Tampa (FL) Tribune

April 152004

Editorial

By JEFFREY P. BROSCO

Floridians should be proud that our Legislature has tak­en a lead role in the nation­wide juve­nile death penal­ty debate.

Until recent­ly, our polit­i­cal lead­ers were on track in call­ing for the min­i­mum age for exe­cu­tion to be 18; now this wise deci­sion risks being derailed by a few who pro­posed an amend­ment low­er­ing the age to 17. While a one-year dif­fer­ence may seem arbi­trary and incon­se­quen­tial, every year counts for chil­dren in this age group.

Adolescence is a peri­od of enor­mous devel­op­men­tal change — phys­i­cal­ly, cog­ni­tive­ly and emo­tion­al­ly. Especially under duress, teenagers are more like­ly than adults to act impul­sive­ly, to take risks, to respond to peer influ­ence, to over­look or dis­re­gard adverse con­se­quences and to exer­cise poor judg­ment. This is why per­sons under the age of 18 are con­sid­ered minors and are denied the right to vote, to con­sume alco­hol, to enter into con­tracts, to serve on juries and to engage in mil­i­tary com­bat.

The exe­cu­tion of juve­nile offend­ers rais­es a num­ber of legal and eth­i­cal issues, but for many it has become a ques­tion of sci­ence and med­i­cine. Why? Because as the U.S. Supreme Court said in pro­hibit­ing the exe­cu­tion of men­tal­ly retard­ed offend­ers, the death penal­ty is the most severe pun­ish­ment to be reserved for adults. As a health pro­fes­sion­al, I know that 16- and 17-year-olds do not yet pos­sess the matu­ri­ty and men­tal capac­i­ties of adult­hood and should not, there­fore, be sen­tenced to die.

Indeed, neu­ro­sci­en­tists have long believed that the part of the human brain that con­trols impulse, aggres­sion and antic­i­pa­tion of con­se­quences does not mature ful­ly until well beyond age 18, pos­si­bly as late as age 23. Now, with the ben­e­fit of cut­ting-edge tech­nol­o­gy that allows us to watch” the ado­les­cent brain in action, researchers at the National Institutes of Health and else­where are con­firm­ing this knowl­edge with new sci­en­tif­ic data. This emerg­ing evi­dence has led promi­nent neu­ro­sci­en­tists to sug­gest that it is unfair and unrea­son­able to impose expec­ta­tions of adult-lev­el capac­i­ties on the think­ing and behav­ior of minors.

Furthermore, med­ical his­to­ries of juve­nile death row inmates show that many of these young peo­ple have been vic­tim­ized by child­hood sex­u­al and phys­i­cal abuse or neglect. Many also have con­gen­i­tal con­di­tions or brain injuries that led to lat­er cog­ni­tive impair­ment. Any ear­ly brain insult can dis­rupt ado­les­cents’ emo­tion­al and cog­ni­tive devel­op­ment, exac­er­bat­ing the exist­ing vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties of youth.

Unfortunately, most of these chil­dren nev­er received the treat­ment that could have pre­vent­ed their emo­tion­al and cog­ni­tive impair­ments as ado­les­cents.

Teenagers who com­mit seri­ous crimes should not be absolved of respon­si­bil­i­ty, but account­abil­i­ty should be com­men­su­rate with ado­les­cent growth and capac­i­ties. The ulti­mate, irrev­o­ca­ble adult penal­ty should not be imposed on those who are not yet adults.

Health pro­fes­sion­als in Florida and through­out the coun­try — espe­cial­ly those who treat and study chil­dren — are urg­ing the Legislature to amend the age back to 18 and to pass the bill. There is good rea­son why oth­er states are rais­ing the age of exe­cu­tion to 18; Florida should not be left behind. It’s the wise thing to do.

Jeffrey P. Brosco, M.D., Ph.D., is a devel­op­men­tal-behav­ioral pedi­a­tri­cian and an asso­ciate pro­fes­sor of clin­i­cal pedi­atrics at the University of Miami School of Medicine, as well as direc­tor of clin­i­cal ser­vices at the Mailman Center for Child Development.

Sources

Tampa (FL) Tribune