Death Penalty: Ford Vs. Wainwright

As long as societies continue to utilize the death penalty as a form of punishment there will always be the question of, is it justified and does it help in preventing crime? Many principles have been influenced from the deontological perspective, that justice demands that the guilty are punished. Also, that punishment must proportionate to the crime, as well as justified (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). When considering an individual’s level of deviance, it would be difficult to determine if they are fact suffering from a mental disorder or avoiding execution. In my opinion, the decision on whether they are fit to be executed should rely on a psychiatric evaluation given by a team of physicians, along with court proceedings. All of the responsibility of …show more content…
The legal system has responded to this question in Ford v. Wainwright. When the Supreme Court answered the question, were the courts in violation of the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment which forbids the application of the death penalty on the insane (Ford v. Wainwright). The case involved Alvin Ford who was convicted of capital murder in 1974. During his incarceration, he began to experience severe changes in behavior that lead to a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia with suicidal tendencies. Experts for the defense had the opinion that he did not understand why he would be executed therefore would not be able to make the connection between crime and the death penalty. The governor of Florida signed Ford’s death certificate after reviewing his status with several experts that were hired by the state. Ford then filed a habeas corpus asking for an evidentiary hearing on the grounds, that his level of competence did not meet the standard to be