A timely note about physician involvement in executions

In light of the Supreme Court's cert grant in the Baze lethal injection case (index here), a note in the August 2007 issue of the Georgetown Law Journal seems especially timely.  The note is entitled, "Second Opinion: Inconsistent Deference to Medical Ethics in Death Penalty Jurisprudence," and can be accessed at this link.  Here is a snippet from the introduction:

This Note illustrates the inconsistent judicial deference to medical ethics by focusing on two increasingly controversial roles physicians play in capital proceedings: their direct participation in the lethal injection process itself and their treatment of insane inmates to restore the condemned’s competency to be executed. Part I of this Note provides an overview of the medical community’s ethical proscription against physician involvement in executions and outlines some reasons why physicians nonetheless breach medical ethics by participating in executions.

Some related posts/readings about doctors and executions:

• Academic insights on the lethal injection scrummages
• The realities of a doctored execution
• Great HLR note on lethal injection litigation
• Reading on lethal injection protocols and the role of doctors in executions