NCJ Number
125381
Journal
Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Volume: 17 Issue: 3 Dated: (1989) Pages: 301-309
Date Published
1989
Length
9 pages
Annotation
Behavioral science data included in an amicus brief has been introduced into a recent Supreme Court decision (Thompson v. Oklahoma) involving the juvenile death penalty.
Abstract
The juvenile death penalty, like the death penalty in general, presents several social, moral, and legal complexities. However, the use of behavioral science data as a basis to argue against the juvenile death penalty does not appear to rest upon solid foundation. Criminal responsibility is based on the ability to distinguish right and wrong. The behavioral science data support sufficient cognitive, moral, biological, and psychosexual development of adolescents such that they are in most ways comparable to adults. Although emotional immaturity exists in many adolescents, many adults never progress beyond this "adolescent" stage and yet are subject to legal sanctions as an adult. There is an insufficient basis to reach a level of reasonable medical certainty to argue that an adolescence is special enough to exclude the death penalty on psychological grounds. 42 references. (Author abstract modified)