Over 16,530,175 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
The United States of America stands as the only democracy in the world that supports capital punishment. In 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the legality of the death penalty in Gregg v. Georgia. Years later, in 1989, the Supreme Court case of Stanford v. Kentucky confirmed that the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not grant minors over the age of fifteen immunity from receiving the death penalty. Since then, thousands of people have been executed in the United States, and an alarming number of them were juveniles at the time they committed their crime. Today, hundreds more still wait on death row.
Many believe that capital punishment exists as a fair and just punishment for murderers; they feel that without capital punishment, a victim’s life and death are held in less regard. Others believe the death penalty serves as a deterrent to murder and also as a means to give closure to victim’s families. Some almost inhumanely consider the costs of lifelong incarceration, and support capital punishment because they assume executions consume less tax dollars.
Ultimately, one finds difficulty in discerning who capital punishment really serves: the dead cannot be resurrected, waiting twenty years for the appeals process and execution of the murderer of a loved one hardly sounds like closure, and the offender’s families and friends undoubtedly suffer more with the death of their loved one. Surprisingly, politicians seem to have the most to gain by claiming support of capital punishment for votes. Regardless of whom capital punishment serves, or fails to serve, perhaps some of its proponents are right in their presumptions. However, even if every assumption in favor of capital punishment were true, the death penalty should never be applied to anyone under eighteen years of age. Because teenagers do not possess fully developed brains, because the justice system that condemns them to death is flawed and inconsistent, and because the execution of a juvenile contradicts contemporary morality and international law, juveniles must be treated as what they are, children, in courts and the sentencing of juveniles to death in the United States must end! In order to fully understand the need of cessation of administering the death penalty to juveniles, one must first understand that the mentality of the juvenile murderer is not comparable to an adult.
Current capital punishment laws allow for the execution of underdeveloped juveniles. The word ‘juvenile’ is used to clearly differentiate an adolescent from an adult, and one of the major differences that separates the two is brain development. Kimberly Appell, a college psychology instructor and behavioral psychologist, explains that scientists generally agree that a person’s cerebral cortex is not fully developed until they are in their 20’s. At this stage of brain development, juveniles have less impulse control, less ability to discern the outcome of their actions, and are generally incapable of foreseeing any options other than the course of action they have chosen (Appell). One must be mindful that adolescence is more than a wait until legal drinking, smoking, and war-waging age, but a physical and psychological transition to adulthood. Unfortunately, that transition rarely goes as planned.
Many adolescents face abuse, and child offenders present no exception. Research indicates that a large percentage of juveniles sentenced to death suffer from physical, sexual, mental, and drug abuse; many of them are abandoned and hopelessly poor (James 182). The average adolescent already suffers from relatively poor judgment, and the abhorrent conditions of an abused adolescent will undoubtedly lead them to display even worse decision-making abilities. While research indicates that abused children later suffer from mental and emotional instability, as well as impaired cognitive abilities, the United States government still holds them culpable for all of their actions when evidence clearly dictates otherwise (Child). The majority of juvenile courts presented with capital offenders defer them to adult courts, and unfortunately, the justice system that tries them falls disappointingly short of perfection.
The flaws of the legal system are astounding. On January 11th, 2003, Governor George Ryan of Illinois commuted the sentences of all death row inmates in his jurisdiction. Ryan recognized the injustice and unfairness of the legal system, stating in reference to convicts on death row, “We then had the dubious distinction of exonerating more men than we had executed. Thirteen men found innocent, twelve executed” (589). Ryan cited several factors contributing to the unfairness of the justice system including race, gender, age, and location acting as determining factors for who is issued the death penalty; the “absence of standards…for attorneys, who must decide to request the death sentence;” and that only two percent of murderers were actually sentenced to death (587-590). Clearly, no fairness or consistency exists in the justice system for impressing the sentence of death on capital offenders, and yet the United States still defers children to this heinous device.
Furthermore, juveniles lack proper defense in adult courts. The average juvenile has few monetary possessions, and most juvenile capital offenders come from poverty, forcing them to rely for their defense on a system of public offenders so overworked that in California alone, “more than 100 [death penalty appeals] are on hold because the state can’t find lawyers to handle them” (Kozinski 630). Unfortunately, these overworked and underpaid lawyers have proven themselves occasionally incapable of properly defending their appointed client. In an argument against capital punishment for juveniles, Anne James cited the case of Alexander Williams of Georgia, a mentally handicapped teen recently exonerated from death row stating:
" His lawyer neither investigated nor presented evidence of Alexander’s severe mental illness or appalling childhood abuse. Furthermore, Alexander was a child still living at home at the time of the crime, but no family member or school official was ever interviewed. His lawyer never requested a psychological evaluation or a history of his client. (183)" (sorry for the shitty formatting on this quote, DS, it's hard to type in block quotes in the text box here)
Because Alexander’s lawyer so carelessly handled his case, he almost paid the ultimate, irreversible price. Surely, others were not so lucky.
Though no case of an innocent ever being executed has been found yet, one can easily attribute it to the fact that little research is done on behalf of a person after they are dead. As long as the reality remains that innocent people, juveniles included, are being convicted of murder and almost being executed, the possibility of an innocent being executed will exist. However, even if a juvenile commits cold-blooded, premeditated murder, and is found guilty beyond a shadow of all possible doubt to the certainty of every person in existence, their execution would still violate modern morality and international laws that the United States itself helped forge into being!
International law dictates that juveniles should never face capital punishment. The most disturbing fact concerning these laws is that the United States helped draft, and even signed, some of the documents that are still in effect. In 1977, the United States signed the American Convention on Human Rights, or the Pact of San José, which specifically states that capital punishment may not be imposed on juveniles (4.6). Furthermore, in 1992, the United States Senate signed and ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR, a document ratified by the United Nations General Assembly, also prohibits juvenile death sentencing, but the United States simply refuses to abide by it (United Nations, 6.4). While the civilized international community ultimately seeks to abolish all forms of capital punishment, a great deal of effort has been reserved to protect juveniles until that time comes by creating laws to ward them from execution. Laws should generally reflect the consensus of the people, and while all other nations who actively participate in the international community abide by the clearly-defined contemporary, and almost globally accepted, moral that children should not face the death penalty, the United States continues to violate that belief in spite of their own contractual agreement to uphold it. The United States stands only with third world countries in applying capital punishment to minors; a change must be made.
United States policy must be changed to concur with modern morality and international law. The first step to this lengthy process is recognizing that children are not adults, and are not fully responsible for their actions, yet at times are prosecuted as if they are. Strangely enough, there exists a minority who is also not liable for their actions but, unlike juveniles, is protected by the law. In July of 2002, the US Supreme Court decided in Atikins v. Virginia that the execution of mentally handicapped offenders, people with an IQ below 70 or diagnosed with a mental illness, is cruel and unusual punishment. Ethics and morality demand the prohibition of capital punishment for the mentally handicapped because they are not fully responsible for their actions. However, one must question why the law protects one inculpable group, but not children, who are equal in the aspect. David Myers, author of a prominent psychology textbook, provides insight to this unfair treatment with the phenomenon known as the curse of knowledge, explaining that people mistakenly assume others share their experiences and that, “what’s clear to them will be similarly clearly to others” (Myers 188). Every adult goes through adolescence, and so they mistakenly assume that adolescents are endowed with their present rationale. However, no normal person was once mentally handicapped, so people have a harder time relating to their condition and therefore recognize their inability to make rational decisions with more ease. Because one assumes adolescents function on the same intellectual playing field as adults, they ultimately are unfairly treated as adults when they commit heinous crimes. Once one recognizes this and inevitably concedes that a child must be tried as a child, the next step of this important process of changes can occur, which is to eliminate the death penalty as an available punishment to them.n
When juveniles no longer face adult prosecution, the possibility of imposing capital punishment on them must be abandoned, and alternatives applied. The decisive solution to the issue of such extreme punishment for children is to discontinue the practice! However, the administration of justice through means other than execution must continue. While the United States could learn much from more than half the world’s countries that have abolished capital punishment entirely since the Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, answers lie closer to home. In 1998 Texas commissioned a Capital Offender Program (COP) for Juveniles. The COP provided an intensive 16 week program to assist juvenile capital offenders to gain access to their emotions through role-playing with the goal of addressing their emotional attachment and inability to accept responsibility for their crimes (Cothern 9). Initial reviews deemed the program successful and effective, suggesting a margin of possibility for rehabilitation for juvenile offenders. Sadly, further research is desperately needed and the true problem is that alternatives are not tested. In a report issued by the United States Department of Justice in 2000, Lynn Cothern states that “a review of individual juvenile…death penalty cases often reveals years of trauma and deprivation prior to the commission of capital offense (9). Because the bulk of offenders suffer from mental trauma, should not rehabilitation be an obvious choice? However, the United States rarely tries alternatives and has created a system that generally kills abused children for capital offenses without an attempting rehabilitation. With the applications of alternatives, and the cessation of capital punishment for juveniles, the United States has much to gain.
Ultimately, capital punishment should not be an option for juvenile offenders in the United States, regardless of the severity of their crimes, because modern morality and international law demand alternative treatment. Furthermore, the United States judicial system must be more mindful of the psychological development of an adolescent, and the common conditions of abuse most juvenile offenders endure. Should the United States adopt this morally righteous suggestion, its citizens will benefit in unforeseen ways. The suffering of victim’s families should find a quicker end to their grievances, as opposed to being mired in decades of legal affairs; offender’s families will be spared the trauma and agony of knowing when and how their loved one will die; taxpayers will ultimately save money, since a lengthy appeals process can cost millions; and most importantly, the United States will find itself in better relations with foreign nations during a time where its present relations are notably strained. The importance of providing children every opportunity to succeed and be safe must be the upmost priority of human beings. American children must be protected, the executions must stop, and rehabilitation must begin!
Works Cited
“American Convention on Human Rights.” Human Rights and Constitutional Rights. Arthur W. Diamond Law Library, 2008. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.
Appell, Kimberly. Personal Interview. 22 Mar. 2011.
Child Welfare Information Gateway. “Long-Term Consequences of Child Abuse and Neglect.” Child Welfare Information Gateway. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2008. Web. 14 April 2011.
http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/long_term_consequences.cfm#psych
Cothern, Lynn. “Juveniles and the Death Penalty.” Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. US Dept. of Justice. Nov. 2000. Web. 19 Mar. 2011.
James, Anne. “Capital Punishment: The Execution of Child Offenders in the United States.” International Journal of Children’s Rights” 2001. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 17 Mar. 2011.
Kozinski, Alex and Sean Gallagher. “For an Honest Death Penalty.” Current Issues and Enduring Questions. Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau. 9th Ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s. 630. Print.
Myers, David G. Exploring Psychology in Modules. 7th ed. New York, NY: Worth, 2008. 188. Print.
Ryan, George. “Speech Announcing Commutation of all Illinois Prisoners’ Death Sentences.” Current Issues and Enduring Questions. Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau. 9th Ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.586-599. Print.
United Nations. “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
United Nations Human Rights. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1976. Web. 22 Mar 2011.
