1
An Ethical Dilemma: Psychologists' Role in Death Penalty Assessment
College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Grand Canyon University
PSY-510: Contemporary and Ethical Issues in Psychology
, 2
An Ethical Dilemma: Psychologists' Role in Death Penalty Assessment
Navigating the ethical implications of death penalty assessments can be difficult for
forensic psychologists, who encounter a dilemma between professional responsibilities and
considerable ethical challenges. These issues create human rights concerns, including the right to
life and prohibiting cruel or unusual punishment. This paper examines the controversy
surrounding psychologists' involvement in death penalty assessments, focusing on human rights
considerations and the ethical implications.
Human Rights: Considerations in Death Penalty Cases
When considering the implications of capital punishment, it is essential to consider how
human rights factor into this form of punishment. The death penalty is a controversial topic that
generates legal and moral issues globally. Some say it breaches the right to life, while others say
it deters offenders. Robinson and Moody (2019) argue that capital punishment breaches
international human rights law. They are supported by the United Nations Human Rights
Committee (2018), which advocates for abolishing the death penalty to improve human dignity
and advance human rights. Such arguments tend to rely on international agreements that are not
legally binding, particularly in countries like the United States (U.S.). Despite international
pressure to abolish the death penalty, the U.S. has maintained the practice, with each state having
the authority to decide whether to implement it (Robinson & Moody, 2019).
Concerns have been raised about the risk of wrongful convictions and the discriminatory
use of the death penalty, disproportionately impacting minority communities. Steiker and Steiker
(2020) discuss the case of Buck v. Davis (2017), which saw the U.S. Supreme Court reverse a
decision where an expert witness stated that the defendant, who was black, posed an increased
risk of dangerousness solely based on his race. This case and many others illustrate that racial
An Ethical Dilemma: Psychologists' Role in Death Penalty Assessment
College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Grand Canyon University
PSY-510: Contemporary and Ethical Issues in Psychology
, 2
An Ethical Dilemma: Psychologists' Role in Death Penalty Assessment
Navigating the ethical implications of death penalty assessments can be difficult for
forensic psychologists, who encounter a dilemma between professional responsibilities and
considerable ethical challenges. These issues create human rights concerns, including the right to
life and prohibiting cruel or unusual punishment. This paper examines the controversy
surrounding psychologists' involvement in death penalty assessments, focusing on human rights
considerations and the ethical implications.
Human Rights: Considerations in Death Penalty Cases
When considering the implications of capital punishment, it is essential to consider how
human rights factor into this form of punishment. The death penalty is a controversial topic that
generates legal and moral issues globally. Some say it breaches the right to life, while others say
it deters offenders. Robinson and Moody (2019) argue that capital punishment breaches
international human rights law. They are supported by the United Nations Human Rights
Committee (2018), which advocates for abolishing the death penalty to improve human dignity
and advance human rights. Such arguments tend to rely on international agreements that are not
legally binding, particularly in countries like the United States (U.S.). Despite international
pressure to abolish the death penalty, the U.S. has maintained the practice, with each state having
the authority to decide whether to implement it (Robinson & Moody, 2019).
Concerns have been raised about the risk of wrongful convictions and the discriminatory
use of the death penalty, disproportionately impacting minority communities. Steiker and Steiker
(2020) discuss the case of Buck v. Davis (2017), which saw the U.S. Supreme Court reverse a
decision where an expert witness stated that the defendant, who was black, posed an increased
risk of dangerousness solely based on his race. This case and many others illustrate that racial
