Death Row inmates less than human?

[Aidensmom]

I will admit, this question was inspired by tonight's episode of House.

Are death row inmates worthless human beings? If they did 1 bad thing, and lots of good things, does the bad thing make everything else insignificant?

On tonights episode, a death row inmate was dying, and a court order was recieved for him to be admitted to a hospital until he was "healthy" and then he would be returned to death row. Most of the characters on the show thought it was a waste of time to be treating him?

What do you think?

Would it make a difference if it ended up being tumor related-medical problems that caused his rage?

 

[Tiggeroo]

We need to be humane. That to me would be making sure a person remains pain free and able to make informed decisions.

 

[luvthatduke]

We need to be humane. That to me would be making sure a person remains pain free and able to make informed decisions.

Tiggeroo, you said what I wanted to.
I also am concerned about the family members,
particuarly the spouses and children of the prisoners.
I also think about the innocent, but that's a whole other can of worms
(and FWIW I am a supporter of the death penalty,
but I struggle with our judicial system).

This brings to mind the case from last year, I think,
where a judge refused a death row inmate's request to donate his organs.
I don't know the history of the case, but my gut reaction was, why??
Why would the judge disallow something like that?
I know, off topic, but it made me think about it.

 

[mrFDNY]

i took a vow to protect life any life.reguardless of any of thier beliefes,even if they differed from mine.i could care less of any ones religion,sexualy preference,disabiltiy,color,gender,and anything else you could think of in their time of need.if someone needs help i will do it and get the job done.i help humans,all are human too me(and some pet's too)

if your huge snake is stuck on the 5 th floor of a rageing house fire.he's on his own i'm terrified of snakes.

 

[Tjaleks]

We have a case locally that is getting ready to go to trail for a mother and her boyfriend (seperate trials) for driving their car down a boat ramp with her 3 kids in it. The car was only in about 6-8 feet of water, but both claim they couldn't get the kids out and the car just rolled into the lake. However, ppl passing by were able to get into the car with no trouble, but they were too late. 3 babie under 6 all dead because of some very selfish individuals that only thought of their own needs. Hell, if she didn't want the children their father sure as hell did. I have a real hard time with this question. Personally, I think there is a special place in hell for these types of ppl and we need to help them get there a bit faster. Yes, we need to offer them appeals and take all evidence into account, (such as a medical condition). However, the practical side of me says we should just lock them up throw away the key for two reasons. 1. They do NOT get an automatic appeal if sentenced to life in prison. 2. It cost us law abiding tax payers a hell of a lot less money. ( however, on the flip side it is costing us an arm and a leg for the medical care because of the rampant AIDS and other ailments prisoners are suffering from.)

However, my heart usually beats out my head on somethings, so we shouldn't cure them to fry them.

 

[Tjaleks]

This brings to mind the case from last year, I think,
where a judge refused a death row inmate's request to donate his organs.
I don't know the history of the case, but my gut reaction was, why??
Why would the judge disallow something like that?
I know, off topic, but it made me think about it.

I think it was in TX and the prisoner wanted to donate his kidneys to his sister who was in kidney failure. I do agree you there was no reason he shouldn't have been able to donate when he was a perfect match.

 

['Canes Fan]

if it was bad enough to put them on death row, you bet.

 

[Aidensmom]

I personally don't support the death penalty. I would rather pay for 100 guilty people to be left alive than to have 1 innocent person killed.

If anyone watched the show, I agree completely with what House did. He did a lot of work to find out what was wrong with the inmate and treated him. Another doctor, who earlier did not see the need for treatment, decided to testify at his appeal because it ended up he had a tumor which caused his rages.

My religious beliefs come into play into what I believe here, but I believe justice is the Lord's, and what someone has coming to them will happen, but it is not up to me to make that decision. I also know that God will forgive anyone for anything, and so I feel that I should too. I feel that all humans are still human and should be treated the same, regardless of the bad things they may have done. If a death row inmate needs medical treatment, he should be treated the same as the most upstanding citizen you can find.

 

[powellrj]

It was in Indiana. The reason they didn't grant the request was because the victims daughter was against it. I'm not sure I agree with the courts on it, but it was a huge story when it was happening. The daughter felt it wasn't fair to her mothers memory.

 

[Tjaleks]

Thanks for the clarification.

 

['Canes Fan]

I feel that all humans are still human and should be treated the same, regardless of the bad things they may have done. I

taking a cue from recently here in florida.... I kidnap and sexually abuse a 10 year old girl over a course of time keeping her alive and hidden in a closet. then I wrap her in a garbage bag and bury her alive. the investigators find her hand prying through the plastic. oh yeah, I admit I was whacked out on Meth the entire time and admit to the crime.

RIP Jessica Lunsford.

yeah, let him live.

 

[KrnB]

It was in Indiana. The reason they didn't grant the request was because the victims daughter was against it. I'm not sure I agree with the courts on it, but it was a huge story when it was happening. The daughter felt it wasn't fair to her mothers memory.

Funny, the first thing I thought when I read the earlier post was that this was probably the most worthwhile thing this killer would have ever done - saving someone else's life. It wouldn't have brought the victim back, of course, and it wouldn't atone his sins, but nothing would truly do either of those.

Going back to the OP, I thought it was a really interesting show tonight. I basically read it as House saying that it wasn't a doctor's right to decide how he would die as the courts had decided that for him. His job was to get him healthy so the state could carry out the sentence. I like that House's own opinion on whether the state had the right to decide death either was left out, as it didn't matter. It wasn't the point of the show.

I also really liked his point regarding the amount of medical care that "should" be given to someone based on what they had done wrong - where does the line get drawn and who judges that?

Now as far as punishment for degrees of crime, that's an entirely different story, where monsters deserve to be punished as such - albeit humanely, since our Constitution and laws dictate that, even if the victims weren't treated that way.

 

[N.Bailey]

I personally don't support the death penalty. I would rather pay for 100 guilty people to be left alive than to have 1 innocent person killed.

Inmates who are on Death Row are actually much more costly for their state. The appeals process itself is very expensive, and you're housing them for upward to 20 years before they are finally executed and that's IF they ever are. We know not many are in California and a few other states. With the added expense of the appeals process, it is MUCH more costly for a state if an inmate is on Death Row than it is for an inmate who received a life sentence (without parole).

Having said that, I fully support the death penalty anytime that premeditation can be established. I think by not enforcing it, we are actually devaluing human life. I just wish they could speed the appeals process up by about 10 years or so. I don't understand why there aren't more appellant attorney's. The death penalty is for punishment and punishment only. It's not about revenge at all and revenge should play no part in it whatsoever. So IMO, it would be vengeful to withhold medical attention from anyone on death row prior to their date of execution.

 

['Canes Fan]

My religious beliefs come into play into what I believe here, but I believe justice is the Lord's,

and that is what kills normal thinking.

 

['Canes Fan]

there aren't enough appellant attorney's because our tax dollars over-saturate defense counsel representing murderers who have cried guilty until they get to formulate wrongful admission.

there's no defense for the victims anymore. it's all letigious wrongful prosecution.

 

[N.Bailey]

[QUOTE='Canes Fan]and that is what kills normal thinking.[/QUOTE]

I really don't set out to change anyone's opinion on the DP. We all have to live with our own beliefs and values.

I"m not sure if you're aware of it or not, but did you know that Sharon Tate's mother (Manson murders) was totally against the DP and really rallied against it at one time? When her daughter was pretty much bludgeoned to death, she instantly changed her views in favor of the DP. Now, I'm certainly not knocking her at all, but do find it hypocritical when people are against it for everyone else, but when it effects them personally, they change their views. In her situation, I would have done exactly the same thing but I too would have been just as hypocritical. Until it hits home for many us, we simply fail to see the significance of it all.

I think at times, we should think about the person we love most in this world. How would we feel if God forbid, someone took them from us in such a horrible fashion? Would we still feel that person shouldn't be put to death? I give kudos to the people who can say yes. I'm just not among them. After answering that question as honestly as we can, we should remember that the person who was murdered probably meant everything to someone.

I just have very little pity for anyone who could purposely choose to end another person's life for whatever their selfish motive was.

 

[luvthatduke]

It was in Indiana. The reason they didn't grant the request was because the victims daughter was against it. I'm not sure I agree with the courts on it, but it was a huge story when it was happening. The daughter felt it wasn't fair to her mothers memory.

Thanks, that jogged my memory.

 

[Miss Jasmine]

House also brought up a good point about the "slippery slope". If we don't treat a death row patient, do we treat a child molestor? What about someone his abuses his or her spouse? When would it be okay to treat people? What is the cutoff? If one group of people are designated for non-treatment, I feel it is much easier to through other groups under that umbrella. It is not up to a doctor to play with the law, it is a doctor's duty to treat, no matter what a person has done.

And yes in the end, the only true Judge will be God.

 

[DawnCt1]

This brings to mind the case from last year, I think,
where a judge refused a death row inmate's request to donate his organs.
I don't know the history of the case, but my gut reaction was, why??
Why would the judge disallow something like that?
I know, off topic, but it made me think about it.

I believe it was his liver. He would certainly die without a liver and even though he was on death row, and scheduled to die, the physicians removing his liver would have been directly responsible for his demise, not the state, and should he receive a last minute reprive, for what ever reason, he would not be able to live to accept the reprive or the remote possibility of a commutation. Many people live with one kidney, so I don't think it was his kidney.

 

[DawnCt1]

There are some European countries that do not dialyse patients after a certain age. There are countries that withhold life saving treatment beyond a certain age, and there are other countries where it may take as long as a year to obtain hip replacement surgery, thus potentially condemnin an elderly person to the rest of their life in a wheel chair or possible death.