botched, and the guy doesn't die, but is disabled, not only does the state have to care for him and pay his medical bills, they can no longer execute him (possibly). 

I think if they are going to use EMTs, then they need to be using Paramedics so that the people administering the drugs know how the drugs work and how to dose them properly.


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> ...because the founders of the constitution included the 8th amendment.



Doesn't mean I have to agree with it. 

I'm hard pressed to be concerned if those on death row experience a little discomfort in their execution. I know that makes me hypocritical.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> There are states that utilize Paramedics to perform State sanctioned executions, whiich itself is controversial... If they are going to allow EMT/I's t*hey might as well just have a non-licensed or certified person*..
> 
> R/r911



Is there something in the EMTP scope of practice or training that makes them more qualified to kill someone than an EMTI?  I work as a Vet Tech for 6 years and euthed hundreads of sick and dying cats a dogs, and let me tell you, it don't take a degree to put in a cath and inject that stuff.  Hell I would rather wuth a hundread prisoners than just one sick kitten.

_"The EMTs are not trained to give these drugs and, in my opinion, there's no assurance they can do it properly," said Dr. Jonathan Groner, trauma medical director at Nationwide Children's Hospital.

"These drugs are way out of their scope, and there is risk of pain and suffering." _

So what?  If you fail to give it wrong what's the worse that could happen?  You kill them!  Oops.  Or that you don’t kill them right away?  If at first you do not succeed, try, try again!  Pain and suffering?  For the record, I am pro death penalty and not because I enjoy death or suffering, but because I believe the punishment need to fit the crime.  Call it the redneck in me, but I believe that if you destroy one life, we should be able to destroy yours.  In my perfect world there are only three crimes that deserve the death penalty:

Murder.  Duh.  You kill them, we kill you.
Rape or other Sexual Assault.  That is a defense again the future victims.  I HATE rapists and molesters and don't see how rehabilitation is gonna matter.
Drug Dealers.  In my mind, one person dealing drugs for one hour destroys more lives (by cause and effect) than 10 serial killers.

So, personally, I don’t think you need a medical license to dole out a judgment passed in a court of law.  Yes, I know the liberal reply is always "you could be killing an innocent man", but (leaving out my personal pro death penalty views) once a sentence is passed, I don not care if the murderer/rapist/whatever is in a little pain and suffers a little.  If a MFR gives the drugs and screws up, so what.  I understand the legal argument against someone giving a drug that is not in their scope, but it doesn’t take a medical degree to push fatal drugs.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (May 19, 2009)

It's either in their scope of practice or it's not.
If it's not, they should be fully liable for going out of scope.


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

> Murder. Duh. You kill them, we kill you.
> Rape or other Sexual Assault. That is a defense again the future victims. I HATE rapists and molesters and don't see how rehabilitation is gonna matter.
> Drug Dealers. In my mind, one person dealing drugs for one hour destroys more lives (by cause and effect) than 10 serial killers.



Drug dealing is kind of a victimless crime. Those who keep the dealer in business do so on their own power, they aren't forced into it. It's also a crime of poverty and circumstances. I don't believe that it ranks anywhere with murders and rapists, nor do I believe rapists, molesters, sexual offenders deserve the death penalty.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Doesn't mean I have to agree with it.
> 
> I'm hard pressed to be concerned if those on death row experience a little discomfort in their execution. I know that makes me hypocritical.



I'm with you.  In my book "cruel and unusual" is shoving these "people" into 6x6 cells for 23 hours a day for 20 years until we finally decide to flip the switch.  And then in good old California they put a fold on lethal injection saying that it was painful!  ?????  So instead of 10 seconds of pain we subject them to the pain of being pinned into a steel cage for the next 40 years and subject us to the pain of supporting them for that time?

EYE FOR AN EYE!  Does it matter who does it, as long as a just sentence is carried out after being doled out by a jury of their peers?  Do we need a Doctor to flip the switch on an electrocution?  Do we need a Doctor to pull the trap door on a hanging?  Do we need a Doctor to pull the trigger for the firing squad?  These methods of execution are all used in some parts of the U.S. (still avaialbe in many states) and are far moer "cruel and unusual".  I, as a lowely EMT, will be glad to easy their suffering, not because I like death (we all fight it every day), but because justice is justice.  Personally, I would make it the resposibility of the Jusge or Jury that doled out the sentence.  If you can pass that judgement on someone, then ou have to carry it out.  IMHO.


----------



## bstone (May 19, 2009)

I guess the biggest issue (outside of killing someone) is not. If they screw up and don't administer enough and the person suffers and lives. That's bad.


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

bstone said:


> I guess the biggest issue (outside of killing someone) is not. If they screw up and don't administer enough and the person suffers and lives. That's bad.



If at first you don't succeed...


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Drug dealing is kind of a victimless crime. Those who keep the dealer in business do so on their own power, they aren't forced into it. It's also a crime of poverty and circumstances. I don't believe that it ranks anywhere with murders and rapists, nor do I believe rapists, molesters, sexual offenders deserve the death penalty.



Difference of opinion.  I believe that there is no such thing as a victimless crime.  I ran an IFT years ago where the patient was a 12 year old girl that was left in the care of her older sister.  The sister's boyfriend comes over, gave her her some X (because at her age it was just the next step up from MaryJ), and you figure out the rest (assualt of a perverse nature). Leaving aside the assault, the drugs screwed her up BAD.  After 12 hours her Bld Wk was still all over the place (ex: her BG was spiking and bottoming out in a matter of hours and would spike again soon after) and she was still confused and disoriented (had no clue what the hell happened, where she was, or who her own mom was).  We were transfering her to a Pediatric Facility that could deal with her severe problems.  The entire ride was heart wrenching for me.  From that day onward I took a hard and fast view of drug dealing.  Giving a kid a single hit on a roach can lead that kid down a road of drug abuse, theft to support that habbit, and future dealing to other kids that perpetuates the cycle.  There are enough victims here, IMHO.


----------



## HotelCo (May 19, 2009)

Mountain Res-Q said:


> EYE FOR AN EYE!



The whole world would be blind.

Ghandi... smart man.


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

I see that as child endangerment, and not drug dealing.

Many are driven to drug dealing to survive and provide for their families. Especially in today's economy. There ARE jobs, but taking that job means you have to pay for daycare which may take your entire paycheck because those jobs pay minimum wage or slightly above it, but then what? Then you gotta pay rent, then you have to pay electricity, food, clothing, toys for those kids. For those who have no education, they can't cut it and often turn to selling dope because it's a fast buck and your kid might eat that night.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> I see that as child endangerment, and not drug dealing.
> 
> Many are driven to drug dealing to survive and provide for their families. Especially in today's economy. There ARE jobs, but taking that job means you have to pay for daycare which may take your entire paycheck because those jobs pay minimum wage or slightly above it, but then what? Then you gotta pay rent, then you have to pay electricity, food, clothing, toys for those kids. For those who have no education, they can't cut it and often turn to selling dope because it's a fast buck and your kid might eat that night.



Do the ends justify the means?  Justifying why you do something doesn't absolve you of the consequence of those actions.  If your actions cause people to suffer than you have to answer for it.  I just think that drug dealing (and abusing for the at matter) creates more suffering and destroys more lives than Bin Laden could ever hope to.  BTW, I volunteer to inject him if we ever get him!


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> The whole world would be blind.
> 
> Ghandi... smart man.



Toby Keith... Smarter Man... 

_Well a man come on the 6 o'clock news
Said somebody's been shot, somebody's been abused
Somebody blew up a building
Somebody stole a car
Somebody got away
Somebody didn't get too far yeah
They didn't get too far

Grandpappy told my pappy, back in my day, son
A man had to answer for the wicked that he done
Take all the rope in Texas
Find a tall oak tree, round up all of them bad boys
Hang them high in the street for all the people to see that

Justice is the one thing you should always find
You got to saddle up your boys
You got to draw a hard line
When the gun smoke settles we'll sing a victory tune
We'll all meet back at the local saloon
We'll raise up our glasses against evil forces
Singing whiskey for my men, beer for my horses

We got too many gangsters doing dirty deeds
We've got too much corruption, too much crime in the streets
It's time the long arm of the law put a few more in the ground
Send 'em all to their maker and he'll settle 'em down
You can bet he'll set 'em down 'cause

Justice is the one thing you should always find
You got to saddle up your boys
You got to draw a hard line
When the gun smoke settles we'll sing a victory tune
We'll all meet back at the local saloon
We'll raise up our glasses against evil forces
Singing whiskey for my men, beer for my horses

Justice is the one thing you should always find
You got to saddle up your boys
You got to draw a hard line
When the gun smoke settles we'll sing a victory tune
We'll all meet back at the local saloon
We'll raise up our glasses against evil forces
Singing whiskey for my men, beer for my horses_


----------



## SauceyEMT (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> nor do I believe rapists, molesters, sexual offenders deserve the death penalty.



Are you kidding? Do you have children? I do..and I'm a cop. With that said, I promise you...if anyone ever rapes, molests, or otherwise sexually assaults my daughter...you will never see them again. Ever.

By the way...recidivism (that rate at which criminals reoffend) rates for murderers are among lowest for any crimimals. One, because, often they are locked up, and two, aside from sociopathic serial killers, most people murder out of a single instance of rage, or another isolated incident. By contrast, rapists, molesters and other pussies who prey on children, almost always reoffend if they are allowed to, (read: released). So really...who's more dangerous?


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

SauceyEMT said:


> Are you kidding? Do you have children? I do..and I'm a cop. With that said, I promise you...if anyone ever rapes, molests, or otherwise sexually assaults my daughter...you will never see them again. Ever.



Why does everyone always think children or the lack thereof validates or debases your opinion on a subject?


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

SauceyEMT said:


> Are you kidding? Do you have children? I do..and I'm a cop. With that said, I promise you...if anyone ever rapes, molests, or otherwise sexually assaults my daughter...you will never see them again. Ever.
> 
> By the way...recidivism (that rate at which criminals reoffend) rates for murderers are among lowest for any crimimals. One, because, often they are locked up, and two, aside from sociopathic serial killers, most people murder out of a single instance of rage, or another isolated incident. By contrast, rapists, molesters and other pussies who prey on children, almost always reoffend if they are allowed to, (read: released).



I like you!!!

I don't have any children... in fact don't want any... but I have a problem with anyone being hurt just because they are weeker or defenseless.  That is part of the resaon why I am in public servcie... I NEED to help those that can't help themselves.

Sasha, just a question... not an arguement... just want to know, how would you deal with "people" who force themselves onto women and children?


----------



## Shishkabob (May 19, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> ...because the founders of the constitution included the 8th amendment.





And the Supreme Court has come out and stated the lethal injection is neither cruel NOR unusual, let alone cruel AND unusual.


----------



## Shishkabob (May 19, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> The whole world would be blind.
> 
> Ghandi... smart man.



We have 4 other senses.


----------



## Buzz (May 19, 2009)

I'm a proponent of the side that "EMTs are hired in hospitals and trained to do other things." I've done more than my fair share of Foleys, and I can guarantee you that it is not in my protocols on the road. They just make it seem like some people who have absolutely no clue what they are doing are just injecting random amounts of random things into somebody with absolutely no guidance or knowledge about it, which I doubt is happening. Granted it's a bit different than a foley, but I'd wager there aren't many medic protocols for euthanasia either.

Has there actually been an issue that occurred because of this, or does this guy have nothing better to use his time on?

And yes, I know, this guy will win because of the wording of the law, unless their EMT-Is are allowed to administer certain other medications.


----------



## Jon (May 19, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> ...because the founders of the constitution included the 8th amendment.
> 
> 
> > Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, *nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted*.



JP... Way back when, burning at the stake was accepted. As were the Stocks.

Anything we due today is tame compared to that!



Also.... I think there are some states where they are training Corrections Officers to do IV access for executions. I've also heard of some places where a MD gets IV access, then goes in another room and the State Corrections folks do the actual execution, then the doc comes back in to declare the person dead.


----------



## SauceyEMT (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Why does everyone always think children or the lack thereof validates or debases your opinion on a subject?



It doesn't. Thats not my point. My point is that once I had children, it became readily apparent to me, that anyone who ever brutalizes a defensless, innocent child, should be dealt with swiftly, and permanently. My point about having children, is that once you have your own, it changes your view of many things. I personally feel that we (society) should be using the death penalty at a much quicker pace. Rapists, child molesters, etc. would be at the top of my list. Quickly and efficiently dispatched.


----------



## VFFforpeople (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Why does everyone always think children or the lack thereof validates or debases your opinion on a subject?



Ok, so using this point of view, lets replace children with say 46yro F. Now what are your thoughts on it? Or a 23 yro F college student 4.0, never parties has the world going for her walking to her car? Or the 4month old that us the youngest in my county to have that happen to? Part of me thinks you keep that view just to argue and otherwise strike a debate because you can. Which is fine you have that right, if playing both sides against the middle works for you go for it. Children validate alot, one day when (I don't say this to be mean, but pointing out an observation rather) you mature a little more and see what having kids is like, or spending time with them. You will know where the majority of us speak from, and then will have a more respected argument.


----------



## VentMedic (May 19, 2009)

I personally know of no EMT-I (or many Paramedics) that can even do RSI and I have not seen the lethal injection drugs listed within their scope of practice. So yes, I can see where this could be a problem. Since they do not routinely even monitor sedated and paralyzed patients during transports, they would not be the best qualified as specified in may guidelines that have been issued by the courts. 

It also depends upon the state the Paramedic is in as to whether their "prehospital" license or cert will allow to administer many if any meds within the walls of a hospital. Thus, they would be considered unlicensed personnel by hospital standards. BTW, these statutes were not written by hospitals or nursing associations but rather by those in EMS because they wanted to be different. 

There are usually 3 drugs administered which include a sedative, a paralytic and something to stop the heart like K+. 

So the list can include: sodium thiopental, pancuronium, Tubocurarine, succinylcholine chloride and Potassium chloride. 






Linuss said:


> And the Supreme Court has come out and stated the lethal injection is neither cruel NOR unusual, let alone cruel AND unusual.


 
This is in the courts now and in California they did have to change their lethal injection practices after the Michael Morales lawsuit.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/03/03/state/n172329S60.DTL&feed=rss.news



> Michael Morales was scheduled to be executed Feb. 21, but the injection was canceled after the prison could not comply with a federal judge's order for changes in the procedure to ensure Morales would not feel too much pain.
> 
> 
> That judge, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, didn't say whether he would approve of the new method to kill Morales or other prisoners, none of whom are scheduled to be executed. During a brief hearing Friday, he characterized the litigation as now being "a challenge to a protocol the state hopes to implement in the future."
> ...


----------



## mycrofft (May 19, 2009)

*I didn't reply because I couldn't find my reply.*

Some offenders are going to be dangerous no matter what. Unless you want to just hold them in limbo the rest of their lives, putting other inmates and correctional staff at risk, and wasting money, then the death sentence is correct.
However, I don't think my license or training as EMT or nurse taught me how to kill people on purpose. 
They trained and paid people as hangmen and other executioners for a purpose. You can teach a person with a high school education how to drop an IV in and give a push from some Bristojects type device marketed by a chemical company. 

It is a violation of licensing and professional ethics for us to kill people unless it is self defense, and executions are not that. if you want to kill people strapped to tables, etc., then go get that job.


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

VFFforpeople said:


> Ok, so using this point of view, lets replace children with say 46yro F. Now what are your thoughts on it? Or a 23 yro F college student 4.0, never parties has the world going for her walking to her car? Or the 4month old that us the youngest in my county to have that happen to? Part of me thinks you keep that view just to argue and otherwise strike a debate because you can. Which is fine you have that right, if playing both sides against the middle works for you go for it. Children validate alot, one day when (I don't say this to be mean, but pointing out an observation rather) you mature a little more and see what having kids is like, or spending time with them. You will know where the majority of us speak from, and then will have a more respected argument.



Spending time with kids??? I work in a pediatric clinic, I think i spend more time with children then you probably do.

How am I playing the middle? I don't think rape is a crime that deserves the death penalty. A major difference between a rapist and a murderer is the rapist's victim is still alive. Having children or spending time with children will not change my view. Where do you draw the line, then? How many claims are false claims?? Even with DNA evidence that they had intercourse, how many women claim it was forced because they were mad or embarrased? Duke University, anyone??? So we're going to kill someone because a woman said they forced them to have sex???? What if the woman is lying?


----------



## mycrofft (May 19, 2009)

*Ummmm....jury trial?*

Sounds like we need a thread on rape, preferably with a professional moderator.

Too many rape cases get swept under the rug. Too many get mishandled once the DA decides to go to court. Just as there are different sorts of murderers, there are different sorts of rapes; the majority of "true" forcible rapes are inflicted upon people the rapist is assured won't fight back like the elderly, the very young, the chemically impaired, and the folks society won't listen to like prostitutes and mental patients.

NOT like "SVU".<_<


----------



## medic417 (May 19, 2009)

My only question is how much does this position pay?  Perhaps it will be enough to get me off the ambulance.  Wow start just a few IV's a year.  Push a couple meds and get rich.  Of course they can probably find a volunteer that will do it for free thus driving wages down for the rest of us.  Then the IAFF will rush in and try and get their piece of the pie.  Crap there goes another good job.


----------



## reaper (May 19, 2009)

mycrofft said:


> Some offenders are going to be dangerous no matter what. Unless you want to just hold them in limbo the rest of their lives, putting other inmates and correctional staff at risk, and wasting money, then the death sentence is correct.
> However, I don't think my license or training as EMT or nurse taught me how to kill people on purpose.
> They trained and paid people as hangmen and other executioners for a purpose. You can teach a person with a high school education how to drop an IV in and give a push from some Bristojects type device marketed by a chemical company.
> 
> *It is a violation of licensing and professional ethics for us to kill people unless it is self defense, and executions are not that. if you want to kill people strapped to tables, etc., then go get that job*.



Don't know how it is in Cali. I have never taken an oath to recieve my license, so no ethical problems there. I have never seen a law stating that we can not work as an executioner in a prision!


----------



## mycrofft (May 19, 2009)

*Medic 417 HAHAHAH!!!*


"Emergency medicine"...hmm, can't even recombine the letters to spell "kill someone". The basic oath of medicine is the Hyppocratic one, including "do no harm". Different job, different skills, different culture.


----------



## JPINFV (May 19, 2009)

So you'd rather not have medical professionals involved in executions even if it means that the codemned feels more pain than would otherwise be present?


----------



## reaper (May 19, 2009)

mycrofft said:


> "Emergency medicine"...hmm, can't even recombine the letters to spell "kill someone". The basic oath of medicine is the Hyppocratic one, including "do no harm". Different job, different skills, different culture.



But, we do not take the hyppocratic oath, the same way a Dr. does. That is why a lot of states use medics in that position.


----------



## SauceyEMT (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> I don't think rape is a crime that deserves the death penalty. A major difference between a rapist and a murderer is the rapist's victim is still alive.



I hope you have not been and never become a victim of rape. I'm willing to bet if you took a survey of rape victims, most of their opinions of the death penalty would differ greatly from yours.

And as for the rape victim being alive, many victims live with lifelong emotional, physical, and psychological scars after being raped. Many are never the same, and some, commit suicide. 

So do you feel the same about child rapists?

(Note: I know this isnt the topic intended for this thread, but you've got me going now...)


----------



## mycrofft (May 19, 2009)

*I never swore at the alter not to gamble all my family's money*

...but the logical extension of the sense of the occasion was that it wouldn't be nice.
Do people go into EMT class with the intention of killing other people?

I once thought I could do lethal injections, I still think I could but not as a nurse.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

Once you start handing out medical certifications to Firefighters... well, all "do no harm" thoughts in EMS go right out the window... j/k.  ^_^

But really, if we are saying that no medical professionals should participate in execution because of an "oath" or dedication to preserving life, then we are left with handing over executions to the electric company.  Out of all execution methods, lethal injection is largely regarded as the most humane (despite Californias issues with it).  So in order to execute justice in a human fashion we are left with medical professionals playig some role in it, even if it is just IV cath placement.... and even if it is just a guard trained in IV placemenet, it is still medicine partaking in the taking of a life.  But, in all honesty, I would rather help end the life of a murder or rapist than "sleep" at night knowing that I would be transporting or pronouncing his/her latest victim the next day.  Lesser of 2 evils, and I don't care who does it, as long as we serve justice and the greater good.


----------



## reaper (May 19, 2009)

SauceyEMT said:


> I hope you have not been and never become a victim of rape. I'm willing to bet if you took a survey of rape victims, most of their opinions of the death penalty would differ greatly from yours.
> 
> And as for the rape victim being alive, many victims live with lifelong emotional, physical, and psychological scars after being raped. Many are never the same, and some, commit suicide.
> 
> ...



Why do you feel that someone can not have their own opinions and beliefs? Does not matter if she has been raped or not. Does not matter if it is a child rapist or and adult rapist. She is allowed to form her opinions.

That is as bad as someone else stating that she does not have children, so she doesn't understand. That is Bull puckey! People are able to form their own opinions and read all they want to come to that opinion.

Do I believe in Death sentence for rapists? No I don't! But I believe in castration for them and only if there is solid evidence that they are guilty of the crime!


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

reaper said:


> Do I believe in Death sentence for rapists? No I don't! But I believe in *castration *for them and only if there is solid evidence that they are guilty of the crime!



What about female rapest and molesters?  They do exist.  I'd prefer not to take the chance that someone with a history of sexual assault is "all better" and release them back into my neighborhood.  IMHO.


----------



## mycrofft (May 19, 2009)

*An executiner who knows how to put a needle in a vein is not a health pro.*

And if it's ok for us to kill em at San Q, then why not in the hospital?

We have to keep the buffer between killing for the courts, and medical practice, widely separated, or our fringier cohorts will do something rash.


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

SauceyEMT said:


> I hope you have not been and never become a victim of rape. I'm willing to bet if you took a survey of rape victims, most of their opinions of the death penalty would differ greatly from yours.
> 
> And as for the rape victim being alive, many victims live with lifelong emotional, physical, and psychological scars after being raped. Many are never the same, and some, commit suicide.
> 
> ...



You can't speak for rape victims or their opinion on the death penalty, becuase you have no idea what's going on in their mind! Many learn to forgive, many understand that the person who did that to them was sick, but they would be getting help in jail. 

Some commit suicide, but many are alive, perhaps they have emotional problems, but is that not living? I believe the insinuation that that's not living is an insult to anyone with mental problems! Therapy can and does work.

How are you going to weed out the false accusations? The ones who don't know who their rapist was, but want someone, anyone, to pay and hurt the way they hurt? 

I'm in support of the death penalty for murder, only if they have been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt with undisputable DNA, video evidence, or something along those lines. Short of a video or audio tape there is no sure fire way that you can be 100% sure for rape or molestation accusations. Too many girls take rape as something to be taken lightly and make false accusations out of shame or anger.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

mycrofft said:


> And if it's ok for us to kill em at San Q, then why not in the hospital?
> 
> We have to keep the buffer between killing for the courts, and medical practice, widely separated, or our fringier cohorts will do something rash.



So a phlebotomist in a hospital is not a health care professional?  Because that is really all that they would train a guard to be.

And there is a big diff between executing someone convicted of a crime and someone who is suffering in a hospital… mind you I am kind of for that as well.


----------



## fortsmithman (May 19, 2009)

Instead of executing them why not do this lock them in cells that are soundproof and just let them sit do nothing do not allow them to have any reading material except maybe the bible.  Also take out all clocks watches from their cells.  the only time they would be allowed out would be for a shower and then that would be one at a time.  Just let them sit no talking.  One thing I find odd about death row is that if an inmate tries to kill themselves the authorities revive them they should just let them die.


----------



## CAOX3 (May 19, 2009)

I don't believe anyone besides an MD should be administering a lethal injection. 

As far as debating the death penalty and eligibility.  I don't believe this is the place, however I know one thing, emotion should never factor into those decisions.


----------



## HotelCo (May 19, 2009)

Mountain Res-Q said:


> Toby Keith... Smarter Man...
> 
> _Well a man come on the 6 o'clock news
> Said somebody's been shot, somebody's been abused
> ...



I really don't feel like reading all of that.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

fortsmithman said:


> Instead of executing them why not do this lock them in cells that are soundproof and just let them sit do nothing do not allow them to have any reading material except maybe the bible.  Also take out all clocks watches from their cells.  the only time they would be allowed out would be for a shower and then that would be one at a time.  Just let them sit no talking.  One thing I find odd about death row is that if an inmate tries to kill themselves the authorities revive them they should just let them die.



Because liberals like to scream about prisioner rights.  that is why they have better health care than most americans, healthier food, free "gym pass", easier access to drugs in prision, oh... and now in California (if the powers that be have their way) free condoms.  We treat prisioners so well that I am tempted to book a room.  And let's be honest, if killing a person swiftly ina humane fashion is "cruel and unusual" than what do we call forcing someone to live in a 6x6 cell, with no outside stimuli, no books, no clocks, and no talking for 40 or 50 years?  THAT IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL to them and just wrong for our money (40-50 k a year per prisioner) to go to supporting murderes, rapists, and drug dealers.  Ya, that solution is so much better. 



HotelCo said:


> I really don't feel like reading all of that.



Um.... so don't.


----------



## Sasha (May 19, 2009)

> And let's be honest, if killing a person swiftly ina humane fashion is "cruel and unusual" than what do we call forcing someone to live in a 6x6 cell, with no outside stimuli, no books, no clocks, and no talking for 40 or 50 years? THAT IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL to them



In your opinion. Some would prefer to live like that than die. It


----------



## mikie (May 19, 2009)

*personally against the DP...but that's not my question:*

Why even have EMT's, no matter which training, there?  So what happens if something goes wrong with the administration of the medicine...do you think they'll transport to the hospital or perform extreme interventions?  

We might not take the same 'do no harm' vows, but nonetheless, our goal is for are patients to live.....right?

And who signs up for this...to be an EMT-E*?

*executioner


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (May 19, 2009)

Sasha said:


> In your opinion. Some would prefer to live like that than *die. It*



I hate dieting.  Yes, I would rather being in prison rather than be forced to cut out the grease, caffine, fat, and sugar!  ^_^

But I would rather be dead than live in that insanity.  And while that is my opinion, it doesn't make it less valid than the person who says that execution is cruel and unusual.  I just don't understand how the criminal should be given the choice in what they prefer.


----------



## SauceyEMT (May 20, 2009)

reaper said:


> *Why do you feel that someone can not have their own opinions and beliefs? *Does not matter if she has been raped or not. Does not matter if it is a child rapist or and adult rapist. She is allowed to form her opinions.
> 
> That is as bad as someone else stating that she does not have children, so she doesn't understand. That is Bull puckey! People are able to form their own opinions and read all they want to come to that opinion.
> 
> Do I believe in Death sentence for rapists? No I don't! But I believe in castration for them and only if there is solid evidence that they are guilty of the crime!



You and everyone else can believe whatever they want. You're mistaking my point of view for what you assume I expect yours to be. I don't make my opinions based on how you form yours, nor do I change mine because someone else doesnt like it, and I'd expect the same from you.


----------



## SauceyEMT (May 20, 2009)

Sasha said:


> You can't speak for rape victims or their opinion on the death penalty, becuase you have no idea what's going on in their mind!
> 
> I'm not speaking for anybody but myself. Note in my post that I said "I'm willing to bet if you took a survey..." I didnt quote all rape victims.
> 
> ...



*Maybe I should have clarified my stance. I am not seeking the death penalty for a guy at a party who gets drunk and has sex with a woman who then decides it was a bad idea, and cries rape. I'm talking about serial, habitual rapists (and there are many) who victimize many women (generally), and people who victimize children. With forensics, DNA, etc, it's just as solid a case for rape with them, as it is for murder cases. Not to mention, many rapists admit their crimes, and blame "being sick" knowing that a liberal society like ours, will coddle them. 

I stand by my statement, although I'll clarify. Serial rapists, child rapists, those who prey on defensless victims...there is no room in society or our jails for them. Swift and severe punishment is the way to go. 

You have yours, I have mine.*


----------



## Sasha (May 20, 2009)

> Yeah, yeah...everyone is sick. Noone is at fault for what they do. There is zero accountability now. Everyone has a disorder, or disease that causes their problems. It's the same with addicts. It's not their fault they stick a needle in their arm, or spark the pipe. And for the record...having worked behind the walls (prison), the help anybody gets isnt all it's cracked up to be.
> 
> Keep in mind...almost all rapists who are imprisoned, eventually are released. Many, many, reoffend. So tell me how well the treatment worked...



You stated the problem yourself. 



> the help anybody gets isnt all it's cracked up to be.



Prisons are not focusing on rehabillitating their  inmates, just containing them for the years and then releasing. The rehabilitation programs in jails need some serious work!



> I never said they werent living, I said many are never the same. two entirely different things.



Some rape victims will tell you, while it was a horrible thing and caused them a lot of pain, it made them a better person in the long run, some even go on to understand that the person who hurt them was very sick and find some way to forgive them. I'm not excusing it in the least, it's a terrible thing to do to someone, but you assume that being raped is the end of someone's livelyhood is insulting to the victim, they may never be the same, but someone may never be the same after a car accident either, should we execute the car driver? Rape is a terrible, terrible and horrible act, but is an act that is comitted by someone who is mentally ill. Do we fault someone for being sick?

Serial rapists and child molesters should be held in jail the rest of their natural life, but I don't think they should be executed. Let the punishment fit the crime.



> With forensics, DNA, etc, it's just as solid a case for rape with them, as it is for murder cases.



It's a solid case that they had intercourse, it is not a solid case that it was forced intercourse and not consensual with someone backing out and crying rape later.


----------



## Shishkabob (May 20, 2009)

mikie said:


> Why even have EMT's, no matter which training, there?  So what happens if something goes wrong with the administration of the medicine...do you think they'll transport to the hospital or perform extreme interventions?  [/SIZE]




I was going to post this before to correct someone on the first page, but after seeing it AGAIn, I need to step in.





The order of death is a lawful order.  A prison can't refuse to kill someone.


Once they are strapped in the chair / bed / firing post, there is no turning back.

If the first dose of the drug, electricity, or bullets from firing squad do not kill, you just do it again.  You do NOT go "Oh, they lived, we have to send to the hospital now"


There are countless cases where the first dose of electricity didn't kill someone in the chair, so they would do it again and again until it DID kill.





This isn't the Salem Witch Trials--- if they live it doesn't mean they're innocent.


----------



## ffemt8978 (May 20, 2009)

Stay on topic please.


----------



## triemal04 (May 20, 2009)

> The procedure state officials follow during executions states that the lethal drugs should be given by a "person qualified under Ohio law to administer medications."





> Richard Rucker, the board's executive director, said the issue is not black and white.
> 
> "It depends on if they're operating as EMTs or not," he said. "EMTs are hired in hospitals and trained to do other things. It's a gray area that has to be looked at."


Only 2 quotes that really matter from the article, and the two that will determine how this goes.  Depending on how Ohio law is specifically written (and which side of the bed the deciding judge got up on) anyone could be "qualified" to start an IV and push 3 separate meds, as long as they had some knowledge about it.  And, as Rucker said, just because someone is an EMT does not specifically mean that they are operating as one...for this it really would fall to what their actual job description is...is it official that they are being used because they are EMT's, or was that never written into the description?

It could go either way, and either way it turns out, if the officials want these same people to continue to do it, then they'll probably be able to, unless the law is very, very specific, which I highly doubt.  What this will turn out to be is an anti-execution advocate throwing a monkeywrench into the system for awhile and getting some media attention, while not really changing anything.

And for those wondering, there have been cases where a lethal injection execution went wrong; if I remember right it was 3-4 years ago and due to a nurse incorrectly inserting an IV catheter.  But guess what, the guy still was executed.


----------



## fortsmithman (May 20, 2009)

As for those who rape women and children don't officially execute them.  Here is what you do with them.  Put them in general population.  You see in general population.  The other inmates will most likely kill them after doing to them what they did to their victims.


----------



## fortsmithman (May 20, 2009)

Personally I'm opposed to capital punishment because of 2 cases here in Canada where  the person accused of murder was wrongly convicted where after decades of being in prison the real murderer was caught.


----------



## daedalus (May 20, 2009)

First, do no harm.

Rip their cards, throw them in jail.


----------



## daedalus (May 20, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> So you'd rather not have medical professionals involved in executions even if it means that the codemned feels more pain than would otherwise be present?



Yes.

No one with any medical training above first aid/cpr should even be in the building. It is an ethical duty to oppose preforming the death penalty with medical professionals. And to anyone who thinks paramedics are not bound by this, open up the ethics chapter in your textbook.

Why are you in medical school? How dare you suggest that medical professionals be involved in murder?


----------



## SauceyEMT (May 20, 2009)

Sasha said:


> You stated the problem yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're reading way too far into my post, rather than taking it at face value. I never said anything about being a victim meaning the end of someone's livelyhood. And to compare a car accident victim is crazy. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, but reality is that very few sex offenders are held in custody for life, and many reoffend when they are released. Call it being sick if you need to, but they victimize people over and over. 

And for putting sex offenders in general population, for the most part, the being killed is mostly derived from TV. Rarely are they murdered. If we we're to put them in gen-pop the bleeding heart liberals would cry that we are violating their rights, afterall, they're just sick, not criminals.


----------



## JPINFV (May 20, 2009)

daedalus said:


> Yes.
> 
> No one with any medical training above first aid/cpr should even be in the building. It is an ethical duty to oppose preforming the death penalty with medical professionals. And to anyone who thinks paramedics are not bound by this, open up the ethics chapter in your textbook.



Are you seriously suggesting that the end all and be all of medical ethics is what a paramedic text book author thinks and that ethics is not up to debate or discussion? There's a big difference between the cardiology and ethics sections of a text book. 

Are you also suggesting that anyone involved in healthcare should be against the death penalty on the sole reason of being involved in health care?


> Why are you in medical school? How dare you suggest that medical professionals be involved in murder?


Execution is not murder. Murder and homicide are related, but not the same thing. Execution is a duly administered penalty for a crime with the penalty being decided as a possibility by the state, as a representative of the citizens, prior to the crime being committed. People who are executed have been found guilty by a jury of their peers in a court of law. The constitution of the USA grants its citizens protections from "cruel and unusual punishment," which in terms of the death penalty has been interpreted as making death as painless and clean as possible (e.g. the guillotine is rapid, yet messy).

As such, any health care provider who is also pro-death penalty arguably has a duty to insure that the punishments given out by the state, which is a representative of all citizens including the provider, meets the requirements of the constitution. Simply put, execution is not murder and is not comparable to physician assisted suicide (albeit I am willing to take on this ethical discussion as well) or so called "angel of death" murders.


----------



## JPINFV (May 20, 2009)

daedalus said:


> First, do no harm.



A strict interpretation of that would ban surgery and chemotherapy as both do harm to get to a greater good.


----------



## Shishkabob (May 20, 2009)

daedalus said:


> First, do no harm.
> 
> Rip their cards, throw them in jail.



I don't know about you, but I never took, recited, or signed the Hippocratic Oath, therefore, it has no consequences on me.






fortsmithman said:


> Personally I'm opposed to capital punishment because of 2 cases here in Canada where  the person accused of murder was wrongly convicted where after decades of being in prison the real murderer was caught.



That's a problem of the court systems, NOT capital punishment.


----------



## Meursault (May 20, 2009)

I knew this was going to devolve into a discussion of ethics.

If you believe that capital punishment is ethically justifiable, then the easiest way to justify the involvement of medical professionals is to say that they are not bound by a provider-patient relationship with the condemned.

I'd argue, actually, that they're not acting as medical professionals at all, but simply applying a few of the technical skills of medicine in the capacity of executioner. Whether or not that's justified hinges on two questions: is it ethical to use medical skills for non-medical purposes, and is capital punishment just (in the specific or the general case)?

I'm not going to discuss the second question; it's out of the scope of this forum, and arguments about law, politics, and ethics get messy very quickly, especially here.


----------



## daedalus (May 20, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> A strict interpretation of that would ban surgery and chemotherapy as both do harm to get to a greater good.



I am sure you have heard of "First, hasten to help" which preserves doing no harm while allowing procedures like cannulation and surgery to take place.


----------



## daedalus (May 20, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> Are you seriously suggesting that the end all and be all of medical ethics is what a paramedic text book author thinks and that ethics is not up to debate or discussion? There's a big difference between the cardiology and ethics sections of a text book.
> 
> Are you also suggesting that anyone involved in healthcare should be against the death penalty on the sole reason of being involved in health care?
> 
> ...


A physician does not have a duty to the constitution, in fact, he must place his patient above all other concerns. He has only a duty to his patient. 

The principle of nonmalfeasance is not debatable part of a text book. It is a responsibility of the paramedic. 

Allowing something to continue because it is the "law" is akin to slavery.


----------



## JPINFV (May 20, 2009)

All citizens have a duty to the constitution.

So you'd rather just have someone with zero experience and little training (yes, IVs aren't hard, but we're talking about people who would do it a few times a year at best) pushing random drugs into a patient than having an educated provider doing as little harm as possible in order to carry out the wishes of the people? 

Allowing something to happen because of the law is slavery? Would you rather have anarchy then?


----------



## Meursault (May 20, 2009)

daedalus said:


> A physician does not have a duty to the constitution, in fact, he must place his patient above all other concerns. He has only a duty to his patient.
> 
> The principle of nonmalfeasance is not debatable part of a text book. It is a responsibility of the paramedic.
> 
> Allowing something to continue because it is the "law" is akin to slavery.



Wow, you sound like you're about to Godwin yourself.

The principle of nonmaleficence, which at least one poster has misapplied, only applies to patients (and foreseeable effects of treatment, presumably; you cannot ethically harm others to help your patient). 

Anyone care to argue why a condemned prisoner that a paramedic is helping kill is a patient?


----------



## AnthonyM83 (May 20, 2009)

If he is not to be considered a patient, what is he considered, then?
And if not a patient, can the medic practice the skills allowed by state or local scope of practice?


----------



## Foxbat (May 21, 2009)

If a person who sticks an IV into murderer's vein is required to be at least EMT-P, then I guess the guys who behead criminals should be certified surgeons.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (May 21, 2009)

That wouldn't make sense, because beheading isn't a medical procedure. Even if not being used to treat or diagnose, I doubt many wouldn't call it a medical procedure. And they are drawing on their medical education and practice to do it (tourniquet, finding vein, getting flash, assuring patency of line).


----------



## daedalus (May 21, 2009)

From Lippincott's Pharmacology "The goal of drug therapy is to prevent, cure, or control various diseases"

You push a drug on someone, they are your patient.


----------



## JPINFV (May 21, 2009)

..curing social ills.


----------



## reaper (May 21, 2009)

Controlling the urge to murder?


----------



## Shishkabob (May 21, 2009)

daedalus said:


> From Lippincott's Pharmacology "The goal of drug therapy is to prevent, cure, or control various diseases"



And the disease being cured is a sick mind.


/win


----------



## Tincanfireman (May 21, 2009)

I'm going to leave the philosophical debates alone and try to look at it from a purely legal standpoint. If Ohio law has a provision that only -P's can administer the medications, I would think any defense lawyer worth his three piece suit would jump on that pretty hard at appeal time after imposition of a death sentence.  Why that state would give a defense lawyer a plum like that escapes me.  I know a little about emergency care and much less than that about the law, but that's just my .02.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (May 21, 2009)

Agreed. No need to complicate it. 

Are the starting of IV's and pushing of controlled medications regulated procedures? If so, are they doing it within a legal scope of practice?


----------



## Meursault (May 22, 2009)

AnthonyM83 said:


> If he is not to be considered a patient, what is he considered, then?
> And if not a patient, can the medic practice the skills allowed by state or local scope of practice?



The second question is probably the practical failure of my argument.

To the first, I present a counterexample. If the state sentences a man to be drawn and quartered, and they decide a surgeon is best qualified to do the quartering, is the condemned a patient of the surgeon? 
For that matter, is the surgeon performing surgery? Does the answer to that question depend on whether the condemned is cut apart with some grisly instrument of torture or surgical tools? Does the answer to that question depend on the surgeon's intent?



Linuss said:


> And the disease being cured is a sick mind.
> 
> 
> /win



Bleh.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (May 22, 2009)

MrConspiracy said:


> If the state sentences a man to be drawn and quartered, and they decide a surgeon is best qualified to do the quartering, is the condemned a patient of the surgeon?
> For that matter, is the surgeon performing surgery? Does the answer to that question depend on whether the condemned is cut apart with some grisly instrument of torture or surgical tools? Does the answer to that question depend on the surgeon's intent?



You can apply the same two questions as before.

Is he performing a controlled medical procedure?  (I think most would say no, realistically)
If he surgically amputated each limb, it might count as a modification of a procedure...then I'd say yes.

If so, is it within his scope of practice?
If it isn't a medical procedure, this question is void. If it is, doctors don't really have a "scope of practice" like us...so he'd need to be judged by medical boards and other regulating bodies that usually judge these things.


----------

