On January 18, 2007, the North Carolina Medical Board (NCMB) issued a Position Statement to express their views regarding the participation of North Carolina's licensed physicians in executions. NCMB stated their belief that any physician participation in capital punishment was a violation of medical ethics. However, because NCMB recognized that North Carolina law (specifically N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15-190) required the presence of "the surgeon or physician of the penitentiary" during the execution of condemned inmates, they would not discipline licensees for "merely being present during an execution" in conformity with the statute. The NCMB then stated, however, that "any physician who engages in any verbal or physical activity, beyond the requirements" of the state law, and any physician that "facilitates the execution" would be "subject to disciplinary action." The Statement specifies that forbidden physician participation would include prescribing or administering tranquilizers and other psychotropic agents and medications, monitoring vital signs in any way, attending or observing the execution as a physician, rendering of technical advice regarding the execution, selecting injection sites, starting intravenous lines as a port for a lethal injection device, prescribing, preparing, administering, or supervising injection drugs or their doses or types, inspecting, testing, or maintaining lethal injection devices, and consulting with or supervising lethal injection personnel.

One week later, two death-sentenced prisoners filed this lawsuit under state law against the State of North Carolina in the Wake County Superior Court. The prisoners contended that the absence of a physician's participation in their execution would subject them to an unconstitutionally high risk of pain and suffering, which would violate their right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.

The court held a hearing, wherein the State announced they had elected to comply with the Medical Board's decision and no longer have physician participation in the execution process. They stated that they intended to have a physician present, but that the physician would not supervise or participate in any way, and they argued that the Warden could carry out a fully constitutional execution through the use of a staff of trained medical personnel that does not include a physician.

After the hearing, the court issued a preliminary injunction preventing the State from conducting any execution until the Governor and other top executive-branch officials had determined whether a physician was required to participate in the execution process.

The North Carolina Department of Correction then sought the approval of its proposed Execution Protocol by the Council of State. However, in an order issued on August 9, 2007, Administrative Law Judge Fred Morrison ordered the Council of the State to reconsider its approval of the Execution Protocol.

Kristen Sagar - 09/10/2007
Anna Dimon - 04/23/2015


compress summary