One of the big stories on Fox News yesterday was that Kentucky's Governor, Ernie Fletcher, a doctor, was under fire for supposedly violating the Hippocratic Oath by signing the death warrant for convicted murderer Thomas Bowling. In 1990, Bowling was convicted of murdering a couple and shooting their 2-year old son.

Predictably, organizations like Kentucky's Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty are quick to claim that Fletcher's status as a doctor prohibits him from signing Bowling's death warrant. According to the group, this part of the AMA Code of Ethics forbids the Governor's actions:

An individual’s opinion on capital punishment is the personal moral decision of the individual. A physician, as a member of a profession dedicated to preserving life when there is hope of doing so, should not be a participant in a legally authorized execution. Physician participation in execution is defined generally as actions which would fall into one or more of the following categories: (1) an action which would directly cause the death of the condemned; (2) an action which would assist, supervise, or contribute to the ability of another individual to directly cause the death of the condemned; (3) an action which could automatically cause an execution to be carried out on a condemned prisoner.

I read this as meaning that physicians shouldn't, for example, actually adminster the drugs for those being executed by lethal injection. The broad interpretation that the anti-death penalty groups take has some pretty far reaching consequences. Does this mean, for example, that doctors on the jury of a death penalty case cannot recommend that penalty to a judge? Does it mean that doctors cannot vote for political candidates who support the death penalty. Or (and this is a big one), think about this example. A psychiatrist is called for their expert testimony in a potential capital punishment case. According to that interpretation of the AMA Code of Ethics, that pyschiatrist is required to testify under oath, whether true or not, that the criminal is insane, because doing otherwise would clearly "assist, supervise, or contribute to the ability of another individual to directly cause the death of the condemned".

Are doctors such a special group that we, as fellow citizens, will allow them to circumvent our laws? If so, how in the world can we trust them to participate in our democracy? Maybe doctors shouldn't be allowed to be on juries, hold office or vote. I mean really, back when JFK was running for office people were worried that he'd put the Pope ahead of America. And, more recently, people worry about Bush's religion. Why shouldn't we worry about doctors? It certainly seems like some people think they should place Hippocrates ahead of their obligations as Americans.

Obviously this is all a bunch of nonsense. However, the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure is going to have a hearing on whether to punish the Governor. Doesn't the Board have something better to do? I don't understand all of this effort to save convicted murderers at the expense of those just trying to do their jobs.

Don't get me wrong, people certainly have a right to oppose the death penalty. But they can, and should, continue to do so through our existing political system, not by trying to ruin the lives of the innocent.