Of course, by attempting to correct one problem, our legislators created another

Of course, by attempting to correct one problem, our legislators created another. Suppose a doctor is "watching" an execution, and sees something gone real wrong; he cannot convey this to the executioner, so hid standing there twiddling his thumbs has no meaning. Is the doctor obliged to jump in, either in attempt to "resuscitate" the inmate, and by doing so establishes a doctor-patient relationship -- good Samaritan situation, or does he now break his oath and "does harm"?

Or if s/he does nothing, his/her being present has no real purpose. I question whether a doctor seeing his patient the first (and last) time can detect the pain of potassium chloride "burning" up his endothelium, or the meanderings of the dying process, which makes the law still more ridiculous.

Even the vets frown on using the cocktail on our faithful pets as being too painful for them; surely a man or woman deserves better not worse.

The whole procedure was conceived badly, and as we have seen, has gotten worse. If there must be a death penalty, use a guillotine; as far as we know, there is no pain, and the job is done in less than 1/4 second, and it is awfully hard to botch, even for a Goon.

G M<>
Charlotte NC USA