Assignment example

Healing versus Execution The issue of death penalty, as well as any other measure of punishment, was always an issue of controversial views on its execution; any punishment committed by law is covered by intense responsibility – both legitimate and moral. The case of Charles Laverne Singleton rises severe doubts regarding what would be right regarding his punishment. Charles Laverne Singleton conducted felony capital murder. He became insane while in jail. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decided that the State of Arkansas could make Singleton to have anti-psychotic medications to make him sufficiently sane to execute. The executive director of New Yorkers Against the Death Penalty David Kaczynski claimed that medicine is supposed to heal people; it is not sets as its purpose to heal them in order to kill. There appears to be a strong controversy. One point is that he conducted a crime and deserves death penalty. Another point is that he is not sane to be executed. Thus, Singleton has to bear the responsibility for own actions. The goals of court and medicine appear to be in a conflict regarding this issue. There are three main possible outcomes: he is being cured and killed; he is insane and would not be executed; he remains insane but still he is being executed – without conscious perception, just murdered like an animal.
Each argument has its sense. Supporting the first variant, I cannot accept the second one. If a person conducted a crime, he has to face the consequences. If he is already a death row prisoner, no reason could be strong enough to change the decision. Another aspect is that he has to be conscious enough to realize the weight of the crime he conducted. Just eliminating him may help society, yet such extent of punishment has no conscious and moral element.
There is a probable claim that medications and efforts of doctors are applied not properly. Doctors spend their time, drugs are bought and used for accomplishing a short-turn goal – to heal to execute immediately. It all may happen the same time when people are ill and suffering, they may have no money to buy medications; while the government spends money and medicine for those who will be executed shortly. It is a kind of waste of resources. If there is a person, who is dangerous and destructive, he or she has to be isolated; murder is a reason for death penalty. There are objections to such measure of punishment and debates are still held. Anyhow, doctors and medicines have to be used for healing people. Medicine values reject healing for killing.
I would meet the previous claim of simple elimination of the murderer in order not to waste time and drugs on those who will be disposed soon by the statement that people still have human nature. They cannot be killed like pigs. They have to be aware of what they have done and face death as an inevitable consequence of own deeds. Even in the end of life there is a tiny chance of repentance and understanding of own guilt.
References
Kaczynski, D. (2011). The Directors Corner. NYADP Journal, Vol 1. Retrieved from www. nyadp. org