Eighth Circuit Court Case Study

Harper, the law allows state officials to medicate mentally ill inmates against their will if they are dangerous to others or themselves. After the Court orders, State authorities reviewed medical records of Mr. Singleton to see if he is competent enough to be executed and they also found out that Mr. Singleton is voluntarily cooperating to the medical treatment and completely aware of the situation and circumstances. According to the Court, Mr. Singleton said, “I don’t want it to seem like I’m running a game, but I have a case going involving forced medication.” Mr. Singleton also requested that he does not want his lawyer not to do anything or come in a way in his execution. I strongly opposed that it took about 24 years for State authorities and Courts to execute him. As we know that Mr. Singleton was diagnosed with schizophrenia/psychosis after he committed murder and was in jail. However, when he entered Ms. York’s grocery store for robbery and according to the records, Mr. Singleton told Ms. York that he is here to only rob her store and if she makes it hard for him then he will take this to the next level which means murder. So it was clear that while Mr. Singleton was committing murder and robbery, he was in his senses and knew what he was doing. Even though what he said and did while in the store, was not even close to any mental illness signs and

This case presents an issue about the 8th amendment and the lack of specificity in the Constitution, specifically pertaining to minors. Graham was a minor at the time of the armed home robbery in the state of Florida. The Supreme Court has decided to revoke the punishment of life in prison without possibility of parole. This is because the majority of Supreme Judges believe that the 8th amendment is fundamental.

Psychiatric care 80 years ago was quite different to how standards are set today. The cases of Youngberg v. Romeo and Wyatt v. Stickney both played big roles in developing standards that help maintain humane conditions in institutions nowadays. Both cases played a part in determining the rights of involuntarily committed patients under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Before both cases, patients may have been living in inhumane conditions, refused the right to psychiatric care, and neglected proper habilitation. But now, standards have been set and it’s been deemed appropriate that involuntarily committed patients’ rights must be protected under the Fourteenth Amendment with such standards.

Four years prior to this case, the Supreme Court ruled that “the Constitution bars states from executing prisoners who are insane.” Then a few moments later after an inmate submitted an appeal on death row, The Supreme Court agreed “to decide the further question of whether a state can, in effect, make a prisoner eligible for execution by administering anti-psychotic medication against his will.” In the Perry v Louisiana case, Keith B. Nordyre argues for Perry’s rights, whether or not they

The primary reason the execution of Charles Singleton is considered to be unethical is because it conflicts with the American Constitution. The 8th amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.” Part of the 8th amendment states that no cruel and unusual punishment should be inflicted; thus the execution of Charles Singleton is unjust. According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, “the U.S. Supreme Court has said that it is unconstitutional and cruel to execute people who are insane” (n.d.). To force a person to take antipsychotic medication in order to make them sane enough to execute is wrong. It should be considered cruel and unusual to make Singleton

This article concerns a Texas man named Scott Panetti who committed murder by shooting his wife’s parents. Scott Panetti was diagnosed with schizophrenia about 14 years prior to the shootings, and was set to receive a lethal injection; however, the execution was stop do to “the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledges the legal complexity of putting a mentally ill inmate to death.” The court explains that they had to sort out legal issues that are involved with mental instability.

Debate over capital punishment is nothing new, but it reaches a whole new level when the accused is mentally ill. The question then becomes… was the perpetrator aware of his heinous actions by knowing right from wrong at the time of the crime or was the mental illness controlling his actions? While being sympathetic to the grief and heart break of the victim’s loved ones, I believe that execution for the mentally ill should not be allowed, because often their illness makes them incapable of knowing right and wrong of their actions. Many of those with mental illnesses often go undiagnosed and untreated, either by choice or by financial circumstances, because of the stigma and general lack of understanding associated with this type of diagnosis in our society.

In Texas, a man with schizophrenia was executed (Kelsey Patterson) even after the Board of Pardons and Paroles recommended clemency after learning of his time spent in mental hospitals and his unintelligible rambling.

Given the number of incarcerated inmates who suffer from some form of mental illness, there are growing concerns and questions in the medical field about treatment of the mentally ill in the prison system. When a person with a mental illness commits a crime or break the law, they are immediately taken to jail or sent off to prison instead of being evaluated and placed in a hospital or other mental health facility. “I have always wondered if the number of mentally ill inmates increased since deinstitutionalization” Since prison main focus is on the crimes inmates are incarcerated; the actual treatment needed for the mentally ill is secondary. Mentally ill prisoners on the surface may appear to be just difficult inmates depending on the

This risk should not be taken. Eventually others, like those with mental illness, could seek this treatment as well (Smith). They wouldn’t have the right to decide if they want to go through with euthanasia, so maybe their relative, who is tired of paying for treatment, could petition for euthanasia. If the state has custody they could also pursue the cheapest option. The physician’s ruthlessness could kill many people everywhere. If this is a possibility so much of the hope could disappear. Death is essentially giving up. “Murder and Suicide are both forms of killing,” States M. Scott Peck. Physician assisted suicide could lead to an even worse law.

would still need a consent from their treating doctor and a record of inmate’s medical history. Inmates who aren’t being treated well in prison would be transferred to hospitals for proper treatment (Reed and Lyne, 2000).

Despite the fact that my parents have worked in the criminal justice system for many years, I have never given much thought to the treatment of prisoners. As we learned from the readings, the current state of the United States criminal justice system is imperfect to the point of cruelty to those involved in it. This is truer for individuals with a mental illness. Due to a lack of psychiatric facilities throughout Alabama and overcrowding of those that do exist, many criminal offenders with mental illnesses are sent to prisons instead. State prisons are currently overcrowded, leading to substandard conditions such in almost every aspect.

There are laws and decisions of United States government and higher orders that present controversy to the people of America. In the state of Texas the application of the death penalty is difficult to interpret, especially for the mentally ill, because there is no written law or bill that explains the execution implication in complete detail. The death penalty is a capital punishment of death for those who have committed such high crime. This penalty goes for everyone who does such act no matter who you are, how rich how poor, or where you stand in society. For the longest time, even with the mindset and understanding that those who commit crime to a certain level can receive the execution punishment, the concern and debate whether the mentally

While, the issue of the incarcerated population having the privilege of this scarce medical resources is extensively and generally approved or compelling recognition within the correctional health profession and there is a case-law supporting the matter of concern, that the statues of a person as an inmate must not preclude such person as a patient from receiving adequate care in respect to serious health needs, regardless of the cost of such treatment. They also have all the social and moral values since the law does not exempt them from citizenship (Puisis, 2006, p.23).

Mentally ill patients are placed to death, most of the time they don’t know what they’re doing. Many people are just born with defects to their brain with the intention that causes them to act a certain way. No amount of drugs, schooling, treatment, or positive reinforcement will change them. It isn’t fair that someone should be murdered only because they were unlucky enough to be born with a brain defect. Although it is precisely unconstitutional to put a mentally ill patient to death, the rules can be indistinct and you still need to be able to convince a judge and jury that the defendant is mentally ill. There isn’t a way for the government to