对美国死刑药物的批判性检查:历史观点和伦理辩论。

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Armaan Singh, Shama Varghese, Dhanesh D Binda, Maxwell B Baker, Cory Faragon, Wendy Bernstein
{"title":"对美国死刑药物的批判性检查:历史观点和伦理辩论。","authors":"Armaan Singh, Shama Varghese, Dhanesh D Binda, Maxwell B Baker, Cory Faragon, Wendy Bernstein","doi":"10.1136/jme-2025-110850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nitrogen hypoxia has recently emerged as a method of execution in the USA, with Alabama conducting the first executions using this technique in 2024. This article examines the historical evolution, medicalisation and ethical dilemmas surrounding execution practices, with particular attention to the rise of nitrogen hypoxia. Drawing on a targeted review of medical, legal and ethical literature, we explore the development of lethal injection protocols, the legal and procedural drivers of nitrogen gas adoption and the complex role of healthcare professionals in executions. Central concerns include the experimental nature of nitrogen hypoxia, the lack of transparency in execution protocols and the ethical implications of involving clinicians in state-sanctioned killing. We argue that the conflation of medical tools with punitive practices obscures fundamental distinctions between clinical care and capital punishment, raising urgent questions about professional integrity and public trust. Ultimately, we call for greater clarity, ethical consistency and transparency in addressing the interplay of medicine, law and the death penalty. By confronting these issues, we underscore the critical role of the medical community in advocating for humane practices and fostering informed public and legislative discourse on the intersection of medicine, ethics and capital punishment. We aim to contribute to the ongoing debate on the ethical and procedural challenges of state-sanctioned executions and the responsibilities of healthcare professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A critical examination of execution drugs in the USA: historical perspectives and ethical debates.\",\"authors\":\"Armaan Singh, Shama Varghese, Dhanesh D Binda, Maxwell B Baker, Cory Faragon, Wendy Bernstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jme-2025-110850\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Nitrogen hypoxia has recently emerged as a method of execution in the USA, with Alabama conducting the first executions using this technique in 2024. This article examines the historical evolution, medicalisation and ethical dilemmas surrounding execution practices, with particular attention to the rise of nitrogen hypoxia. Drawing on a targeted review of medical, legal and ethical literature, we explore the development of lethal injection protocols, the legal and procedural drivers of nitrogen gas adoption and the complex role of healthcare professionals in executions. Central concerns include the experimental nature of nitrogen hypoxia, the lack of transparency in execution protocols and the ethical implications of involving clinicians in state-sanctioned killing. We argue that the conflation of medical tools with punitive practices obscures fundamental distinctions between clinical care and capital punishment, raising urgent questions about professional integrity and public trust. Ultimately, we call for greater clarity, ethical consistency and transparency in addressing the interplay of medicine, law and the death penalty. By confronting these issues, we underscore the critical role of the medical community in advocating for humane practices and fostering informed public and legislative discourse on the intersection of medicine, ethics and capital punishment. We aim to contribute to the ongoing debate on the ethical and procedural challenges of state-sanctioned executions and the responsibilities of healthcare professionals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2025-110850\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2025-110850","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

氮缺氧最近在美国作为一种处决方法出现,阿拉巴马州于2024年首次使用这种技术执行死刑。这篇文章探讨了历史演变,医疗化和伦理困境周围的执行做法,特别注意氮缺氧的兴起。通过对医学、法律和伦理文献的有针对性的审查,我们探讨了致命注射方案的发展、采用氮气的法律和程序驱动因素以及医疗保健专业人员在执行中的复杂作用。主要问题包括缺氧氮的实验性质、执行程序缺乏透明度,以及让临床医生参与国家批准的杀戮的伦理影响。我们认为,医疗工具与惩罚性做法的合并模糊了临床护理和死刑之间的根本区别,提出了关于职业诚信和公众信任的紧迫问题。最后,我们呼吁在处理医学、法律和死刑的相互作用时更加明确、道德上更加一致和更加透明。通过面对这些问题,我们强调了医学界在倡导人道做法和促进就医学、伦理和死刑的交叉问题进行知情的公众和立法讨论方面的关键作用。我们的目标是促进正在进行的关于国家批准处决的道德和程序挑战以及保健专业人员责任的辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A critical examination of execution drugs in the USA: historical perspectives and ethical debates.

Nitrogen hypoxia has recently emerged as a method of execution in the USA, with Alabama conducting the first executions using this technique in 2024. This article examines the historical evolution, medicalisation and ethical dilemmas surrounding execution practices, with particular attention to the rise of nitrogen hypoxia. Drawing on a targeted review of medical, legal and ethical literature, we explore the development of lethal injection protocols, the legal and procedural drivers of nitrogen gas adoption and the complex role of healthcare professionals in executions. Central concerns include the experimental nature of nitrogen hypoxia, the lack of transparency in execution protocols and the ethical implications of involving clinicians in state-sanctioned killing. We argue that the conflation of medical tools with punitive practices obscures fundamental distinctions between clinical care and capital punishment, raising urgent questions about professional integrity and public trust. Ultimately, we call for greater clarity, ethical consistency and transparency in addressing the interplay of medicine, law and the death penalty. By confronting these issues, we underscore the critical role of the medical community in advocating for humane practices and fostering informed public and legislative discourse on the intersection of medicine, ethics and capital punishment. We aim to contribute to the ongoing debate on the ethical and procedural challenges of state-sanctioned executions and the responsibilities of healthcare professionals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信