This conversation is closed.

Medicine advances enough to cure any disease, slow aging, and prolong life to hundreds of years. Should this be used on prisoners?

Would it be considered cruel and unusual punishment to extend someone's life, who is convicted to "life" in prison. And should it be at the cost of the rest of the country to pay for someone to spend 2 or 3 hundred years in prison. Or should we restrict their access to advanced medicine when it becomes available?

  • thumb
    Sep 6 2012: If there is such a drug that prolongs life, it should be the choice of individuals whether to use the drug or not.
    And this right to choose should also be extended to convicts.
  • thumb
    Sep 8 2012: No. First it would violate court orders in most cases. The sentence is to natural life. I also think it would be cruel and unsual to keep someone caged for a hundred plus years. And last but not least that would create a burden on the taxpayers and would increase the prison population because there would be no attrition.
  • Sep 8 2012: I think they should have a right to buy whatever they want through money earned, while in prison or anywhere else. I think what they should be given in prison is enough to keep them alive in a reasonable state of health.

    What you are describing is sort of elective medicine, like plastic surgery to improve a non-life threatening appearance problem.
  • thumb
    Sep 7 2012: hehe, genetically engineer inmates to withstand vacuum and cold, and exile them to the moon
  • thumb
    Sep 7 2012: Our concept of ethical standards and morality changed many times in past with new understanding and that will happen in future as well ....

    May be ther life term conviction will change also that time....
    But with my current sense of ethics and morality says we can't deny access to medicine to a patient....whether s/he is a prisoner or free person doesn't matter once s/he is in need of medical attention...
  • thumb
    Sep 7 2012: Interesting topic. To answer it, I think you need to ask a couple other questions though.

    1. Is your prison system based on the concept of trying to rehabilitaye the individual to teturm them back to society someday? Even with life sentences, there are differences. Some sentences are "life without parole" while others are not and allow parole in the future under certain circumstances.

    2. If you accept the concept that medicine will find ways to increase life spans to 200 - 300 years, then isn't it posible that same medicine might find "cures" for some criminal behaivors (sociopathic, anti-social, etc) during that time that would allow the rehabilitated criminal back into societey? Would withholding life-entending medical care (drugs) be moral then? We currently administer life-SAVING medical care to prisoners with life sentences, don't we?

    As to whther society should have to bear the additional cost, I think that as a society if we are going to make laws, then incarcerate those who violate them, then yes...we need to bear the cost of that incarceration. I shudder to think the time comes when we decide, "It costs too much to keep them alive in prison, so let's just let 'em die (or actually just kill them?) instead."

    I have to agree with Feyisayo...they should be able to use the drugs.