Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty

The mentally retarded have had a long history with the death penalty in the United States. Psychology and science have long been used in the classification of intelligence, which in turn leads to the classification of legal competence. Throughout the early 1900s, the United States took part in eugenics sterilization practices, with the United States committing an estimated forty thousand forced sterilizations. Thought at the time, this pales in comparison to what was happening in Nazi Germany, it is still very significant. Involuntary sterilization was ended in the United States during the civil rights movement, because data showed it was mainly poor minority groups that were being sterilized. This is also when a push began for deinstitutionalization and community-based clinical services.  began to gain traction.  The case Wyatt . Stickney set standards in Alabama quality of care required for involuntary committal on grounds of mental retardation, including that it must be a humane environment, you must have sufficient qualified staff, an individualized treatment plan, and placement in the least restrictive environment possible. In Youngberg v. Romeo, the Supreme Court nationalized these standards for the entire United States. However, these rulings also had some unintended consequences that affected the view on mental retardation and the death penalty. For many states, it was for too expensive for them to maintain these facilities while following these guidelines, so many of them just closed and mentally retarded and mentally ill patients were released into communities that were not prepared to deal with their care needs. As a result of this, prisons and jails became the main home for mentally ill and mentally retarded patients due to their inadequate care. Due to community resistance against group homes, the Supreme Court made a ruling in City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, stating that mental retardation, in itself, does not determine a ‘quasi-suspect’ class, and therefore does not grant them any special rights beyond those afforded to all regular citizens. This ruling, similar to the previous rulings, also had unintended consequences. While this ruling allowed removed a large obstacle in the strategic placement of group homes for the mentally ill and retarded, it also took away their protections that were previously afforded to them, and made them liable for the death penalty. Finally, in 2002 in the Supreme Court case of Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that executing inmates with mental retardation was unconstitutional. Prior to this ruling, since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, at least forty-four people classified as being mentally retarded we sentenced to death and executed in the United States.

Thoughts for later: This source also briefly related back to my previous source about whether the death penalty is unconstitutional for juveniles. It seems that the general consensus in all of the sources that I have read that the death penalty is unconstitutional. If there have been rulings for all of these exceptions in the death penalty, like juveniles and mental retardation, why hasn’t a set-in-stone ruling been made as to whether the death penalty is actually constitutional.

Works Cited:

FRENCH, LAURENCE A. "Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty in the USA: The Clinical and Legal Legacy." Criminal Behaviour & Mental Health, vol. 15, no. 2, June 2005, pp. 82-86. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18184426&site=ehost-live.