A sentence of life without the possibility of parole usually reflects a judgement by society that the offender’s culpability is so great, the benefit of deterrence so high, and the potential for rehabilitation so low that the person must be incapacitated for the rest of their lives. When we apply the sentence to youth, we contradict a growing body of scientific research that indicates those conclusions are never appropriate when dealing with adolescents.
Researchers have found that, due to the incomplete development of the emotional and decision-making centers of the adolescent brain, youth tend to overstate immediate rewards while only partially recognizing the long-term consequences or risks involved in a situation. This decreased ability to evaluate consequences makes youth categorically less culpable for their deficient decisions than adults. It also diminishes the deterrent effect of subjecting youth to the harshest adult punishments.
Studies have also shown that neurological immaturity renders youth particularly susceptible to peer pressure, and vulnerable to the influence of environmental factors over which they have little control.
Finally, research indicates that youth are capable of great change. Their tendency towards impulsive behavior generally subsides with maturity, and the same incomplete development that makes them sensitive to peer pressure makes them highly receptive to rehabilitation.
This summary was drawn from the American Psychological Association’s Amicus Brief for Graham v. Florida and Sullivan v. Florida.
The US Supreme Court took note of the emerging scientific research on adolescent brain development in a 2005 ruling. In ruling that youth under the age of 18 could not be subject to the death penalty, the Court cited three fundamental differences between youth and adults:
[A] lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility are found in youth more often than in adults and are more understandable among the young. These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and decisions… The second area of difference is that juveniles are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure… The third broad difference is that the character of a juvenile is not as well formed as that of an adult. The personality traits of juveniles are more transitory, less fixed.”
The full court decision can be viewed here.
Our recognition of the difference between youths and adults is evident in the special restrictions we apply to young people. State statutes forbid the sale of alcohol and cigarettes to youth. We do not allow these youth to vote, nor serve on the juries they would appear before. Youth are recognized as too irresponsible or immature to purchase guns, consent to sex or marriage, or even see certain movies.
Ensuring that those convicted for crimes they committed as youth will have the possibility of parole would bring consistency to the treatment of youth under the law. As things stand, current Nebraska inmates have been sentenced to die in prison for crimes committed before the law recognized them as responsible enough to get behind the wheel of a car.
