Calnen T, Blackman L S
Teachers College, Columbia University.
Am J Ment Retard. 1992 May;96(6):557-64; discussion 565-75.
The Supreme Court recently decided that the death penalty as it applies to persons with mental retardation is not a violation of constitutional protection from cruel and unusual punishment as long as juries consider the convicted person's disabilities during trial proceedings. Advocates for persons with mental retardation have argued that because their disability reduces culpability in capital offenses, the death penalty is always inappropriate. In this paper we argued that the latter position makes unwarranted categorical assumptions about mental retardation, fails to consider the individualized and situation-specific determinants of culpability for a capital offense, and undermines the very assumptions required to restore respect and value for citizens with mental retardation as participants in society.
最高法院最近裁定，只要陪审团在审判过程中考虑到被定罪者的残疾情况，适用于智障人士的死刑并不违反宪法对免受残酷和不寻常惩罚的保护。智障人士的倡导者认为，由于他们的残疾会降低在死罪中的罪责，死刑永远都是不合适的。在本文中，我们认为后一种观点对智障做出了毫无根据的绝对假设，没有考虑到死罪罪责的个体化和具体情况决定因素，并且破坏了恢复智障公民作为社会参与者的尊重和价值所需的基本假设。
