Throughout the years of having a criminal justice system, we have explored different punishments that we deemed justified. We have evolved from firing squads, hanging individuals, gas chambers, electric chairs, and finally to the latest form of capital punishment… Lethal injection. Lethal injection is illegibly more peaceful and humane. However, there have been countless episodes of botched procedures. We as American citizens have a right to our amendments whether one is being accused of a crime, guilty of a crime, a victim of a crime, or an innocent individual. With these rights in mind, we pay close attention to the Eighth Amendment. This amendment directly states that “cruel and unusual punishment should not be inflicted” (Stevenson). This amendment protects the defendants and prohibits the government from imposing harsh punishments after conviction (Stevenson). The use of lethal injection is deemed unconstitutional because the individuals suffering from this form of punishment are facing cruel and unusual punishment, such as suffocating, and/or suffering from an unintended heart attack. Our technology today has not found a correct formula for an injection to insure a peaceful way of death. Due to this consistent error and the number of procedures gone horribly wrong, executioners are therefore experimenting on the next individual on death row, and hoping for the best. 

Lethal injections aid in cruel and unusual punishments that go directly against the constitution and the rights we as citizens have. On May 1st, a botched Oklahoma execution sets the stage for why capital punishment by lethal injection is deemed unconstitutional (NMANewsDirect). One particular case occurs in Oklahoma, when Clayton Lockett refuses orders from prison guards on the day of his execution. Leading up to the time of his execution, Clayton was tasered by prison guards because he would not listen. The prison guards found a self-inflicted cut on his arm, and brought him to the medical facility where he refused meals (NMANewsDirect). The time for Clayton’s execution came near and he was placed on the execution table. Individuals spent almost 50 minutes trying to find a viable vein in his arm, legs, feet and neck (NMANewsDirect). At 6:18 P.M., an IV was finally put into his groin, the sedative midazolam was administered, and Lockett was deemed conscious at 6:33 P.M. (NMANewsDirect). The second and third drug were administered through his IV and at 6:44 P.M. the executioners found that the vein had collapsed (NMANewsDirect). This caused the drugs to have either been leaked into his bloodstream, or absorbed into tissue. Following this unexpected occurrence, the Correction’s Department had to step in and make a decision quickly. The director of the Correction’s Department called off the execution at 6:56 P.M. because there were not enough drugs available to continue the procedure (NMANewsDirect). Clayton suffered from a heart attack and around 7:06 P.M. was pronounced dead (NMANewsDirect). 

Clayton Lockett suffered a cruel and unusual punishment. He suffered a heart attack because the executioners were not prepared for the mistakes that occurred. This procedure is unconstitutional because this individual was tortured. There are not enough drugs available to aid in a peaceful death because the drug companies are not willing to make and sell excessive amounts. Because of the scarce amount of drugs, individuals will continue to suffer these cruel and unusual punishments. Clayton Lockett was a perfect example. Individuals are sitting on the execution tables in pain, and sometimes even conscious of what is occurring around them but paralyzed and unable to speak or move. Lethal injections are taking longer than intended because they are not successful, and when the drugs fail, executioners hope for the best and pray that the individual will die on their own.  

Joseph Wood was convicted of shooting and murdering Debbie Dietz, 29, and her father, Gene Dietz, 55, at their auto repair shop in Tucson during the year 1989 (Press). On the day of his execution, during preparations, Wood looked around the death chamber and two IV’s were inserted into his arms (Press). About 10 minutes after the drugs were administered, Wood began to gasp for air (Press). His jaw dropped, chest expanded, and the gasps repeated every five to 12 seconds (Press). The administrator checked on the inmate, and turned on a microphone to inform the gallery that Wood was still sedated, despite the loud snoring noises (Press). As the episode continued to drag on, Wood’s lawyers quickly drew up an emergency legal appeal, asking the federal and state courts to stop the execution immediately (Press). About an hour and a half later, he took his final breath and was pronounced dead (Press). This individual is another example of someone who suffered cruel and unusual punishments. We are not certain as to what punishment he truly received, and that is the most horrifying part. We are unable to tell how much pain he endured, and what the gasps of air were truly representing. The prolong death and constant struggle is a flaw with lethal injections. The procedure is not perfect, and there are complications.  

The state of Florida attempted to execute inmate Bennie Demps, however, the procedure of lethal injection did not go as planned. Execution officials had a difficult time finding a viable vein. “‘He complained about the procedure and said that he bled profusely,’ said George Schaefer, attorney for Bennie Demps” (News). Witnesses saw Demps strapped down to the execution table and screaming, “They butchered me” (News). In a separate incident in Texas, execution, defense attorney Karen Zellars vividly recalls the lethal injection of her client Stephen McCoy (News). “He lurched forward, pulling the gurney up with him. It was so violent that news reporter behind me passed out cold on the floor” (News). These are two more examples of lethal injection procedures that had gone wrong. Individuals are suffering, unable to move, or speak.

Another flaw of lethal injections comes from the research conducted in April 2005. This research found that lethal injection is not as peaceful as individuals thought. “Post mortem findings indicate that levels of anesthetic found in offenders were consistent with wakefulness and the ability to experience pain” (“BBC-Ethics…”). A team of medical doctors conducted a study in the British medical journal, The Lancet, on 49 executed inmates (“Medical Journal…”). Of the 49 inmates, 43 inmates were given anesthetic administered during the procedure of lethal injection that was lower than that required for regular surgery (“Medical Journal…”). Toxicology reports revealed that post-mortem concentrations of thiopental in 21 inmates was consistent with awareness (“Medical Journal…”). This investigation found that the lethal injection guidelines for delivering the essential anesthesia drug, thiopental, are flawed and that some inmates might experience awareness and suffering during the execution (“Medical Journal…”). The study also found that no records were being kept regarding the administration of the anesthesia drug and the failure of keeping records, having the correct amount of anesthesia drug, and appropriate monitoring, might have been the reason for cruel and unusual suffering (“Medical Journal…”). 

Many states that are conducting capital punishment by lethal injections are not keeping records of the procedures. This is because the records are proof that this procedure is leading to too many cases that are cruel and unusual. Without these records, no one is held accountable for the amount of anesthetic that an inmate receives and the suffering that individual will have to endure. With the little amount of drugs available to executioners, they are able to make judgements on how little anesthetic the inmate may receive, and no one is there as a witness to protect the rights of that inmate. Executioners no longer care that the procedure causes suffering, and they will continue to inflict cruel and unusual punishments on inmates because no one is stopping them.  

Lethal injections are a common form of execution in the United States and we have protocols of what the injection must contain. A study conducted by Teresa Zimmers examines the protocol that was used until 2009 (Zimmers). This practice includes three types of drugs: an ultrashort-acting barbiturate, a neuromuscular blocker, and an electrolyte (Zimmers). The ultrashort-acting barbiturate, thiopental, acts as an anesthetic (Zimmers). The neuromuscular blocker, pancuronium bromide, causes muscle paralysis (Zimmers). And finally, the electrolyte, potassium chloride will stop the heart from beating (Zimmers). This combination of drugs was intended to produce anesthesia followed by death in a form of respiratory and cardiac arrest (Zimmers). However, this study shows that this combination of drugs does not work as sufficiently as intended. 

In this study by Teresa Zimmers, the information from two states that use the form of capital punishment by lethal injections, North Carolina and California, was looked at further. The execution outcomes from these two states prove that thiopental acts as an insufficient source of anesthesia during the duration of the execution and might not be fatal (Zimmers). Furthermore, outcomes from North Carolina and California prove that potassium chloride does not appropriately stimulate cardiac arrest (Zimmers). In conclusion of this study, if thiopental is not acting as a suitable from of anesthesia, then individuals are suffering more so than intended. No one is alive to tell us how painful the suffering may be, and therefore, this is an example as to how lethal injections are deemed cruel and unusual. Furthermore, if potassium chloride is not producing the intended form of cardiac arrest, individuals may be under distress of pancuronium-induced asphyxiation, also known as suffocation (Zimmers). Thus, this proves that these combinations of drugs that were used until 2009, were inflicting cruel and unusual punishments on individuals which is unconstitutional. 

Although this study showed proof of cruel and unusual punishments by suffocation, the study also brings an awareness to who is actually performing the executions. A claim is made in this study that the people who are giving the injections are individuals who are not in the professional medical field. Because of this, the way in which the injection is giving might be part of the reason for the botched results. A different study conducted by Deborah Denno is an extension of this idea. One case in particular that questions this claim of who is administering the drugs is the case of Michael Morales on February 14th, 2006 (Denno). 

The Michael Morales case was in the state of California and in order to conduct the lethal injection execution, “the state had to choose between two court-mandated options: provide qualified medical personal to ensure unconsciousness during procedure, or alter the department of corrections’ execution protocol and use only one kind of drug rather than the three drug combination” (Denno). The state made the decision to have medical professional perform the procedure and two anesthesiologists were found to perform the execution. However, the doctors were not fully aware of their role and backed out of the procedure hours before the execution was scheduled to take place. This particular case of Michael Morales caught the attention of one judge named Jeremy Fogel. This judge conducted a hearing and on December 15th, 2006, made a decision that the “protocol for California’s lethal injection “as implemented” violated the Eighth Amendment” (Denno). This study further solidifies the claim that the executions that were occurring in California were deemed unconstitutional because the procedures were inflicting cruel and unusual punishments. Taking a look at death penalty cases similar to this, will prove that this form of punishment is unconstitutional. 

With the help of the anesthesiologists, the execution of Michael Morales may have been successful and constitutional. Maybe with the help of the medical field, there would be less botched procedures with lethal injections. This means that less people would suffer from cruel and unusual punishments, therefore making lethal injections constitutional. However, the medical field does not allow professionals to intervene with such procedures because under the Hippocratic Oath, doctors are banned from administering fatal chemicals (News). Also, “in August 2006 the American Society of Anesthesiologists released a statement detailing the current status of lethal injection. In the statement, the president of the society encouraged anesthesiologists to ‘steer clear’ of participation” (“Lethal Injection…”). Therefore, the medical field will never be able to intervene and help the executioners, and procedures will continue to be cruel and unusual. A claim is brought into question about whether doctors and nurses believe helping executioners is wrong and goes against their profession, or whether doctors and nurses just follow the standards given by the American Medical Association, and without these standards, would feel differently about the medical field offering aid to the executioners. 

A study conducted by Neil Farber took this idea, and questioned the physicians to better understand their attitudes and opinions. This study asked eight physicians about how acceptable actions banned from the American Medical Association and four of these actions being lethal injections (Farber). The conclusion of this study showed that physicians did find acceptable circumstances in which to kill individuals against their wishes and perform the procedures disallowed by the American Medical Association (Farber). This study shows us that some physicians do not see the harm in lethal injections under certain circumstances and are supporting some ways of capital punishment. However, regardless of the personal attitudes of these physicians, if a procedure were to end up going wrong, the medical professional would have to intervene and provide medication or medical assistance if the inmate deemed to be conscious or in pain (Denno). 

The American Medical Association’s Code of Medical Ethics prohibits involvement of physicians in the executions, permitting only certification of death after someone else has already declared death (“Lethal Injection…”). Because the purpose of lethal injections is to kill and clearly harms an individual, physician participation is unethical (“Lethal Injection…”). “Even if not practicing medicine, physicians are bound by medical ethics when using medical knowledge and skills and therefore must not participate in executions, whether or not participation is deemed medical practice” (“Lethal Injection…”). Physicians who claim there are certain circumstances in which the medical field administering lethal injections is acceptable, hold an identity that is confidential. Many physicians are not open with this particular opinion because who would want a doctor that harms others when their main job is help individuals? The physicians are not willingly open with their views on lethal injection, and therefore, keep their name a mystery in order to protect their profession. Without the help from the medical field, the number of botched procedures will continue. The individuals who administer the drugs will not be professionals. The individuals receiving the drugs will continue to suffer and be inflicted with cruel and unusual punishments. And finally, capital punishment by lethal injections will remain unconstitutional.

In conclusion, lethal injections are not getting any better, and the procedure remains a mystery. Lethal injections will remain unconstitutional and it is a matter of time before another botched procedure occurs and is brought to the Supreme Court to be reviewed. We are sitting back and waiting for the worst case scenario to occur to an individual receiving lethal injection so that we can then officially claim this procedure to be unconstitutional. We are ignoring the rights even to everyone, guilty of a crime or not. If unknown pain and suffering, suffocation, and unintended heart attacks do not fall under the category of cruel and unusual punishments, then what does our government truly believe is cruel and unusual? What will it take for our government to see that lethal injection is indeed a cruel and unusual punishment? Well, the answer must be horrifying.   
