THE CRUELTY OF LETHAL INJECTION

Julian Alemany

Before 2020, there had been a seventeenyear pause on federal executions (Balsamo). This brings into question why the federal government would want to reinstate executions. More importantly, is the method of lethal injection inhumane? There are several different opinions regarding the issue. One view is that the three-drug cocktail used is not a reliable method. If the process of lethal injection is doubted due to its efficiency in putting a person down, then it should not be used. While that side argues lethal injection should be changed, others would argue that lethal injection, while not pleasant to watch, is also not an inhumane method. Even after witnessing botched executions, these people have stood firm in their beliefs, which could either work for or against the argument of lethal injection. Trying to abolish the death penalty is a whole other debate and reasonably speaking would be a hard task to accomplish; however, setting laws for how executions should be carried out is realistically attainable. Lethal injection should be banned in the U.S. as it violates the Eighth Amendment’s “cruel and unusual punishment” clause.

Lethal injection is supposed to be a method that puts the inmate to death in a quick and painless manner; however, its reliability to do so is in question. If the dependency of the method wavers, so does the humanity of the inmate. In the article “New Rule Could Allow Gas, Firing Squads For US Executions,” reporter Michael Balsamo states, “As lethal injection drugs become difficult to obtain, some states have begun looking at alternative methods for carrying out death sentences.”

Since the drugs used for the lethal cocktail are becoming more scarce, new chemicals will have to be tried. The problem with this is that the inmates will essentially become lab rats when performing the executions for the first couple of times. This could lead to botched executions and increased suffering for the inmate. By switching to a different method, the variables that would have to be accounted for would be reduced.

While other options seem outdated, inmates in Tennessee have been choosing to be executed by the chair instead of the shot. If the lethal injection was quick and painless, then it would be a no-brainer to choose that option; however, it is not that clear cut. Dr. Joel B. Zivot, an associate professor of anesthesiology and surgery at Emory University, explained the controversy of the sedative, midazolam, used in the drug cocktail. While the drug is supposed to induce unconsciousness and numb the inmate so they do not feel pain, Dr. Zivot says that does not exactly happen. In fact, he stated, “the drugs can cause their lungs to fill with fluid, asphyxiating them, and making them feel like they are burning” (Rojas). Since midazolam is the first drug administered, the inmate would have to endure the pain of the other two drugs while still being tormented from the initial injection. When an expert says that a drug is actually torturing a person, an inmate would be wise to pick another means for execution. After all, they would not want to experience something that is cruel and breaks the Eighth Amendment.

After learning what happens at the anatomic level, a vivid picture can be painted in the mind, which one would most definitely not want to witness. Despite this, many still have to watch while the inmate suffers. In Oklahoma, there was a case of a man who was yet another victim of a botched execution by lethal injection. Sean Murphy, an Associated Press reporter who had to watch the execution, reported that the inmate “had convulsed about two dozen times after being administered a sedative, the first of three drugs used in the execution.” Murphy then went on to state that “before the other drugs were administered, the doctor entered the execution chamber to wipe vomit from the face of Mr. Grant, who was strapped to a gurney” (Bogel-Burroughs). Without knowing that the person being administered the injection was basically drowning on the inside, one could argue that convulsion would only be natural as the body is shutting down. However, with the person basically imploding from the inside, they are forced to endure an extended amount of time which contradicts the reasoning of using lethal injection. By imposing lethal injection, inmates are being stripped of their humanity, and the experience that Murphy witnessed is only one of many.

It is apparent that lethal injection is not what many assumed it to be, but many do not know the alternatives. As mentioned earlier, inmates in Tennessee have been opting for the electric chair. By using the electric chair, the variables would be more consistent, and the inmates would undergo “Two cycles of 1,750 volts of electricity” (Rojas). When given the choice between a couple of minutes of electricity or possible hours of waiting for a drug to kill, one would probably want the quick route out. In addition, if the electrocution is botched, the inmate can be executed quickly by applying another cycle. Meanwhile, the same cannot be said about lethal injection as inmates may have to rest on the table for hours until they are officially pronounced dead. When taking into account what Dr. Zivot stated earlier, the inmate would not be in a peaceful, unconscious state for those hours they are spending on the table either. While the alternatives to lethal injection seem barbaric, they are getting the job done in a way that does not violate the Constitution.

While people should be served justice, execution is not the answer and only complicates the entire situation. A warden who executes a murderer is also one himself. He is no better or more righteous just because he did it in the name of justice. Since dealing with the entire topic of the death penalty is too much, narrowing it down to how it is carried out is a much better way to discuss it. It is important to discuss if lethal injection is unconstitutional or not because, even though it is a small portion of our justice system, it speaks volumes about how it is run. Some may not care about this because the inmate is someone who has killed another person, but the way the Constitution was written, they still have their rights, and they need to be respected. By correcting the way the death penalty is fulfilled, the integrity and sanity of the executioners will remain, as well as a more humane ending for the inmates.

Works Cited

Balsamo, Michael. “New Rule Could Allow Gas, Firing Squads for US Executions.” AP NEWS, Associated Press, 27 Nov. 2020, https://apnews.com/article/international-newsexecutions-cc1b22bda846df0b331597a3b65010bb.

Bogel-Burroughs, Nicholas. “Facing Questions, Oklahoma Vows to Keep Lethal Injection:

[National Desk].” New York Times, 30 Oct 2021. ProQuest, https://ezproxy.scottsdalecc.edu/login?url=https://www. proquest.com/newspapers/facing-questions-oklahoma-vowskeep-lethal/docview/2588185447/se-2?accountid=227.

Rojas, Rick. “Fearing Lethal Injection, Inmates in Tennessee Opt for the Electric Chair:

[National Desk].” New York Times, 20 Feb 2020. ProQuest, https://ezproxy.scottsdalecc.edu/login?url=https://www. proquest.com/newspapers/fearing-lethal-injection-inmatestennessee-opt/docview/2358204265/se-2?accountid=227.