Essay on Death Penalty for Juveniles Text

Jonathan Friesen - Writing Coach

Oklahoma 1988 decided that the eighth amendment prohibited the execution of persons younger than 16 at the time of their crimes. Of the thirty eight death penalty states, twenty four permit the death penalty for individuals who committed crimes prior to the age of 18. The minimum age at the time of the crime is 16 in 12 states, 17 in 4, and many states do not specify an age. Fourteen states and the federal system hold a minimum age at time of crime of 18. Currently, there are about 70 death row inmates who were sentenced as juveniles and 37 % of them are in texas. Seventeen have been executed for crimes committed as juveniles since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976 and three of these executions occurred earlier this year.

Only four other nations, iran, nigeria, pakistan, saudi arabia and yemen have executed juveniles in the past decade and there is almost global consensus on the need to eliminate the death penalty for crimes committed as juveniles. Has been the only country to refuse to sign the un convention of the right of the child, an international treaty which bars the execution of persons committing crimes before age 18. The death penalty is unlikely to have any deterrent value on juveniles as many young juvenile offenders are impulse ridden, highly stimulus reactive and have difficulty planning ahead. Adolescents tend to live in the present, view themselves as invincible and many are easily swayed by peers in their antisocial behavior with little heed to consequences. It is precisely because of their emotional and cognitive immaturity and difficulty with decision making that they are not afforded full adult status under the law. Hence, they are not considered old enough to vote, serve as jurors, sign a contract, purchase alcohol, serve in the military or, in some states, marry. Many youths within the juvenile justice system have treatable but undiagnosed psychiatric disorders.

Apa Essay Structure

The rates of affective disorders, post traumatic stress disorder, attention deficit disorder and learning disabilities are consistently high in this population. In addition, some have neurological impairment as a result of exposure to drugs or alcohol in utero, early childhood physical abuse or their risk taking life styles. Because of poverty and minority status, many of these youths have been disproportionately diverted into the juvenile justice system rather than to mental hospitals. Legal representation is likely to be inadequate for youths facing the death penalty. The aba notes that jurisdictions that have the death penalty have been unwilling to provide adequate legal services to these defendants who end up with unqualified or indifferent attorneys.

Often these cases are assigned to the lowest bidders who invest little time in these cases and are unlikely to request a forensic evaluation or consider issues unique to adolescent development which might have bearing on issues of culpability. Even well intended attorneys may have difficulty getting the courts to authorize payment for forensic evaluations and investigations. In addition, prosecutors may lack adequate training in avoiding constitutional violations. Yet another argument against the death penalty is the well publicized risk of error, reported to be as high as 68% coyle , which has resulted in a moratorium on the death penalty in the state of illinois. Numerous organizations have come out with position statements opposing the use of the death penalty for crimes committed as juveniles including the american academy of child and adolescent psychiatry, the american bar association, the national mental health association and most recently the apa.

English Paper Cbse 2012

In addition, the aba has called for a moratorium on capital punishment until each jurisdiction implements policies and procedures consistent with longstanding aba policies intended to 1 ensure that death penalty cases are administered fairly and impartially in accordance with due process and 2 minimize the risk that innocent persons may be executed. Opposition is also coming from an unlikely source some of the families and loved ones of victims have spoken up because they believe that the death penalty only serves to perpetuate the cycle of violence and failed compassion and they realize it will not take away their loss and grief. The philosophy of the juvenile court has always been rehabilitation, yet, this is being eroded in an atmosphere of getting tough on juvenile crime and the increasing practice of waiving juveniles to the adult court. It is hard to justify this trend in an era where serious juvenile crime continues to decline and the goal of rehabilitation is closer than ever before with new and effective innovative treatments and community interventions available to populations at risk. We know that juveniles who are transferred to the adult correctional system have a very high risk of being victimized, are less likely to have their educational needs met and, if released, recidivate more rapidly than those who remain in the juvenile justice system. Our country continues to pour money into new and more prisons and executions rather than into efforts at preventing juvenile crime, providing psychiatric services for at risk youths, and strengthening the juvenile justice system so that it can effectively respond to dangerous and/or repeat offenders to ensure public safety. Aapl members are urged to consider a position paper in support of banning the death penalty for crimes committed prior to age 18.

Essay About The Lovesong of J Alfred Prufrock

Phoenix, az it's a fact that 19 states permit the execution of teenagers, and since 1973, have sentenced 226 juveniles to death. With the questionable culpability, the effects of neglect and abuse, and international opinion, juveniles should not be punished with the death penalty. While adolescents should be held responsible for their actions, many studies question their legal culpability. Many experts agree that violent tendencies among youth stem from psychological imbalances. For example, according to the harvard medical school, the national institute of mental health and ucla's department of neurosci ence, the areas of the brain that regulate impulse control and judgment are not fully developed until the age of 201. Between the ages of 10 and 20, humans have the ability to decipher between right and wrong.

In many cases, however, most are not entirely aware of the significance of their actions. As we are aware, it is cruel and unusual punishment to execute a mentally retarded person2. A similar concern is present regarding the ethics of condemning an immature juvenile to death.

Other studies have shown that the abuse and neglect adolescents experienced as children can create aggressive behavior. It is common knowledge that growing up in conditions that adversely affect children's emotional and physical growth can convince them that violence is acceptable. Sure, they are responsible for their actions to a certain extent, but other factors including parental influence and the entertainment industry may also be liable for violent behavior. In fact, it has been proven that the rate at which children mature can be extremely slowed not only by enduring abuse or neglect but by living in environments where they are present. It is amazing to view the statistics and realize the upbringing of most of the juvenile offenders3. While those brought up properly will be able to think through problems logically, those who are less fortunate will rely on the only thing they know: violence.

It is safe to assume that if a serious mistake has been made, the law must punish minors. Beyond that, executing minors violates international treaties which recognize that society should not execute people with an underdeveloped sense of the consequences of their actions4. During the past decade, the united states has executed more juveniles than any other nation in the world.

Since america knows more about the workings of the brain and the effects a violent childhood can have on an adolescent, the u.s. Should not implement the death penalty when it violates treaties we have ratified. The united states of america is obligated to bring justice to these adolescents, adolescents who are not capable of voting, driving, or, in some cases, even working. In 1988, the united states supreme court ruled that children under the age of 16 could not be put to death 2. This justice should not be based solely on the crime committed, but on motivation behind the offense and the child's environment. Adolescents who commit murder should suffer consequences since they are old enough to know right from wrong. Most, however, are unable to understand the total repercussions of their acts on themselves or their victims.

Christian science monitor 3nat'l coalition to abolish the death penalty 4welch, emma. Ny times up front resources please register or login for free access to our collection of supplementary materials.

key supreme court cases on the death penalty for juveniles

the constitutionality of executing persons for crimes committed when they were under the age of 18 is an issue that the supreme court has evaluated in several cases since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. Oklahoma 1988 , the court recognized that the age of the offender was an important consideration when trying to determine how the individual should be punished. The court endorsed the proposition that less culpability should attach to a crime committed by a juvenile than to a comparable crime committed by an adult: rdquo their inexperience, less education, and less intelligence make the teenager less able to evaluate the consequences of his or her conduct while at the same time he or she is much more apt to be motivated by mere emotion or peer pressure than is an adult. The reasons why juveniles are not trusted with the privileges and responsibilities of an adult also explain why their irresponsible conduct is not as morally reprehensible as that of an adult.

Kentucky 1989 , the united states supreme court held that the eighth amendment does not prohibit the death penalty for crimes committed at ages 16 or 17. Virginia 2002 , the supreme court considered whether the special characteristics of individuals with mental retardation requires that they be categorically exempted from the death penalty as a matter of federal constitutional law. In holding that the execution of a mentally retarded persons is a constitutionally forbidden cruel and punusual punishment, the court asserted that ldquo because of their disabilities in areas of reasoning, judgment, and control of their impulses, they do not act with a level of moral culpability that characterizes the more serious adult criminal conduct. Rdquo the standard put forth in atkins was not lack of legal responsibility mdash for individuals with mental retardation often know the difference between right and wrong mdash but of diminished criminal culpability. Because of their mental impairments, they ldquo have a diminished capacity to understand and process information, to abstract from mistakes and learn from experience, to engage in logical reasoning, to control impulses, and to understand the reactions of others.

Their deficiencies do not warrant an exemption from criminal sanctions, but they do diminish their criminal culpability. Rdquo victim rsquo s rights advocates protested a further narrowing of the number of individuals who were eligible for the death penalty. A number of attorneys general in states that allowed the execution of juvenile defendants and the texas based justice for all organization submitted amicus briefs in the roper case requesting that the supreme court uphold stanford. In addition, they argued that the court should not group juveniles together as a class of defendants, but instead ldquo acknowledge that they are all different with respect to their experience, maturity, intelligence and moral culpability.

City College Essay