Michael Adelberg, health policy wonk, historian, novelist
A few weeks ago, Connecticut became the seventeenth state to ban the death penalty.
For most of my life, I’ve supported the death penalty. On some level, I still do. There are some crimes that reveal such depravity that the perpetrator forfeits basic human rights. It doesn’t bother me at all, for example, that U.S. soldiers basically assassinated Osama Bin Laden. If the execution of a murderer mitigates the suffering of the victim’s loved ones, even if it is pandering to bloodlust, I think I am okay with that.
Nonetheless, the time has come to admit that the death penalty, as it commonly practiced in the U.S. today, is mistaken. Here’s why:
- The Death Penalty Does Not Deter Crime: There are numerous conflicting studies about the death penalty’s impact on homicide. Several studies from the 90s suggested a correlation between declining crime rates and the more frequent use of capital punishment. However, these studies generally did not control for the simple fact that an improving economy suppressed crime generally. Recent studies by professors at Columbia, Stanford and UCLA find no correlation between the death penalty and homicide. In a recent poll, only 2% of the five hundred police chiefs polled named “insufficient use of the death penalty” as an impediment to combatting crime. The linkage between the death penalty and homicide deterrence is inconclusive, at best.
- The Death Penalty Does Not Save Money: For better or worse, executing a person in this country is very expensive. This is because death row prisoners are generally given extra appeals that often drag on for years before an execution—as the justice system attempts to lessen the chances of wrongful execution. The average stay for a prisoner on death row is twelve years from date of sentence to the day of execution. A study of death row individuals in California suggests that because of their many appeals, a prisoner on death row costs an average $90,000 more per year than an individual with a life sentence.
- Capital Punishment Is Irreversible: The most compelling argument against the death penalty is the most obvious; our legal system is imperfect and the capital punishment is irreversible. In the late 90s, when DNA testing became an effective investigative tool, we saw numerous homicide convictions overturned. In Illinois alone, thirteen people were proven wrongly executed. This led the Republican governor to sign an executive order putting a moratorium on the death penalty in the state (the moratorium turned into a permanent ban last year). Estimates vary on how many people have been wrongly executed since 2000, but even if it’s only a few, a wrongful execution is irreversible. This is the trump card in the death penalty argument: until we can be certain that our trial outcomes are correct, how can we support such a dire, irreversible punishment?
Although circumstances and frequency vary greatly, thirty-three states still allow the death penalty. A few hundred Americans are executed each year. The large majority of these people are poor and poorly educated; some are convicted after poor legal representation. Several states have recently moved to end the death penalty, including Connecticut just last month.
Nationally, the death penalty remains popular—at least in the abstract. According to Gallup, 61% of Americans favor it. This is way down from a peak of 80% in the 80s, but still a legitimate majority. However, other polls show slippage in death penalty support: one poll offers that only 37% of death penalty supporters regard the issue as “very important” to them; another shows only 46% of death penalty supporters favoring it when life in prison without parole is offered as the alternative.
I am waiting for the poll that asks death penalty supporters this question, “Assuming that a few people on death row are executed each year for crimes they did not commit, do you still support the death penalty?”
Congratulations Connecticut.
Yesterday, the family medicine residency program where I serve as a faculty preceptor “went live” with their new electronic health record. They posted a sign at the front desk that read in part: “Pardon Our Progress,” as if we were starting a major construction project – which in a way, we were. Instead of wading through stacks of unruly paper charts, my colleagues and I logged on to a sleek online portal via laptop computers to review and sign residents’ progress notes. Thanks to months of meticulous preparation and the presence of onsite technical support, the day went relatively smoothly for physicians and patients. [click to continue…]
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
