Daily Archives: 22 Mar 06

When Law and Ethics Collide

Posted on by

Why Physicians Participate in Executions. An opinion piece by Atul Gawande, one of my favorite physician-writers. Hopefully of interest to non-MDs as well.

“States have affirmed that physicians and nurses — including those who are prison employees — have a right to refuse to participate in any way in executions. Yet they have found physicians and nurses who are willing to participate. Who are these people? And why do they do it?”

Gawande interviews several physician-executioners, all but one cloaked by anonymity, pointedly examining the slippery slope that led each one to their induction into the role, and their ethical qualms, such as they are. Gawande himself takes pains to note that he is not an opponent of the death penalty, although one of the physicians he interviews, who has so far participated in six executions, is. Interestingly, ironically, troublingly, this MD sees his role as akin to not abandoning any other patient with a terminal illness in their final moments. Gawande isn’t buying that argument, and comes down on the side of advocating a legal ban on the participation of physicians and nurses in performing executions. (New England Journal of Medicine)

Supreme Court Limits Police Searches of Homes

Posted on by
“A bitterly split Supreme Court, ruling in a case that arose from a marriage gone bad, today narrowed the circumstances under which the police can enter and search a home without a warrant….

The issue before the justices was one that has long caused confusion in state courts: whether the police can search a home without a warrant if one occupant gives consent but another occupant, who is physically present, says ‘no.’ The majority held today that at least under some circumstances, such a search is invalid….

Justice Souter, [writing for the majority,] said a finding for Mr. Randolph — in the specific circumstances that marked this case, Georgia v. Randolph, No. 04-1067 — was compelled by Fourth Amendment principles against unreasonable searches and seizures. But Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the main dissenter, bitterly disagreed, as he and Justice Souter exchanged darts in writing.” (New York Times )

Even though the case went (IMHO) the right way, the heated disputation does not bode well for some of the other contentious issues facing the Roberts Court, especially as Alito (who was not on the Court when this arguments in this case were heard) begins to join the deliberations.