The Capital Punishment Debate: Public Perceptions of Crime and Punishment1

Psychophysical scales for seriousness of crime and severity of punishment were developed to aid in investigating the Eighth Amendment issue of whether the death penalty is “cruel and unusual” punishment. Using indirect crossmodality matching techniques with a quota sample of the Boston SMSA, satisfactory scales were obtained for both dimensions with most items in both scales concentrated toward the serious/severe end as planned. Further, specific case vignettes in which experimental variations were embedded were also developed; psychophysical lines production judgments for these specific cases indicated that quite complex social stimuli can be successfully judged psychophysically. Results indicated that (1) capital and noncapital offenses are thoroughly intermingled in seriousness ratings; (2) the death penalty is not rated as significantly more severe than life imprisonment without parole; (3) respondents assign the death penalty relatively rarely even to serious offenses, and then in a manner not particularly in line with capital statutes; and (4) respondents' weighing of extra-legal and legally relevant aspects of capital cases is inconsistent with current statutes. These results suggest multiple ways in which capital punishment could be defined as “cruel”, and strongly suggest the need for further research and through about the issue.     

Anticruelty care: commentary

The anticruelty policy is a best-interests test for treatment plans including decisions to forgo life-sustaining therapy for certain incompetent patients. In connection with specific proposed therapy, the policy requires no reference to the patient's unknowable values, subjective experiences, or quality of life. The decision to undertake a treatment plan derives from the caregiver's knowledge of burdens and benefits of that treatment when used in caring for the competent or for those incompetents capable of growth or repair. The caregiver should weigh the potentially cruel effects of treatment against the likelihood of reducing suffering or encumbrance with the treatment. The terms "burden" and "benefit," in fact, are replaced by the terms "cruelty" and "beneficence," as the relevant opposing outcomes that must be weighed. Thus, the anticruelty policy shifts our scrutiny from experiences of the patient that we cannot evaluate to the proposed actions of the competent decision makers and caregivers. Notably, it is a protreatment policy when the goals of medicine are attainable; and it is an anticruelty policy when they are not. The policy does evaluate the world of the patient to the extent that it requires a judgment based upon external appearances about patient pleasure or happiness in living. It presumes to universalize larger societal values about cruelty, beneficence, compassionate concern for the helpless, and certain rights of individuals. And it presumes to universalize on the patient's behalf specific medical values about hopeless injury, timely death, the goals of medicine, and cruelty, which should remain open to societal discussion and revision. The presented definition of hopeless injury does not require brain death, coma, or persistent vegetative state. Specifically, the policy holds that death is timely for a patient with hopeless injury, and that prevention of death for such patients is not a goal of medicine but a cruelty.     

Father Knows Best: Parishes, Priests, and American Catholic Parishioners' Attitudes Toward Capital Punishment

Public opinion has important implications for capital punishment in the United States. Such opinion formation involves moral judgments irreducible to processing information on the administration of capital punishment or sentencing alternatives. Religious communities play a crucial role in resolving such moral dilemmas and giving meaning to available information. The Catholic Church strongly opposes capital punishment and strives to instruct lay Catholics on this issue. Accordingly, church attendance is associated with less support of the death penalty among Catholics but not among non-Catholics in the general population. Politically and socially conservative Catholic parishioners are more supportive of such punishment, while more religious parishioners report less such support. Parish priests significantly influence death penalty attitudes, in particular among more spiritual parishioners. Black Catholics are more supportive of the death penalty than their non-Catholic counterparts, in part because of a convergence in death penalty attitudes between blacks and whites in predominantly black parishes.     

Understandings and Experiences of Cruelty: An Exploratory Report

Abstract

The authors investigated popular understandings of cruelty among 103 undergraduates who identified the crudest acts that they had experienced vicariously and personally. The authors also examined the reasons that the cited acts were defined as cruel. Results indicated that most of the vicarious cruel acts involved intense aggression or sexual imposition, whereas personally experienced cruelty was milder, frequently consisting of teasing or gossip. Offense, victim, and perpetrator characteristics were all cited as reasons that acts were considered cruel. The authors also investigated gender differences in reported acts and reasons. Future researchers should address the discrepancies between vicarious and personally experienced cruelty. Findings with regard to personal acts also call for links to the literature on callousness and victimization.     

Understandings and experiences of cruelty: an exploratory report

The authors investigated popular understandings of cruelty among 103 undergraduates who identified the cruelest acts that they had experienced vicariously and personally. The authors also examined the reasons that the cited acts were defined as cruel. Results indicated that most of the vicarious cruel acts involved intense aggression or sexual imposition, whereas personally experienced cruelty was milder, frequently consisting of teasing or gossip. Offense, victim, and perpetrator characteristics were all cited as reasons that acts were considered cruel. The authors also investigated gender differences in reported acts and reasons. Future researchers should address the discrepancies between vicarious and personally experienced cruelty. Findings with regard to personal acts also call for links to the literature on callousness and victimization.     

Can empathy close the racial divide and gender gap in death penalty support?

Public opinion data indicate that the majority of US respondents support the death penalty. Research has consistently indicated, however, that Blacks and females are significantly less likely to support capital punishment than their White and male counterparts. Past research efforts attempting to account for these differences have, at best, only partially accounted for them: the racial divide and gender gap in death penalty support, while narrowed, remained evident. This study proposes that empathy, particularly ethnocultural empathy, may be a key explanatory correlate of death penalty support and that racial and gender differences in empathy may fully explain the observed racial and gender differences in death penalty support. This study uses three forms of empathy measures (cognitive, affective, and ethnocultural) to test this hypothesis using survey data from a sample of undergraduate students. Our results show that neither a variety of other “known correlates” of death penalty support nor cognitive or affective empathy scales were able to fully account for the observed racial difference in death penalty support. Ethnocultural empathy, however, was successful in reducing the effect of race on death penalty support to nonsignificance. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to have done so.     

Enuresis, firesetting, and cruelty to animals: does the ego triad show predictive validity?

The hypothesis tested in this study was that the presence of enuresis and cruelty to animals in juvenile firesetters would be significantly related to recidivistic firesetting. This hypothesis was related to Yarnell's belief in an ego triad among juvenile firesetters, which linked the occurrence of enuresis, cruelty to animals and others, and firesetting. No relationship was found between groups for firesetting recidivism and enuresis. However, juveniles who were identified as being cruel to animals were more likely than those who were not cruel to animals to engage in recidivistic firesetting behaviors.     

Socioscientific evidence and supreme court numerology: When justices attempt social science

In Stanford v. Kentucky, in which two juveniles sentenced to death raised an Eighth Amendment challenge, Justice Scalia's plurality opinion set the ground rules for deciding juvenile death penalty cases. He ruled ?socioscientific”? evidence and philosopher-king decisions out of bounds. Scalia argued that the Court must do its own social science analysis of the objective indicia to gauge whether community sentiment finds such a punishment cruel and unusual. In determining whether a ?national consensus”? exists, Justice Scalia transformed the empirical question into an impossible question, requiring that a categorical aversion must be shown. Petitioners lost, but so too did social science jurisprudence, as ?statistical magic”? and ?numerology”? reigned supreme.     

"i hope someone murders your mother!": an exploration of extreme support for the death penalty

Although general support for the death penalty is decreasing, a segment of the pro-death penalty population continues to support capital punishment with great vehemence. Extreme support for the death penalty is expressed through angry, confrontational, and sometimes threatening verbal attacks against condemned prisoners and opponents of capital punishment. Expressions of this support are especially strong around the time of highly publicized executions. This paper explores extreme support for capital punishment in the months before and after Tennessee's first execution in 40 years, using data gathered from newspaper reports, letters to the editor, interviews with death penalty opponents, and the authors' own experiences. Linking Bowers and Pierce's brutalization theory with community psychology theory, we explore ways in which highly publicized executions seem to unleash of hatred and violent intention among a number of death penalty supporters and how this behavior may illuminate research of increases in homicide after highly executions.     

Christianity and Opposition to the Death Penalty: Late Modern Shifts

This article sketches the shifts in Christian thought and denominations on capital punishment from the early church to today in the United States, and then examines the ethical issues in the administration of capital punishment both before and since the Supreme Count stopped executions in 1972. The conclusion of the article is that overwhelming evidence of the injustice of death sentences could not sway popular support for capital punishment, but evidence that switching to life sentences could save states millions of dollars is swaying many pro‐death penalty voters and legislators.     

Cruelty's rewards: the gratifications of perpetrators and spectators

Cruelty is the deliberate infliction of physical or psychological pain on other living creatures, sometimes indifferently, but often with delight. Though cruelty is an overwhelming presence in the world, there is no neurobiological or psychological explanation for its ubiquity and reward value. This target article attempts to provide such explanations by describing three stages in the development of cruelty. Stage 1 is the development of the predatory adaptation from the Palaeozoic to the ethology of predation in canids, felids, and primates. Stage 2, through palaeontological and anthropological evidence, traces the emergence of the hunting adaptation in the Pliocene, its development in early hominids, and its emotional loading in surviving forager societies. This adaptation provides an explanation for the powerful emotions - high arousal and strong affect - evoked by the pain-blood-death complex. Stage 3 is the emergence of cruelty about 1.5 million years ago as a hominid behavioural repertoire that promoted fitness through the maintenance of personal and social power. The resulting cultural elaborations of cruelty in war, in sacrificial rites, and as entertainment are examined to show the historical and cross-cultural stability of the uses of cruelty for punishment, amusement, and social control.Effective violence prevention must begin with perpetrators, not victims. If the upstream approaches to violence prevention advocated by the public-health model are to be effective, psychologists must be able to provide violence prevention workers with a fine-grained understanding of perpetrator gratifications. This is a distasteful task that will compel researchers to interact with torturers and abusers, and to acknowledge that their gratifications are rooted in a common human past. It is nonetheless an essential step in developing effective strategies for the primary prevention of violence.     

Killing kids: The juvenile death penalty and community sentiment

In the Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment jurisprudence, “community sentiment” plays a central if not dispositive role in determining if a punishment is disproportionate. To gauge sentiment on the death penalty for juveniles, two experiments with death-qualified subjects were run, where age (a 15–25 age range) and case (heinousness) were varied in the first, and type of defendant (principal, accessory, or felony-murder accessory) and an extended age range (13–25) varied in the second. Significant age effects occur in both experiments, with approximately 75% and 65% refusing to give the death penalty for the youngest (13–15) and next youngest (16–18) groups, whereas 60% give the death penalty for the 25-year-old. In their reasons for their decisions, the killing kid was judged less blameworthy and death-worthy. Although politicians have called for “a man-sized punishment for a man-sized crime,” this community does not see that “man-sized” punishment fitting the kid.     

Juror Decision‐making in Death Penalty Sentencing when Presented with Defendant's History of Child Abuse or Neglect

Previous studies have found aggravating, mitigating, and null effects of defendant histories of abuse and neglect on punishment preferences in capital sentencing. Perceiving these defendants as more dangerous, jurors may be more likely to favor the death penalty when such evidence is presented. This is counter to the intuition that abuse or neglect reduces culpability, and therefore mitigates the severity of punishment. We investigated the effect of defendant childhood physical abuse, sexual abuse, or neglect on the probability of a prospective juror preferring the death penalty in an between‐subject experimental design. Using vignettes and two large samples (students and jurors), defendant histories were found to mitigate the probability that the hypothetical defendant received the death penalty, with sexual abuse having the most salient effect. Further, the effects were conditioned by preference for the death penalty – larger mitigating effects were observed among individuals who favor the death penalty. These findings suggest that initial judgments of abuse and neglect are related to juror leniency, and further research on the interaction of jury instructions and defendant histories is needed. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

In the public interest: intellectual disability, the Supreme Court, and the death penalty

This article deals with a case that recently came before the U.S. Supreme Court. The issues involved whether attorneys provided effective assistance to a person convicted of murder when no mitigating evidence was presented (either strategically or by neglect) to the jury concerning the intellectual disabilities of their client during the death penalty phase of the trial. The Supreme Court had previously ruled that the death penalty for intellectually disabled individuals (mentally retarded) constituted cruel and unusual punishment. In this case the attorneys made a strategic decision not to present possibly mitigating evidence for the death penalty phase. The Supreme Court considered whether the appeals court abdicated its judicial review responsibilities. The results of psychological evaluations are presented, and the decisions of the Supreme Court are discussed.     

Nonviolent Childhood Discipline

Summary

Interpersonal violence is a leading cause of death and injury in this country. Parents normalize and validate violence when they use corporal punishment. If the legitimization of violence in the name of discipline is to end, physicians and other professionals must be convinced that spanking is harmful and unnecessary. They must help parents learn effective, nonviolent parenting practices. This article presents a program to help health educators teach physicians and others to counsel parents on nonviolent parenting practices.     

The juvenile death penalty: A frustrated society's attempt for control

The United States is alone among western industrialized nations in allowing a provision for the juvenile death penalty. Specifically, 92% of the juveniles presently sentenced to death were convicted under a felony-murder doctrine which eliminates the state's burden of proving the mens rea requirement for murder. The high rate of felony-murder convictions of juveniles on death row is highly inconsistent with theories of punishment which have traditionally been used to support the death penalty.     

The last low whispers of our dead: when is it ethically justifiable to render a patient unconscious until death?

A number of practices at the end of life can causally contribute to diminished consciousness in dying patients. Despite overlapping meanings and a confusing plethora of names in the published literature, this article distinguishes three types of clinically and ethically distinct practices: (1) double-effect sedation, (2) parsimonious direct sedation, and (3) sedation to unconsciousness and death. After exploring the concept of suffering, the value of consciousness, the philosophy of therapy, the ethical importance of intention, and the rule of double effect, these three practices are defined clearly and evaluated ethically. It is concluded that, if one is opposed to euthanasia and assisted suicide, double-effect sedation can frequently be ethically justified, that parsimonious direct sedation can be ethically justified only in extremely rare circumstances in which symptoms have already completely consumed the patient’s consciousness, and that sedation to unconsciousness and death is never justifiable. The special case of sedation for existential suffering is also considered and rejected.     

浅谈临终医疗的双重效应原则

双重效应原则常用于临终患者的治疗中,应用药物为患者解除痛苦,但可能导致患者严重不良反应甚至死亡,这在伦理上是可以接受的。但目前仍存在着较大争议,特别是如何认定医师的主观意图。     

Stories of crime,stories of suffering: A narrative perspective on ethical issues in criminal justice counselling

Counsellors working with prisoners often listen to stories that are both stories of crime and stories of suffering. From a criminal justice perspective, the suffering of offenders is deliberately inflicted as punishment. From a counselling perspective, however, responding to the suffering of a client and even trying to relieve it is a basic ethical concern. So counsellors, working with offenders, may face the ethical question of how to integrate a response to the suffering of offenders with a response to crime, especially when confronted with stories of cruel, violent crimes. In this paper, it is argued that a narrative perspective on counselling offers a framework in which these responses may be integrated. Here, the principle of recognizing privileged authorship of persons is crucial. The concepts of ‘double listening for implicit others’ and ‘relationally rich stories’ are developed, which are based on concepts and ideas from narrative therapy. These serve as a first step of translating the narrative ethical framework to counselling practice.