The state of Washington executed a convicted murderer last week.
I am, perhaps, an unusual liberal in that I am a firm believer in execution. There are some people who, by their actions, have simply given up their right to live in a civilized society. And regardless of the circumstances that exist in some U.S. prisons, even prisons represent civilized society…. or at least an outgrowth thereof.

Doesn’t matter. I’m not here to debate prison conditions or even executions. Executions happen, they’re gonna happen, and they’re constitutionally mandated to not be “cruel and unusual”.

And that’s the question. See, Washington state executed our killer with a new single drug lethal injection, this being the replacement for a three drug cocktail that has recently come under fire as possibly causing suffering in the condemned. The three drug protocol called first for an injection of sodium thiopental. Pentothal is an anesthetic drug, still in use in some veterinary hospitals, even teaching hospitals. I don’t know if it’s still in common use in human anesthesia, but regardless…. An anesthetic injection to cause unconsciousness in the condemned who is then injected with pancuronium, a respiratory paralytic agent, then potassium chloride to stop the heart. Provided that the pentothal does its job, the condemned shouldn’t even notice the respiratory paralysis, let alone the cardiac arrest.
The single drug protocol is a massive overdose of thiopental. Anesthesia, then respiratory, then cardiac arrest. This too has come under scrutiny as having the potential to cause suffering in the condemned.

The American Veterinary Medical Association recognizes several different methods of humane slaughter and euthanasia.
Cattle and other large animals are stunned with a captive bolt to the head –they’re not shot, they’re knocked cold– then the throat is cut and the animal exsanguinates without regaining consciousness.
Chickens and turkeys are electrically stunned before their throats are cut.
Pets are injected with an overdose of sodium pentobarbital. Pentobarbital is used to control severe seizures and for euthanasia.
Horses are often shot in the head, but more often these days they are euthanized with pentobarbital.
Lab animals are usually euthanized in carbon dioxide chambers, or decapitated, or undergo “cervical dislocation” — their necks are broken.

All methods tested, debated, and found to be “humane” (debate as you will, I think carbon dioxide chambers are fairly gruesome myself).
But pentobarbital?
Thousands. Hundreds of thousands of pet animals are euthanized every single year with pentobarbital. I probably do more than a hundred per year myself. There have been days when I’ve euthanized more than ten patients in a twelve hour shift. You place an IV catheter, you give your patient a hefty dose of sedative, you inject the pentobarbital and most of them are dead before the injection is finished. It’s quiet, it’s peaceful, it’s quick, and, I hesitate to say it, it’s easy. Granted I’ve had some patients who require more drug than I’d expected or planned fore. Granted I’ve had some patients who haven’t had good veins AT ALL and who have required injections into the peritoneal cavity. It’s not a more painful way to go, it just takes a little bit longer.

I’m not recommending that the US justice system return to executing condemned prisoners by, say, tying them to a stake and leaving them to drown. I’m not even saying that they should be knocked on the head and their throats slit (although if it’s humane slaughter for cattle, why shouldn’t it be humane execution for people?), but for heaven’s sake, if the justice system wants a model for suffering free execution I can think of a few (hundred) thousand examples.
The reason pentobarbital can’t be used for human executions? It’s not labeled for use in humans. Technically the product we use isn’t even labeled for use in species other than dogs and horses, but that’s beyond the point. The FDA can’t license pentobarbital for use in human executions because it can’t be tested for human executions and found to be not “cruel and unusual” because the test subjects, well, would DIE.

Isn’t that weird? A product that we humans use, that we tout as humane euthanasia for thousands upon thousands of animals every year, can’t be used in executing humans because we can’t prove that it’s not inhumane.

Maybe I’m naive, maybe I can’t see the slippery slope that this would uncover. Maybe the lawyers, and the legal system, and the civil liberties folks (note that I am a supporter of the ACLU) can see something that I cannot, but if there’s question about whether or not an execution protocol is cruel and unusual, why can’t we look to what we find acceptable for animals and apply that to people? Under the circumstances I think applying a different standard, i.e. using a drug that the FDA hasn’t licensed for use in humans but that has been proven to provide a quick and painless death for animals, to condemned prisoners might not be the worst thing in the world.