I’m a paramedic and I was just thinking of this after I heard about a man being put to death. I mean really what would you do, you got a guy who is minutes from being executed. He begins to have chest pain shortness of breath radiating down the left arm with nausea vommiting dizziness diaphoresis all classic signs/symptoms of myocardial infarction(heart attack). Do you proceed with the execution or do you allow for him to suffer and ultimately be put to death. For me the law states I have a duty to act. There is almost no chance I personally will be put in this type of situation but someone someday will be.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Actually, yes. Not long ago I was reading on CNN.com about a guy who was to be out to death. He had 2 heart attacks while on death row and both times they brought him back. Then they had to wait until he was well enough to be executed.
Stupidest darn thing I have EVER heard of. Don’t you love our system?!?!
Yes they would call in the medical team, untill he is actually executed, all of the legal requirements would have to be followed according to department of prison rules.
By law the person has to be healthy enough to be put to death!! I know, it sounds stupid but if they have certain medical conditions or an emergency situation then yes they get medical care before they are killed.
By law, the state holding the prisoner, or the U.S., if federal prison, is responsible for his medical well-being as long as he is in their custody. I do believe that the execution would have to be put on hold and a squad called. Good question, though!
I believe the law also insists that they try to save this man. But I’m not sure. I suppose if he had a DNR order out then they wouldn’t have to. For those of you who don’t know DNR is “Do Not Recessitate” meaning that they can’t try to save them if they’re going to die. Either way it sucks for him. I’d just be like “F— that, let me die this way. I’m going to die either way, might as well be this rather than that.”
-Duo
It is crazy but, he would more than likely be treated and revived if need be, admitted to intensive care and allowed to recover just so he could be executed later.
You know that is actually a very good question. I am an RN and I always wondered why they used sterile needles to administer a lethal injection? Humm…. Like you said, you have a duty to “do no harm” and try to help save the person in distress. Thanks for the question you have given me something to ponder. I honestly believe that I would have to jump in and try to “save” the person.
Ooooof. What a quandry. The duty to act law kinda sucks in this case, huh? To be honest, I’m not sure what I would do.
actually it’s law that they must be given proper medical attention.
Allow for him to suffer because he’ll be dead before you have the chance to put him to death.
Ethically…yes.
Practically…no.
Humorously…you pull the switch just a little earlier:)
Hahaha… yes!
Believe it or not, the law stated that it is “cruel & unsual” punishment to execute a person who is not well. S/he has to be in fairly good health. Ironic, huh?