The North Carolina Supreme Court heard argu­ments on November 18 on whether the state’s Medical Board can sanc­tion doc­tors who par­tic­i­pate in an exe­cu­tion. The Board for­bids physi­cian par­tic­i­pa­tion in exe­cu­ti­ions as a vio­la­tion of the med­ical code of ethics. At the same time, North Carolina’s death penal­ty statute requires a physician’s pres­ence at all exe­cu­tions.

A Wake County judge ruled last year that the Medical Board had over­stepped its author­i­ty and the state law took prece­dence, a deci­sion that the Board then appealed. The debate in the state’s Supreme Court cen­tered on the prop­er def­i­n­i­tion of ​“present” as it is used in the law and to accu­rate­ly define what doc­tors had been doing at the state’s exe­cu­tions for the last hun­dred years.

​“What does the word ​‘present’ mean? That’s real­ly what this case turns on,” said Todd Brosius, an attor­ney for the Medical Board. ​“This is a word we under­stand as ele­men­tary school chil­dren. When the teacher calls out your name at roll and you say, ​‘Present,’ it means that you’re there. It does­n’t have any impli­ca­tion as to what you’re doing.“

Justice Edward Thomas Brady chal­lenged the Board’s rea­son­ing, argu­ing that some dic­tio­nar­ies define ​“present” as being ​“active­ly involved.” He con­tin­ued, ​“A physi­cian has edu­ca­tion, train­ing and expe­ri­ence. If he’s just stand­ing there or sit­ting there like a pot­ted plant, what’s the pur­pose of that?” Brady asked, ​“If a con­demned inmate is suf­fer­ing and becomes con­scious and is con­vuls­ing … the doc­tor should just stand there?“

The hear­ing end­ed with Justice Patricia Timmons-Goodson sug­gest­ing that the court refer the mat­ter back to state law­mak­ers to resolve the ques­tion of doc­tors’ roles in exe­cu­tions. ​“This court and oth­er courts are always tak­en to task for leg­is­lat­ing. Why should­n’t we just send this right on over (to the General Assembly) where it belongs?” Timmons-Goodson said.

A rul­ing is not expect­ed for a few months, and exe­cu­tions will like­ly remain on hold as the court con­sid­ers the case.

(M. Burns, ​“Death penal­ty debate goes before NC Supreme Court,” WRAL News, November 18, 2008). See also Executions and Lethal Injection.

Citation Guide