An op-ed appear­ing in the Arizona Republic and authored by Dr. Mark Wellek, past pres­i­dent of the American Society for Adolescent Psychiatry, and Carol Kamin, cur­rent pres­i­dent of the Arizona Chapter of the Children’s Action Alliance, echoed grow­ing nation­al con­cerns about the cul­pa­bil­i­ty of juve­nile offend­ers who face cap­i­tal charges despite sci­en­tif­ic evi­dence that they may be less cul­pa­ble than adult offend­ers. Wellek and Kamin not­ed:

​“American soci­ety has many gray areas. Our many cul­tures, sys­tems and ide­olo­gies over­lap in small ways and larg­er ones. However, there is one area that is com­plete­ly dis­tinct, and that is the law as it applies to chil­dren.

​“Laws pro­hib­it those under 18 from serv­ing in mil­i­tary com­bat and on juries, vot­ing, enter­ing into con­tracts, and buy­ing alco­hol or cig­a­rettes, pre­cise­ly because kids are dif­fer­ent — they are phys­i­cal­ly, emo­tion­al­ly and men­tal­ly imma­ture.

​“Groundbreaking new sci­ence reveals spe­cif­ic evi­dence of how these dif­fer­ences deter­mine ado­les­cent behav­ior. Their devel­op­ment is delayed, their minds oper­ate dif­fer­ent­ly, their emo­tions are more volatile and their brains are anatom­i­cal­ly imma­ture.

​“There is a con­flu­ence of evi­dence show­ing that the regions of the brain that adults use to con­trol and influ­ence behav­ior are still under­de­vel­oped in ado­les­cents.

​“For exam­ple, the pre-frontal cor­tex, which is one of the last areas to devel­op and mature in ado­les­cents, is involved in the con­trol of aggres­sion and oth­er impuls­es, the process of plan­ning for long-range goals, orga­ni­za­tion of sequen­tial behav­ior, con­sid­er­a­tion of alter­na­tives and con­se­quences, the process of abstrac­tion and men­tal flex­i­bil­i­ty, and aspects of mem­o­ry includ­ing ​‘work­ing mem­o­ry.’

​“3 states, Texas, Virginia and Oklahoma, have exe­cut­ed the major­i­ty of juve­nile offend­ers, which account for 80 % of all juve­nile exe­cu­tions. In fact, Texas alone was respon­si­ble for 60 % of juve­nile exe­cu­tions. Obviously, the juve­nile death penal­ty is not wide­ly prac­ticed or even pop­u­lar. Nationwide polls con­sis­tent­ly show that 70 % of Americans are opposed to juve­nile exe­cu­tions.

…

​“In a crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem depen­dent upon deter­mi­na­tions of cul­pa­bil­i­ty, sci­en­tif­ic find­ings sug­gest­ing juve­niles as a class are indeed less cul­pa­ble call for seri­ous con­sid­er­a­tion. The U.S. Supreme Court rec­og­nized the con­se­quence of ado­les­cent devel­op­ment in its 1988 deci­sion to pro­hib­it cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment for minors under age 16.

​“31 states, the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment, the U.S. mil­i­tary and the District of Columbia pro­hib­it the exe­cu­tion of juve­nile offend­ers. Just this year South Dakota and Wyoming signed bills into law ban­ning the prac­tice, and sim­i­lar leg­is­la­tion has passed in the New Hampshire Senate and House, and the Florida Senate.

​“This month, we joined the nation’s lead­ing American med­ical, reli­gious and legal insti­tu­tions, child- and vic­tim-advo­cate groups and near­ly 50 coun­tries, along with promi­nent indi­vid­u­als includ­ing Nobel lau­re­ates and for­mer U.S. diplo­mats, in sub­mit­ting briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is sched­uled to hear argu­ments this fall in the case to end the juve­nile death penal­ty.

​“The American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, American Society for Adolescent Psychiatry and sev­er­al addi­tion­al med­ical asso­ci­a­tions filed ami­cus curi­ae briefs in sup­port of end­ing cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment for minors, and a cross sec­tion of more than 420 promi­nent pedi­a­tri­cians, child and ado­les­cent psy­chi­a­trists and neu­rol­o­gists, includ­ing such notable physi­cians as for­mer Surgeon Generals C. Everett Koop and Julius Richmond, and Doctors T. Berry Brazelton and Alvin Poussaint, along with nine physi­cians from Arizona, sub­mit­ted the Health Professionals’ Call to Abolish the Juvenile Death Penalty to the Court.

​“Many promi­nent child wel­fare groups, includ­ing the Children’s Defense Fund, Child Welfare League of America, Voices for America’s Children and the Children’s Action Alliance of Arizona, sub­mit­ted a brief as well.

​“In their briefs the groups say that the juve­nile death penal­ty vio­lates evolv­ing stan­dards of decen­cy, that it serves no legit­i­mate pur­pose and is exces­sive in light of emerg­ing evi­dence show­ing the lim­it­ed capa­bil­i­ties of juve­niles, and that the prac­tice is almost uni­ver­sal­ly reject­ed by the inter­na­tion­al com­mu­ni­ty.

​“The rest of the world, along with most of the coun­try, has rec­og­nized the sense­less­ness of the juve­nile death penal­ty. It is our hope that the rest of our coun­try will join these voic­es.”
(Arizona Republic, August 1, 2004)

The U.S. Supreme Court will con­sid­er the con­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty of the juve­nile death penal­ty this fall when it hears argu­ments in the case of Roper v. Simmons. See DPIC’s Roper v. Simmons Web page. See also, Juvenile Death Penalty.

Citation Guide