Discussion Repurposing executioners for voluntary euthanasia (assisted suicide)

[TAW122]

In countries that have the death penalty (especially the US), the executioner carries out the death sentence on the day that the death row inmate is to be executed. However, I have an interesting idea since (at least in various parts of the world) executioners would have to have thick skin and a steel heart in order to perform their duties, which means they are more or less, accustomed to 'death' as they administer said punishment to the death row inmates.

Also, given the fact that most medical professionals (doctors, nurses, physicians) have taken the Hippocratic Oath as well as their overseeing organization not allowing them to carry out the act (even if the state has delivered the death row inmate the death sentence), they would not only be against partaking in executions, but also against the practice in general. This is because they would have ethical dilemmas about just assisting patients in self-deliverance, including only supplying the drug the patient for the patient to self-administer it. Whether one argues about delivering 'death' versus prolonging life in accordance to the "do NO harm" phrase in the Hippocratic Oath is another discussion and debate for another thread.

Therefore, my idea is that if voluntary euthanasia ever becomes legal and since medical professionals will not be undertaking such a position or job, then perhaps repurposing state executioners who execute the condemned convicts on death row, into people who administer and/or aid patients (actively or passively) in self-deliverance and having a dignified death would bring many benefits. Of course, each executioner would need to pass stability tests, be carefully vetted (to ensure they don't act unethically or unlawfully), and of course, go through extensive training in administering certain methods and/or providing the patient the method (N, inert gas, SN, etc.).

Considering that the US and various countries around the world have a 'for-profit' healthcare system, I believe that if they are able to somehow find a way to capitalize and/or allowing death for each willing patient (after the patient goes through a careful screening to eliminate any chance of coercion, pressure, and ensure that the patient is choosing it 100% from their own volition, then allowing a waiting period in the event that the patient changes his/her own mind).

The benefits would include economic boon in a new industry, creating new jobs for screeners/vetters of the process, technicians to prepare the method, and executioners to carry it out (the technicians could also double as executioners but that's another discussion). As for the benefits of the patient and the world itself, it would greatly reduce suffering as people have the choice to leave this world on their own terms so they are LESS likely to resort to gruesome and violent methods, potentially causing collateral damage (unwilling participants or bystanders around), having a mess that first responders have to respond to and clean up, and more. For society as a whole, it would be less damaging and overall quality of life would increase as the people who want to be around will stay around, the people who WANT help will be more likely to get help, the people who just want out, would go in a peaceful manner and thus less resources used to treat or help someone who doesn't want it to begin with.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[BipolarGuy]

The oath taken by doctors etc would presumably change if assisted suicide were made legal.
In fact assisted suicide doesn't necessarily go against the oath.

I don't understand what skills executioners have that would require them to be 'repurposed' rather than other qualified doctors or nurses doing the job.
Let me put it another way; does Dignitas employ people who were previously executioners?

 

[Good4Nothing]

I haven't read your whole post yet, but the title immediately conjured an image in my mind of a shirtless hairy dude in a black hood with a giant axe.

 

[TAW122]

The oath taken by doctors etc would presumably change if assisted suicide were made legal.
In fact assisted suicide doesn't necessarily go against the oath.

I don't understand what skills executioners have that would require them to be 'repurposed' rather than other qualified doctors or nurses doing the job.
Let me put it another way; does Dignitas employ people who were previously executioners?

Hmm, that may be true assuming that the oath is 'changed' when the law with respect to euthanasia and assisted suicide were changed as well. On the other point, I do agree with you, it's just that a large part of the medical community is still gray on it, with more still viewing "do no harm" as an absolute which means even a dignified "death" is still considered a harm. To answer the other question, they would need to know how to administer an syringe, an IV, or providing the drug to the patient. I guess you could consider them like another class of doctors, nurses, but then again it's a matter of technicality of professions and titles. Finally as for Dignitas, I don't know, but I assume they may or may not have taken doctors from the US (I could be wrong though), and that doctors and medical professionals in the world (outside of the US) especially in Europe are more open with euthanasia laws and assisted suicide being an option.

I haven't read your whole post yet, but the title immediately conjured an image in my mind of a shirtless hairy dude in a black hood with a giant axe.

I think you may be referring to the Middle Ages and/or the earlier periods of human history where there is an executioner that executes the condemned in public.