WPLN News30%

Doctors shouldn’t serve as executioners, Tennessee physicians say 14%

By Catherine Sweeney24%

7/28/2026, 7:07:19 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7% saturation with 58 hits. Analysis detected 639 faulty-reasoning hits from 827 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 25.5% and a BS Rank of 14% (22,395 of 26,005 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 86.10% of the article peer group.

Yet another group is calling for a death penalty moratorium after the failed execution of Tony Carruthers in May. 
This time, it’s doctors and nurses. 
They want the state to find a way to carry out capital punishment without medical professionals. 
Under Tennessee’s lethal injection protocol , the Department of Correction brings on a doctor for execution day. 
The role is meant to be passive: to make sure the person is deceased and to call the time of death. 
But there’s an exception. 
If the lower-ranking medical staff fail aren’t successful in placing an IV to deliver the lethal drug, the doctor is tasked with placing a central line in a deeper vein, just above the heart. 
This all unfolded during the failed execution attempt in May . 
The doctor on site tried several times to carry out the procedure and ultimately failed. 
Dr. 
John Greer, a retired Nashville hematologist, said that was probably because it’s not an easy task. 
“Placing a central line is not just sticking a needle in a person’s arm,” he said during a press conference on Tuesday . 
“To place a central line, one must access the subclavian vein, which is a large vessel above the heart. 
It should only be done by someone with specific training who performs the procedure routinely… And I cannot imagine that there would be someone who’s doing these routinely who would be involved in this procedure [lethal injection].” 
Medical ethics strictly forbid participating in an execution. 
That’s stated explicitly in the American Medical Association’s code of ethics . 
That’s why Greer and dozens of other doctors and nurses sent a letter to Gov. 
Bill Lee calling for a moratorium on the death penalty and a redesign of the state’s capital punishment process. 
“This means that the health care professionals who agree to take part in Tennessee’s executions are those willing to set aside their professional ethics,” the letter reads in part. 
“The problems that we have seen, such as in Mr. 
Carruthers’s case, are the predictable result of working with such unscrupulous actors.” 
They’re asking for Lee to halt executions and redesign execution methods so they don’t rely on medical professionals. 
Greer acknowledged that’s a difficult ask. 
“There’s a concept called the ‘Hippocratic Paradox,’  he said. 
“To do this well, you’d be somebody who’s well trained and perhaps in the medical profession, but we forbid that from occurring. 
So there’s a paradox. 
We do not want to participate, and should not participate, in legally authorized executions.” 
Complicating conditions 
The next execution  of Anthony Darrell Hines  is scheduled for Aug. 
13. 
Christa Pike is set to be put to death in late September . 
Both have medical conditions that compromise their veins, and their defense attorneys say that makes it likely they’ll need a central line placed. 
Hines had a stroke late last year, according to legal filings . 
He wasn’t given scans to confirm the stroke for three weeks, and was never given the anticoagulant medication he was prescribed. 
The prison system’s medical contractor, Centurion, said it wasn’t on the list of drugs its insurer will cover. 
The contractor didn’t give him a similar replacement. 
He then had another stroke early this year, fell, and hit his head. 
He has been partially paralyzed in the infirmary since. 
That has caused severe muscle atrophy, which can make placing IVs more difficult. 
With less muscle and flesh, veins are less supported, which makes them harder to see . 
It also allows them to move around more. 
He’s also developed a spasm in one of his arms, according to his legal team. 
“He cannot unbend his arm or unclench his fist, and it is extremely painful when others attempt to do so,” they wrote. 
Christa Pike has a blood condition called thrombocytosis. 
That means she has too high of a blood platelet count. 
It increases the risk of blood clotting, which can cause heart attacks and strokes. 
Dr. 
Mark Fowler was the doctor involved in Carruthers’ attempted execution. 
He said in a deposition late last year that it had been more than a decade since he placed a central line. 
Attorneys for Hines have sought a court order to disclose whether Fowler would be involved in the next execution, but the Department of Correction has fought it. 
The department argues that although his role in past executions has been revealed, Fowler is still entitled to the same privacy protections as anyone else involved in future executions. 
Several other groups have called for a moratorium and independent investigation, including a group of GOP state senators. 
But Lee told a group of reporters in Knoxville earlier this month that he won’t intervene . 
“I think, as we have observed, everything about the protocol of the death penalty in the state was carried out appropriately,” Lee said. 
“In that situation, the Department of Correction did exactly what they were supposed to.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.9%Catherine Sweeney: 1.7%WPLN: 1.9%Confirmation Bias6.9%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.1%WPLN: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 5.9%Catherine Sweeney: 2.3%WPLN: 2.9%Availability Heuristic5.9%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.1%WPLN: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Catherine Sweeney: 1.2%WPLN: 0.6%Overconfidence Bias1.9%This article: 5.1%Catherine Sweeney: 1.5%WPLN: 3.3%Framing Effect5.1%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.5%Catherine Sweeney: 0.9%WPLN: 0.6%Status Quo Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.4%WPLN: 2.1%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.7%Catherine Sweeney: 0.4%WPLN: 0.7%Pessimism Bias0.7%This article: 7.0%Catherine Sweeney: 8.4%WPLN: 5.9%Negativity Bias7.0%This article: 3.5%Catherine Sweeney: 1.8%WPLN: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.5%WPLN: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.5%WPLN: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 1.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Catherine Sweeney: 0.2%WPLN: 1.2%Recency Bias1.5%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.1%WPLN: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.4%WPLN: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.9%Catherine Sweeney: 2.7%WPLN: 2.5%Appeal to Authority5.9%This article: 2.7%Catherine Sweeney: 0.3%WPLN: 0.9%False Dilemma2.7%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.3%WPLN: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 1.7%Catherine Sweeney: 0.1%WPLN: 0.1%Circular Reasoning1.7%This article: 5.0%Catherine Sweeney: 2.2%WPLN: 2.8%Hasty Generalization5.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.5%WPLN: 0.3%Bandwagon4.0%This article: 2.7%Catherine Sweeney: 3.6%WPLN: 3.7%Appeal to Emotion2.7%This article: 2.8%Catherine Sweeney: 0.9%WPLN: 0.5%Begging the Question2.8%This article: 1.8%Catherine Sweeney: 0.8%WPLN: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)1.8%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 3.3%Catherine Sweeney: 0.7%WPLN: 0.6%Burden of Proof3.3%This article: 1.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.1%WPLN: 0.1%Appeal to Nature1.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 1.4%WPLN: 2.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.1%Catherine Sweeney: 1.1%WPLN: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.1%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.3%WPLN: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 4.5%Catherine Sweeney: 0.4%WPLN: 0.0%Personal Incredulity4.5%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.2%WPLN: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.9%WPLN: 1.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.6%WPLN: 0.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 1.0%Catherine Sweeney: 1.0%WPLN: 1.7%Biased Writer Voice1.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Catherine Sweeney: 0.0%WPLN: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

827 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers31%attributed speech570writer words
Selected voice

Bill Lee

100%flagged-word coverage
37 attributed words14% of attributed speech49% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Biased Writer Voice-1.4 ptsWriter: 1.4%Bill Lee: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.