Curette Eugenia Wk 8 Assignment-PSY 510 PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Curette Eugenia Wk 8 Assignment-PSY 510 PDF

Description

Running head: FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

Forensic Psychology and Ethical Implications Eugenia V. Curette Grand Canyon University: PSY 510 May 17, 2017

1

FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY Forensic Psychology and Ethical Implications For decades, the ruling of the death penalty has always been a controversial issue. There are those that will argue that the death penalty is unconstitutional because no one, not even the law, has the right to take the life of any man. In contrast, there are others that believe the death penalty is an appropriate ruling for capital cases. Because of the Gregg v. Georgia (1976) case, forensic psychologists have been highly involved in death penalty cases. The Supreme Court ruled that capital sentencing must fit the individual offense and the violator (Fisher, 2013). Psychologists involvement in death penalty cases became controversial after the amending of Ethics Code Standard 1.02. The amended standard prohibited psychologists from participating in any activities including lawful, that defended or justified human rights (Fisher, 2013). There are those that will argue that the Ethics Code should prohibit psychologists from conducting assessments that supports an inequitable correctional system whose inconsistencies lethally violates human rights (Fisher, 2013). The death penalty would fall under this exclusion because it is an unwarranted and inequitable killing which violates the basic rights of individuals to life and liberty. Whereas, others argue that the absence of well-trained forensic psychologists could lead to capricious and unprofessional assessments conducted by those without proper training (Fisher, 2013). The ethical debate concerning this controversial issue continues because of the many flaws identified in the death penalty process. One flaw being that the capital punishment procedure consists of inequities and unfairness given the findings that the individuals who are more likely to receive the death sentence are racial minorities and defendants from lower socioeconomic levels.

2

FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

3

Research psychologists have also noted that fallibility of testimonies has been a serious threat to fair convictions for some time, resulting in innocent people being put to death or waiting on death row. Considering the flaws of the death penalty procedures, the APA requested that death penalty is not carried out until there are policies and procedures that can be shown through psychological and other social science research to improve capital case procedural flaws such as: incompetency, inadequate investigative services, the withholding of exculpatory evidence, and the selection of conviction-prone jurors (Fisher, p.65, 2013). Studies have also shown that the fallibility of psychological test has also contributed to the inequities and arbitrariness in death penalty proceedings. According to Fisher (2013), most test scored that indicates psychological disorders or cognitive disorders are based on probabilities. Take for instance the definition of mental retardation. Its specific definition varies across states. The general agreement is that an individual must display a lack of adaptive skills necessary to live independently and below-average general intellectual ability. There is no agreement on the IQ score for mental retardation, the relative weight that should be given to IQ scores, and the validity and reliability of IQ scores. The third contributing factor to diagnostic fallibility is socioeconomic disadvantages. Defendants who were brought up in lowsocioeconomic areas were never evaluated for mental retardation before the age 18, so their records would lack the information needed for a mental retardation diagnosis. Cultural bias and the predicting of future acts of violence are also probabilistic. These probabilistic fallibilities, biases, and idiosyncrasies result in absolute decisions. According to the Center for Constitutional Rights, the death penalty violates the rights guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 3 of the Declaration of

FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

4

Human Rights, life is a human right, consequently making the death penalty a violator of human rights. The death penalty has been found to breach the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and prohibition against torture under international human rights law. There is progress being made against the death penalty. Atkins v. Virginia the Supreme Court (2002) found that executing the mentally retarded as unconstitutional. Roper v. Simmons (2005) the Supreme Court overturned the ruling of juvenile death penalty by citing the international human rights law, which prohibits capital punishment on a person below the age of 18 (CCR, 2017). In defense to the death penalty violating human rights, the legal system provides defendants with protections to rectify flawed evaluations or decisions: right to appeal, right to receive psychological treatment and ongoing evaluations, and the providing of new evidence into consideration following conviction. The inclusion of psychologists in capital cases is to provide fact or expert testimony by providing relevant and useful information that ultimately leads to the decisions make in the case. Even though there are arguments that provide reasons that the death penalty violates human rights, there is no definite ruling that a psychologist is violating the Ethics Code if they are involved in a capital case. However, a psychologist must be mindful that their own morals, beliefs, cultures, and biases could affect their ability to make ethical decisions. Without proper acknowledgment, a psychologist could be in violation of Standard 2.04 and 2.06. If proper actions are not taking to reduce any conflict the psychologist could be in violation of Standard 2.01f and Standard 1.02.

FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

5

If a psychologist still decides to be involved they must properly administer, analyze, and report assessments. Failing to do so could cause them to violate Standards 9.01, 9.02, 9.05, 9.06, 9.09, and 9.10. In conclusion, there may not be a definite answer as to whether psychologists involved in capital cases violates Ethics Code Standard 1.02. The most ethical decision that a psychologist could make it to refrain from being involved in such cases. That is the only guarantee that one will avoid such ethical pitfalls in a controversial issue.

6

FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY References APA. (2017). Ethical Principles for Psychologists and code of Conduct. Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx Center for Constitutional Rights. (2017). The death penalty is a human rights violation: An examination of the death penalty in the U.S. from a human rights perspective. Retrieved May 17, 2017 from https://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/assets/files/CCR%20Death%20Penalty%20Factsh eet.pdf Fisher, C. B. (2013, May 17). Are psychologists violating their ethics code by conducting death penalty evaluations for defendants with mental disabilities? Retrieved May 16, 2017, from https://ethicsandsociety.org/2013/05/17/are-psychologists-violating-the-

american- psychological-associations-apa-ethics-code-when-they-conduct-death-penaltyevaluations-involving-defendants-with-mental-disabilities/ Fisher, C. (2013). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications....