Crime, Culpability, and the Adolescent Brain Mary Beckman This fall, the U.S. Su
ID: 3454646 • Letter: C
Question
Crime, Culpability, and the Adolescent Brain Mary Beckman This fall, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether capital crimes by teenagers under 18 should get the death sentence; the case for leniency is based in part on brain studies When he was 17 years old, Christopher Simmons persuaded a younger friend to help him rob a woman, tie her up with electrical cable and duct tape, and throw her over a bridge. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by a Missouri court in 1994. In a whipsaw of legal proceedings, the Missouri Supreme Court set the sentence aside last year. Now 27, Simmons could again face execution: The state of Missouri has appealed to have the death penalty reinstated. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case in October, and its decision could well rest on neurobiology. At issue is whether 16- and 17-year-olds who commit capital offenses can be executed or whether this would be cruel and unusual punishment, banned by the Constitution's eighth amendment. In a joint brief filed on 19 July, eight medical and mental health organizations including the American Medical Association cite a sheaf of developmental biology and behavioral literature to support their argument that adolescent bra?ns have not reached their full adult potential. "Capacities relev or 17 years old," says psychologist Laurence Association, which joined the brief supporting Simmons. Adds physician David Fassler, spokesperson for the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the argument "does not excuse violent criminal behavior, but ant to criminal responsibility are still developing when you're 16 teinberg of the American Psychological it's an important factor for courts to consider" when wielding a punishment "as extreme and irreversible as death."
Explanation / Answer
These type of cases are more now a days and it has been given punishments other than death because they think that the person may change and they can lead a peaceful life. But the punishments can be given based on their mental ability to understand what is right and wrong, so that it won't be repeated after. When it is not tested, and considered as below 18 and given release, the court is making a mistake by releasing a person who can cause a crime or harm others for his own good.
My suggestion for these type of cases is the person should be imprisoned for atleast 7 years and taken a test about his views and mind development in a regular interval(6 months). When the person is fully developed based on the test results, then he can be left free. This can be a best way to reduce crime and also save the young cirminals who did the crime unknowingly.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.