Skip to main content

Arizona execution renews debate over methods

PAUL ELIAS
Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A third execution by lethal injection has gone awry in six months, renewing debate over whether there is a foolproof way for the government to humanely kill condemned criminals, and whether it’s even worth looking for one.

Death penalty opponents say any killing is an unnecessarily cruel punishment. Proponents may favor the most humane execution method possible, but many reject the idea that a few minutes or hours of suffering by a criminal who caused great suffering to others should send government back to the drawing board.

Thirty years ago, states and the federal government gave little thought to the condemned inmates comfort. Most executioners used electric chairs, but death row inmates were also hanged, put to death in the gas chamber or faced a firing squad.

Mistakes occurred. Inmates appeared to suffer in the gas chamber. Electric chairs caught fire or malfunctioned and didn’t kill. So a growing number of law enforcement officials, legislators and advocates began searching for a foolproof, constitutional method for executions.

In 1977, an Oklahoma medical director appeared to have found a solution. Dr. Jay Chapman came up with a three-drug combination that promised to put the inmate to sleep before painlessly and quickly drifting off to death. Chapman’s formula replaced the state’s use of the electric chair.

Now, calls are mounting to scrap lethal injection, even by those who support capital punishment like Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He believes a completely humane method of execution isn’t possible and favors firing squads.

“If we as a society cannot stomach the splatter from an execution carried out by a firing squad, then we shouldn’t be carrying out executions at all,” Kozinski wrote Monday in support of carrying out Wood’s execution.

Chapman’s three-drug combination became the default execution method for the federal government and in every state — some three dozen — that has capital punishment. Lethal injection was embraced as the best possible way to execute and the apparent painless and swift death it caused were seen as attributes to counter lawsuits and protests that claimed capital punishment was cruel and unusual.

Since then, more than 1,200 inmates have been executed by lethal injection. The U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 ruled the method constitutional.

“Execution by lethal injection should be a humane way to die,” said Arthur Caplan, head of medical ethics at New York University’s Langone Medical Center. “But it isn’t.”

Caplan said that there hasn’t been any reported trouble with physicians who in some states can legally help people commit suicide. “So we know it can be done painlessly,” he said.

But medical ethicists and professional licensing boards for doctors and nurses forbid their participation in executions, which are carried out by lay workers who sometimes struggle with administering a lethal injection.

Further, pharmaceutical companies are refusing to ship prisons the three drugs necessary to mimic Chapman’s mixture. That has caused prison officials to scramble to find alternative drugs that may not kill as quickly. Anesthesiology experts say they’re not surprised that the two drugs Arizona used Wednesday took so long to kill Joseph Rudolph Wood.

So the lawsuits and protests persist. So do the problems.

On Wednesday, Wood gasped for air for 90 minutes and took about two hours to die after receiving an injection. An Ohio inmate gasped in similar fashion for nearly 30 minutes in January. An Oklahoma inmate died of a heart attack in April, minutes after prison officials halted his execution because the drugs weren’t being administered properly.

Previously, non-medical personnel had trouble delivering the lethal injection or had trouble finding veins on longtime drug abusers. When doctors were called in to assist, the American Medical Association objected that it was unethical for physicians to be directly involved in executions.

After questions over the amount of time it took for Wood to die, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer ordered a review of the state’s execution protocol. Governors in Ohio and Oklahoma have ordered similar reviews.

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Irvine law school and death penalty opponent, said he believes lethal injection is here to stay because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it constitutional in 2008 — and because the public would never stand for firing squads.

“It is far too gruesome,” Chemerinsky said.

However, a Utah lawmaker says he will introduce legislation next year to restart firing squads in that state. Utah eliminated firing squads in 2004, citing the excessive media attention it gave inmates. But those sentenced to death before 2004 can choose it, which is what condemned inmate Ronnie Lee Gardner did in 2010. Five police officers using .30-caliber Winchester rifles executed Gardner, the third inmate to die that way since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

The idea of using firing squads has come up in Wyoming, where an interim legislative committee has been looking at the issue this summer. A proposed bill to allow firing squads failed an introductory vote last winter in the state Legislature.

Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the pro-death penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in Sacramento, said that the lethal injection process can be fixed and he wants government to looking for an answer.

Regardless, he said it’s unclear whether Wood — and others who endured prolonged lethal injections– suffered any pain, which is more than his two victims could say.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris, a death penalty opponent who must decide whether to appeal a federal judge’s recent decision striking down California’s death penalty, was asked this week if a humane execution method is even possible.

“I honestly don’t know,” she said.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Don’t Settle for Student Loans to Pay for Online Education

Online college programs are becoming a more popular choice for prospective students, with one study finding that more than 6 million students enrolled in at least one online course in fall 2015. The popularity of these courses can be attributed in part to their flexibility with working adults' schedules, students' ability to progress more quickly through online programs and, oftentimes, cheaper tuition. [See 10 low-cost online bachelor's programs for out-of-state students.]Online degrees can be beneficial to many college students, but some studies have shown online learners complete their programs at lower rates than students at traditional brick-and-mortar campuses. Individuals with student loans but no degree comprise two-thirds of defaulted borrowers. Though these numbers are not encouraging, just like for traditional programs, there are ways to reduce how much you'll need to borrow for an online program to ensure you won't become one of these statistics. Don't just settle on borrowing student loans to cover the whole cost of your program and living expenses. Instead, start thinking about how to cut costs and cover your balance in different ways, such as the following. -- Grants and scholarships: Even though you are taking an online course, you can still apply and receive grants and scholarships. But your first step should be to complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, commonly referred to as the FAFSA, which will allow you to receive a Pell Grant if your expected family contribution is low enough. The EFC criteria and award amounts are adjusted annually, but the 2017-2018 academic year awards range from $606 to $5,920, which could significantly lower the amount you borrow annually. Your next step is to apply for scholarships. You can start by checking online scholarship search engines, such as the Salt Scholarship Search, College Board's BigFuture and Peterson's. But don't forget to take advantage of local organizations and your school's financial aid office. Both may offer scholarships that you can't find with a national scholarship search. [Review these 10 sites to kick off your scholarship search.]For instance, organizations like the Elks Club, Knights of Columbus or the Rotary Club typically offer scholarships annually to local students. Just because you're going to school online doesn't mean you're ineligible. Visit your local library for scholarship listings, and ask around town. You might be surprised how many local organizations offer scholarships. While these scholarships typically aren't large, every little bit counts. Each dollar you receive in a scholarship is a dollar you don't have to borrow and pay interest on. -- Work-study: Another option for online students may be work-study awards. Not all students enrolled in online programs are eligible, but students at some schools -- including, for example, SUNY Empire State College and Liberty University -- are. Work-study awards are not given upfront like scholarships and grants. In most cases, they are an offer to earn up to the awarded amount if you secure an eligible work-study job. While there is a misconception that all work-study jobs must be on campus, students can work for off-campus, nonprofit or public employers as long as the work is in the public's interest. You may be able to work for a for-profit employer if the job is relevant to your course of study. No matter who the outside employer is, it will need to have an established agreement with your college for you to receive work-study funds. Remember, to be eligible for federal financial aid, you must be enrolled and pursuing a degree or certificate. If you're not working toward a credential, Pell Grants and work-study won't be option, but you may still be able to take advantage of private scholarships -- just be sure to read the eligibility criteria carefully. [Explore what to know about financial aid in online programs.]-- Pay as you go: One of the great benefits to enrolling online is the flexible schedule, which can allow you to complete your college coursework around your responsibilities. But prospective students often overlook using their part- or full-time job earnings as an option for paying for college. Almost 80 percent of college students in 2015 worked at least part time while attending classes, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. By budgeting and thinking strategically about your college costs, you can likely reduce your dependence on student loans by paying a portion out of pocket. Many -- but not all -- online programs are less expensive than traditional programs and often have shorter payment periods. Six, eight or 10 weeks are common course durations. Because of the frequency of payments in an online setting, you may be well-placed to pay as you go and possibly avoid borrowing altogether. Attending college online and avoiding student loans may be challenging, but if you are willing to put in the effort, you can limit the amount you need to borrow. More from U.S. News Q&A: Understanding Student Loan Discharge Eligibility Student Loan Refinancing Isn't Right for All Borrowers
Read Next Story