A recent op-ed in the Litchfield (Connecticut) News highlights concerns about the death penalty as expressed by murder victims’ families. Mary Healy and Jane Caron are social work professionals who also experienced a murder in their families. In their recent op-ed, they stated that Connecticut’s death penalty does not sufficiently care for the needs of victims: “The problem with the death penalty is that it maintains a focus on the murderer when the focus rightly belongs with the people the murderer has harmed. The misplaced emphasis is evident by the fact that, while crucial victims’ services and crime prevention programs are not funded to their optimal level, the state spends between $4 million to $7 million annually on a death penalty system where the focus is primarily on the murderer.” The writers further explained that murder victims’ survivors endure much pain during trial and appeals: “Capital cases receive greater media attention and increased public scrutiny. When a death sentence is handed out, to the public, it seems like the case is over and ‘justice’ has been served. However, this sentence sets into motion a decades-long process that the survivors must continue to live through. Being entrenched in a legal system can be harmful to anyone; to those suffering from traumatic grief, the injury is compounded.” Healy and Caron concluded, “The death penalty is not what victims need. If we are serious about caring for the needs of victims, we will abandon the pretense of the death penalty and work for real solutions.” Read full op-ed below.

—Update: Victims’ family members held a press conference in Connecticut on February 29. To see video of the event, click here.

Time to eliminate the death penalty?

We are intimately acquainted with homicide grief, each one of us having lost a cherished family member to murder. But our connection to survivors is also professional, with a doctorate and master’s degree in clinical social work, and more than 30 years each of clinical experience, we have devoted our professional lives to the alleviation of human suffering, trauma, grief and loss.

As both homicide survivors and professionals who help those dealing with grief, we are less concerned with what is deserved by the murderer than we are by what is deserved by the families of murder victims. We believe that justice is only served when the needs of those who have been harmed are met. The problem with the death penalty is that it maintains a focus on the murderer when the focus rightly belongs with the people the murderer has harmed. The misplaced emphasis is evident by the fact that, while crucial victims’ services and crime prevention programs are not funded to their optimal level, the state spends between $4 million to $7 million annually on a death penalty system where the focus is primarily on the murderer.

However, there are many additional costs to victims because of our decision to keep the death penalty on the books. The process a family member goes through in a capital case is not beneficial to mental or emotional health. To start, capital cases can cause additional trauma to homicide victims’ families by making a distinction between those cases “worthy” of capital pursuit, and those not. To someone in the throes of grief, the notion that their loved one’s murder is not the “worst of the worst” is deeply offensive. Given that fewer than 2 percent of all homicides in Connecticut are prosecuted as capital cases, the majority of victims’ families are left to conclude that their loss wasn’t as horrible as someone else’s, not worthy of the attention and condemnation capital cases warrant.

Still, it is those families who end up with capital cases that bear the brunt of the system’s abuse. Capital cases receive greater media attention and increased public scrutiny. When a death sentence is handed out, to the public, it seems like the case is over and “justice” has been served. However, this sentence sets into motion a decades-long process that the survivors must continue to live through. Being entrenched in a legal system can be harmful to anyone; to those suffering from traumatic grief, the injury is compounded.

On top of all of this, the death penalty in Connecticut is a false promise. Because the state prides itself on not succumbing to the temptation of fast executions that would leave us open to the risk of wrongful executions, hardly anyone is executed in Connecticut. We want everything in Connecticut — to have the death penalty, but not the terrible risk of executing an innocent person. In our attempt to have it all, victims’ families are the ones left to suffer the consequences.

We have devoted our professional lives to caring for people, especially when those people are most in need. Following the murder of a loved one, people are tremendously vulnerable. We understand this on every level. The death penalty is not what victims need. If we are serious about caring for the needs of victims, we will abandon the pretense of the death penalty and work for real solutions.

(M. Healy and J. Caron, “Time to eliminate the death penalty?” Litchfield News, February 23, 2012). The state legislature is currently considering a bill to abolish the death penalty. See Victims. Read more New Voices on the death penalty.

Tags
Citation Guide