Psychologists' Involvement in Assessment Related to Death Penalty Cases

However, there is a counter-argument with many psychologists arguing that their involvement in court proceedings and cases with treason charges contribute significantly especially for establishing if the accused are of sound mind. The tick of the 21st century indicated the need for psychological assessment gained momentum in capital cases after the Supreme Court decision that death penalties for mentally ill defendants were unlawful (Fisher, 2013). Psychologists play a prime role in establishing if an accused person is fit to face trials for capital charges or the death penalty as a result. However, these crashing ideas on whether or not to involve the psychologists in capital offenses pose ethical discussions. Discussion of Human Right as it Relates to the Controversy Psychologists many are seen as people ready to cultivate and speed the death penalty of an accused individual in police custody.

Their rights to access education and other enlightenment offered to prisoners are ever abused that makes them feel the sense of loneliness. The fear instilled in these inmates as they live hallucinating and longing for their unknown bloody and black days are high. These issues are all cumulative to the psychologists because they prescribe every step taken for the inmates. The anxiety that builds in them because of the separation and segregations they undergo make more mental issues in them than they were after an arrest and judgment. Therefore, such operations add up to compromise of the inmates’ human rights because they feel the torture, isolation, death sentence, lack of access to family, and inaccessibility to information and services as other prisoners.

S. because some face execution on unfair grounds. Ethical Implications that might arise for both Sides of the Controversy Many legal experts, human rights activists, doctors sparked and still spark debates and advance arguments on whether psychologists are going against their ethical code of conduct when they conduct death penalty evaluations by focusing on medical retardations of the row inmates. Arguably, the death penalty is the violation of the fundamental human right to life. Conversely, the pro-death penalty tenets argue that the inmates violated the rights of the complainants and this is a sufficient reason to charge them and administer death penalties for them. Psychologists can help convert the inmates into individuals that are fit mentally or correction, but they cannot rationalize the prisoner’s actions.