At 17:45 11-1-02 -0600, Ronn Blankenship wrote: >>Principle 5 of the UN Principles of Medical Ethics: >> >>It is a contravention of medical ethics for health personnel, >>particularly physicians, to participate in any procedure for restraining >>a prisoner or detainee unless such a procedure is determined in >>accordance with purely medical criteria as being necessary for the >>protection of the physical or mental health or the safety of the prisoner >>or detainee himself, of his fellow prisoners or detainees, or of his >>guardians, and presents no hazard to his physical or mental health. > > > >Given the history of Al Queda/Taliban members, and the suicidal behavior >others have demonstrated, it would seem to meet the criteria of "the >protection of the physical � health or the safety of the prisoner or >detainee himself, of his fellow prisoners or detainees, or of his guardians."
The Principle also says "in accordance with purely medical criteria". Which purely medical criteria would you find applicable here? Given that they were restrained in such a way that they could not even move their limbs, it is highly unlikely they would even be able to make an escape attempt, let alone pose a risk to the physical health of their guards. I do not believe that "they might try to escape" is a valid reason for sedating a prisoner. That would allow law enforcement officers to sedate any criminal. Let's say a serial killer is to be transported to the Court House for his trial. He is likely to be sentenced to death, so it would be make sense for him to try and escape -- and if necessary use violence in the attempt. Are those criminals sedated before transport? Jeroen _________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com Tom's Photo Gallery: http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com
