Title Correction: Determining Intellectual Disability in the Courts: Focus on Capital Cases

12-20-13 Correction note:  The title listed at the AAIDD web page differs from the official title for this guide as submitted by the editor of this volume, and agree upon by the contributors.  The current title, and expected publication title, is:

 Determining Intellectual Disability in the Courts:  Focus on Capital Cases



The Death Penalty and Intellectual Disability: A Guide is now listed as a forthcomming publication at the AAIDD publications web page. A brief description from that page follows below

In the 2002 landmark decision Atkins v. Virginia 536 U.S. 304, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that executing a person with intellectual disability is a violation of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment,” but left states to determine their own criteria for intellectual disability. AAIDD has always advocated against the death penalty for people with intellectual disability and has long provided amicus curiae briefs in Supreme Court cases. Thus, in this comprehensive new book published by AAIDD, notable authors in the field of intellectual disability discuss all aspects of the issues, with a particular focus on foundational considerations, assessment factors and issues, and professional concerns in Atkins assessments.

The projected publication is sometime this spring.

Conflict of interest statement: I am the author of two of the chapters:

-Intellectual Functioning: Conceptual Issues
-Norm Obsolescence: The Flynn Effect


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Research brief: Global support for the death penalty?

Unnever, J. (2010). Global support for the death penalty. Punishment & Society International Journal of Penology, 12(4), 463-484.

Abstract

The recently released Gallup International 2000 Millennium Survey Poll collected data from individuals residing in 59 countries. The focus of this research was to analyze these data to examine whether the abolition movement has ushered in a new ‘collective sensibility’ about the death penalty or whether global attitudes toward capital punishment are characterized by deep divisions. The research assumes that the long-term stability of abolition will be assured when the vast majority of the citizens of the world oppose the use of the death penalty. The findings reveal that there are deep cleavages in worldwide support for capital punishment. The article highlights five divides in support for capital punishment and then separately discusses the results from the human rights and minority group threat analyses.

Forensic psychology criminal psychology criminal justice death penalty capital punishment


- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Court Decisions: Prosecutors waive death penalty correctly in two Atkins MR/ID cases

A couple of recent Atkins cases where the state agreed to waive death because the defendant was ID.  It is nice to see the prosecutors willing to admit that someone is MR/ID when it is clear.  There is hope for correct implementation for Atkins cases.  Thanks to Kevin Foley for alerting me to these updates.

Oregon murder defendant, James Demetri Davenport, will not face death. According to the March 20th Statesman Journal, "Marion County prosecutors dropped plans to seek the death penalty against Davenport after his mental disability was confirmed by separate evaluations performed by experts hired by defense lawyers and the prosecution, said Matt Kemmy, a deputy district attorney."


Arkansas, defendant Normal Brandon Dewayne Johnson, will also not face the death penalty. According to the March 13th Arkansas Democate Gazette,  " Prosecutors on Thursday dropped their plans to seek the death penalty against a 22-year-old Little Rock man accused in a string of armed holdups and shootings that left three men dead, including a university instructor, after doctors determined him to be mentally retarded.  "Arkansas law and U.S. Supreme Court precedent bar the execution of mentally retarded defendants whose IQs are 65 or below. Testing at the State Hospital in Little Rock measured Brandon Dewayne Johnson's IQ at 55, according to a mental health evaluation filed in Pulaski County Circuit Court on Tuesday."

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, neuropsychology, intelligence, school psychology, educational psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, intellectual disability, mental retardation, MR, ID, criminal psychology, criminal defense, ABA, American Bar Association, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, Davenport V Oregon, Johnson v Oregon, death penalty waived

iPost: [CEDP] WA Supreme Court to hear death penalty debate

From: Julien Ball <julienball@hotmail.com>
Date: March 18, 2010 11:26:45 AM CDT
To: CEDP National <cedp_national_office@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [CEDP] WA Supreme Court to hear death penalty debate

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011373880_apwascowdeathpenalty.html

WA Supreme Court to hear death penalty debate

The state Supreme Court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of the state's execution process.

The Associated Press

OLYMPIA, Wash. — The state Supreme Court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of the state's execution process.
Thursday morning, the high court will hear debate on whether one aspect of a lawsuit filed by a death row inmate who is challenging the constitutionality of death penalty procedures is now moot because of a recent change made by the state Department of Corrections.
Earlier this month, the state revealed that it was changing its method of execution from a three-drug cocktail to a one-drug system.
The court will also consider whether the department has the authority to draft execution policy and whether lethal injection violates federal laws because a doctor doesn't obtain or administer the drugs.

---

Law Review Article: Judging Cruelty (Ryan, 2010)

Another death penalty related Law Review article (click here) by Meghan Ryan, which builds on her prior article related to the eight ammendment.

Abstract:    

The wisdom of the death penalty has recently come under attack in a number of states. This raises the question of whether states’ retreat from the death penalty, or other punishments, will pressure other states—either politically or constitutionally—to similarly abandon the punishment. Politically, states may succumb to the trend of jettisoning a penalty. Constitutionally, states may be forced to surrender the penalty if the punishment is considered cruel, and, as a result of a large number of states renouncing the penalty, the punishment also becomes unusual. If a punishment is thus found to be both cruel and unusual, it will be proscribed under the Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Considering the disappearance of some punishments and emergence of new punishments, whether a punishment is cruel under the Punishments Clause is an important question. Curiously, there has been very little discussion of what constitutes a cruel punishment, as distinguished from whether a punishment is also unusual. This Article examines the concept of cruelty as enshrined in the Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause and suggests that the Supreme Court ought to focus on this elusive concept through its independent judgment analysis. The Article emphasizes that such an independent judgment focus on cruelty should be constrained by specific, identified factors and that these factors should go beyond examining the penological purposes of punishment. The Article asserts that motive and the nature and quality of a punishment are central to the concept of cruelty and suggests that a more nuanced understanding of punishment rationales, supplemented by factors focused on elements such as the bloody or lingering nature of the punishment, is necessary in properly determining whether a punishment is cruel under the Punishments Clause.

Keywords: Eighth Amendment, Punishments Clause, cruel and unusual, Kennedy v. Louisiana, retribution, retributivism, deterrence, deterrent, roper v. simmons, Baze v. Rees, Ford v. Wainwright, Stanford v. Kentucky, Penry v. Lynaugh, punishmemt. sentencing
Working Paper Serie

iPost: More on trends in death penalty and executions

More on changing trends in death penalty and executions. Many articles have been published over the past six months re: these trends that were summarized in recent 2009 DPIC report.

Thanks to Tim Derning for sending these links to TIME magazine coverage

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1948904,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1876397,00.html

iPost: DPIC 2009 year end death penalty report

You can get your yeat end DPIC report at link below
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/dpics-2009-year-end-report-released

Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)

iPost: UN leader asks for international ban on the death penalty

Over at the DPIC blog.



Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)

Research Briefs 12-17-09: Asian-American sentencing; does death penalty deter crime?; public opinions re: crime/punishment

Johnson, B. D., & Betsinger, S. (2009). PUNISHING THE ''MODEL MINORITY'': ASIAN-AMERICAN CRIMINAL SENTENCING OUTCOMES IN FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS. Criminology, 47(4), 1045-1090.

Research on racial and ethnic disparities in criminal punishment is expansive but remains focused almost exclusively on the treatment of black and Hispanic offenders. The current study extends contemporary research on the racial patterning of punishments by incorporating Asian-American offenders. Using data from the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) for FY1997–FY2000, we examine sentencing disparities in federal district courts for several outcomes. The results of this study indicate that Asian Americans are punished more similarly to white offenders compared with black and Hispanic offenders. These findings raise questions for traditional racial conflict perspectives and lend support to more recent theoretical perspectives grounded in attribution processes of the courtroom workgroup. The article concludes with a discussion of future directions for research on understudied racial and ethnic minority groups.

Land, K. C., Teske, R. H. C., & Zheng, H. (2009). THE SHORT-TERM EFFECTS OF EXECUTIONS ON HOMICIDES: DETERRENCE, DISPLACEMENT, OR BOTH? Criminology, 47(4), 1009-1043.

Does the death penalty save lives? In recent years, a new round of research has been using annual time-series panel data from the 50 U.S. states for 25 or so years from the 1970s to the late 1990s that claims to find many lives saved through reductions in subsequent homicide rates after executions. This research, in turn, has produced a round of critiques, which concludes that these findings are not robust enough to model even small changes in specifications that yield dramatically different results. A principal reason for this sensitivity of the findings is that few state-years exist (about 1 percent of all state-years) in which six or more executions have occurred. To provide a different perspective, we focus on Texas, a state that has used the death penalty with sufficient frequency to make possible relatively stable estimates of the homicide response to executions. In addition, we narrow the observation intervals for recording executions and homicides from the annual calendar year to monthly intervals. Based on time-series analyses and independent-validation tests, our best-fitting model shows that, from January 1994 through December 2005, evidence exists of modest, short-term reductions in homicides in Texas in the first and fourth months that follow an execution—about 2.5 fewer homicides total. Another model suggests, however, that in addition to homicide reductions, some displacement of homicides may be possible from one month to another in the months after an execution, which reduces the total reduction in homicides after an execution to about .5 during a 12-month period. Implications for additional research and the need for future analysis and replication are discussed.

Cochran, J. K., & Sanders, B. A. (2009). The gender gap in death penalty support: An exploratory study. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(6), 525-533.

One of the more enduring observations in the study of death penalty support within the United States is the strong divide between males and females. Men have consistently shown significantly higher levels of support for capital punishment than women. This divide between males and females has appeared in nearly every survey, over time, and across a variety of methodological designs. Using data from the cumulative (1972-2002) data file for the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) General Social Surveys, this study attempted to understand the basis for this gender gap. It examined gender differences in socioeconomic status, gender inequality, gender socialization, religion/religiosity, political ideology, positions on right-to-life and other social issues, fear of crime and victimization experience, experience with the criminal justice system, philosophies of punishment, and attribution styles. The findings revealed that the effect of gender on capital punishment support continued to be robust despite controlling for the effects of all of these explanations.

Cook, C. L., & Lane, J. (2009). The place of public fear in sentencing and correctional policy. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(6), 586-595.

Public opinion about sentencing and correctional issues has emerged in recent decades as a salient topic in criminology. Empirical studies have suggested that the public has dynamic perceptions about these criminal justice issues. Sentencing and correctional policy have become key issues confronting legislators and policymakers, as correctional budgets and public interest in these areas have increased. Despite the focus on public opinion about sentencing and corrections, previous research has largely ignored how the public feels about the role of policymakers regarding these issues, and what influences opinions about whether public fear should be an important consideration in policy decisions. The current study partly replicated the work of Cullen and colleagues by examining perceptions of crime salience, crime causation, goals of the criminal justice system, and attitudes towards imprisonment and rehabilitation. It uniquely examined perceptions about the importance of legislator consideration of a specific determinant, namely, public fear, in decision making about sentencing and correctional policy.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, psychology and law, neuropsychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, death penalty, capital punishment, public opinion on crime, death penatly efficacy

iPost: Cost of death penaly

Yet another article on the coats if the death penalty. Thanks. DPIC for the post.


Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)

Research briefs 12-14-09: Effect of race on capital jury deliberation

Lynch, M., & Haney, C. (2009). Capital Jury Deliberation: Effects on Death Sentencing, Comprehension, and Discrimination. Law and Human Behavior, 33(6), 481-496.

Abstract

This study focused on whether and how deliberations affected the comprehension of capital penalty phase jury instructions and patterns of racially discriminatory death sentencing. Jury-eligible subjects were randomly assigned to view one of four versions of a simulated capital penalty trial in which the race of defendant (Black or White) and the race of victim (Black or White) were varied orthogonally. The participants provided their initial ‘‘straw’’ sentencing verdicts individually and then deliberated in simulated 4–7 person ‘‘juries.’’ Results indicated that deliberation created a punitive rather than lenient shift in the jurors’ death sentencing behavior, failed to improve characteristically poor instructional comprehension, did not reduce the tendency for jurors to misuse penalty phase evidence(especially, mitigation), and exacerbated the tendency among White mock jurors to sentence Black defendants to death more often than White defendants.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, neuropsychology, juries, jury, capital punishment, death penatly, ABA, American Bar Association, race, discrimination

21st century jury, 8th Ammend. and death penalty, Texas Atkins cases: Three Law Review Articles posted

The following law review articles have been posted to ICDP's Atkins-Related Law Review Articles blog sidebar.

Church (2003). Mandating Dignity: The United States Supreme Court’s Extreme Departure From Precedent Regarding the Eighth Amendment and the Death Penalty


Hans (2009).  The Twenty-First Century Jury: Worst of Times or Best of Times?


Kan (2009). Presenting information about mental retardation in the courtroom:  A content analysis of pre-Atkins capital trial transcripts from Texas

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensice psychology, neuropsychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, ABA, American Bar Association, IQ, MR, ID, mental retardation, intellectual disabilities, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital puniishment, 8th Ammendment, juries, Texas death penalty

ACPN conference Feb 26-28: Forensic neuropsychologist workshop on death penalty litigation cases

The American College of Professional Neuropsychology annual conference is this Feb 26-28 in Las Vegas.  One of the half-day workshops is focused on forensic neuropsychology in death penalty litigation cases.  Below is a description of the workshop.

Friday February 26, 2010   8:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.

Course A. What the Forensic Neuropsychologist Needs to Know about Death Penalty Litigation
Presenter:  Thomas J. Reidy, Ph.D., ABPP

Description:  This workshop will explore the unique psycho-legal issues at capital sentencing broadly divided into mitigation and violence risk assessment. A U.S. Dept. of Justice science based formulation will be used to demonstrate the nexus between adverse developmental trajectory and adult outcome. The scientific basis for violence risk assessment unique to a prison context will be demonstrated, as well as the methodological and conceptual errors made by mental health professionals at capital sentencing. The discussion of mitigation and risk assessment will include issues of relevance to neuropsychologists.

Goals & Objectives Participants will be able to:

1. Describe the difference between criminal responsibility and moral culpability in a capital context;
2. Recognize the role of adverse developmental and neuropsychological factors in mitigation; and
3. Identify the special considerations and errors in violence risk assessment at capital sentencing

Technorati Tags: psychology, neuropsychology, school psychology, educational psychology, forensic psychology, workshops, death penalty, capital punishment, American College Professional Neuropsychology

Larry v Branker (NC, 2009). More voodoo psychometrics via SEM misuse/abuse and use of SSSQ

Another addition to the Atkins Court Decisions section of the ICDP blog. And, unfortunately, another case the reflects the courts failure to recognize professionally accepted psychometric standards (viz., failure to consider standard error of measurement--SEM; and the use of adaptive behavior instruments that are inappropriate for norm-referenced "relative standing" in a population comparisons).  Another case of voodoo psychometrics.


Thanks to Kevin Foley for sending the Larry v Branker (NC, 2009) decision.

Upon review, this appears to be yet another case where a bright line IQ score of 70 is used to render a Dx of MR.  That is....70 or below...DX=MR....71 to 75 = not MR.  The defendant obtained a Full Scale IQ score on the WAIS-III of 74, which is within the professionally accepted range for a Dx of MR (when taking into account "measurement error".)  Not taking into account the standard error of measurement (SEM) is at odds with the two major professional associations (AAMR/AAIDD; American Psychiatric Association DSM) that are always mentioned as providing the operational definition of MR in Atkins decisions.  APA and AAIDD (as well as all major measurement associations) make it extremely clear that SEM must be part of "best practices" when diagnosing MR.  The use of SEM is interpreted by professional associations, psychometric experts, and most psychological testing experts, as recognizing scores as high as 75 (70 plus or minus 5 IQ pts) in a possible Dx of MR. 

The continued failure of certain courts, judges, states, and some psychologist "experts" to recognize the well-established measurement concept of "measurement error" (as reflected by the SEM statistic) is troubling....very disturbing.  I will eventually be making a post re: the concept of SEM...in hopes of educating folks on the logic, statistics, and support for recognizing measurement error in MR Dx....esp. in Atkins cases.  The recent law review article by Blume is an excellent read regarding the failure of many courts to recognize the accepted practice of bracketing IQ scores with the SEM---and often in a manner that appears to be a deliberate attempt to circumvent the intention of the U.S. Supreme Courts original landmark Atkins v Virginia decision.  Some courts and judges continue to play foot-loose and fancy-free with psychometric concepts that they clearly fail to understand or, simply deliberately interpret inappropriately to justify a predetermined biased decision.  People with MR are continuing to be executed due to SEM misuse and abuse.   It appears the Larry Court hid behind statutory language: "The statute defines '[significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning' as '[a]n intelligence quotient of 70 or below.' Id" rather than employing reflective critical thinking in accordance with accepted professional standards. 

Also, as has been seen in other decisions,the SSSQ was inappropriately accepted as a measure of adaptive behavior.  Another example of voodoo psychometrics (click here for my prior comments on the use of the inappropriate use of the SSSQ in the formal Dx of MR. ) The SSSQ may be an appropriate instrument for which it was developed and/or normed, but is not an appropriate nationally normed measure of AB...which is required as per the Joint Test Standards when making inferences regarding a persons relative standing within the population.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, school psychology, educational psychology, neuropsychology, IQ, intelligence, IQ tests, IQ scores, standard error of measurement, SEM, MR, ID, mental retardation, intellectual disability, SSSQ, adaptive behavior, Atkins cases, Atkins hearings, death penalty, Atkiins v Virginia, capital punishment, Larry v Branker, voodoo psychometrics

Woods v Texas Standwown Texas update: May be executed after Thanksgiving break

The StandDown Texas Project just made a post indicating that after Thanksgiving the first person to possibly be executed may be mentally retarded (intellectual disability).  The initial ICDP post re: Woods v Texas (plus links to relevant court decisions) can be viewed by clicking here.  As one can surmise from my initial post, the Woods case contains a quagmire of psychometric issues.

The StandDown report includes a link to a Texas newspaper that has posted a brief online interview with Woods.

Technorati Tags: psychology, psychometrics, neuropsychology, forensic psychology, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, adaptive behavior, MR, ID, mental retardation, intellectual disability, Atkins cases, death penalty, capital punishment, StandDown Texas Project, Texas executions, Woods v Texas

Moratorium and ABA-based team review of Kentucky death penalty announced

State of Kentucky death penalty moratorium and ABA-lead review story can be found at the DPIC.

Technorati Tags: Kentucky, DPIC, death penalty, ABA

Book review: More on the Last Lawyer

More reviews on The Last Lawyer...this time from DPIC.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, ABA, American Bar Association, death penalty, capital punishment, mental retardation, Last Lawyer

Book review: The Last Lawyer: The Fight to Save Death Row Inmates

I just finished reading "The Last Lawyer" last night.  I would recommend it to anyone who has not been privy to the lengthy, complex and personal winding road of death penalty appeals and the court proceedings.  I agree with Leonard Pitts (one of my favorite syndicated columnist) who, on the book jacket, describes the book as reading "like first-class legal fiction, but it's far more compelling because it is, tragically, legal fact."  So true.  It was an extremely easy read and felt like story unfolding before me.  I found myself frequently saying "just one more short chapter" before going to bed.  Extremely well written.

Readers of this blog will likely find the later half of the book (starting on page 130) particularly interesting (and sobering) as the use of intelligence test scores and the diagnosis of MR/ID becomes a major point of the story.  How some of those in the legal field (and one judge in particular) played with the IQ scores and failed to recognize that they are imperfect measures (the need to recognize measurement error)  is eye-opening and sobering to those of us involved in intelligence testing development and research.

I give it two big thumbs up.

THE LAST LAWYER: A NEW BOOK ABOUT A BORDERLINE MENTALLY RETARDED DEATH ROW INMATE (GUEST POST BY AUTHOR JOHN TEMPLE)

Click here for more information about the book and a link to the authors web site.

Technorati Tags: The Last Lawyer, Last Lawyer, John Temple, book, ABA, American Bar Association, psychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, neuropsychology, educational psychology, school psychology, adaptive behavior, intelligence, IQ, IQ tests, mental retardation, intellectual disability, death row, North Carolina death penaly, capital punishment, Atkins case

Does California's death penalty violate the 8th ammendment: New California Law Review Article

Another law review article.  Not specific to Atkins MR/ID cases, but may be of interest to readers.

Colon, S. (2009).  Capital Crime: How California’s Administration of the Death Penalty Violates the Eighth Amendment.  California Law Review  (click here to view entire article)

There have been fewer executions in California than deaths by lightning strike. But what does the death penalty have to do with lightning? The comparison is drawn from the analysis in the landmark capital punishment case, Furman v. Georgia, which held capital punishment at the time to be unconstitutional. That analysis, now mostly relegated to sound bite status, suggests that California's capital punishment system is unconstitutional. In Furman, Justice Stewart compared being sentenced to death with getting struck by lightning, in the sense that sentencing was both arbitrary and capricious. The Furman court noted that this was not acceptable because it meant that capital punishment could not serve the legitimizing penal purposes of deterrence and retribution. Now once inmates have been sentenced to death in California, executions are so infrequent that comparison with lightning is generous. Because the execution rate in California is so low, sentencing does not correspond to the actual imposition of the death penalty. Only 13 inmates have been executed since 1978. There are currently 677 on death row. This paper aims to show that as a result of a low execution rate and inmate death row stays averaging around 17 years and growing, capital punishment in California is no longer more retributive or deterrent than the punishment of life without parole. As such, it is excessive and violates the Eighth Amendment. Part I introduces the subject in context with other developments in capital punishment. Part II addresses different theories of retribution and deterrence and defines retribution and deterrence in the context of capital punishment and this paper. Part II also illustrates why retribution and deterrence are essential elements to a constitutional capital punishment scheme. Part III argues that the delay in California between judgment and executions frustrates the furtherance of retribution and deterrence. Part IV focuses on the low number of executions in California and why this prevents retribution and deterrence. Part V discusses potential solutions to California's capital punishment problem. Finally, Part VI summarizes key points from the paper.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, death penalty, capital punishment, Atkins cases, California Law Review, ABA, American Bar Association

Research briefs 11-17-09: Borderline intellectual functioning and ID; Happiest man ever on death row

Articles that caught my eye during my weekly search of journals.

Ferrari, M. (2009). Borderline Intellectual Functioning and the Intellectual Disability Construct. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 47(5), 386-389. (click here to view)

Wehmeyer et al. (2008) recently published a particularly instructive paper in this journal on the construct of intellectual disability. The authors carefully distinguished between operational definitions of the term and those intended to describe and explain the potential basis for the condition; the latter they referred to as constitutive. They also discussed a multidimensional model of human functioning as a preferred way of conceptualizing intellectual disabilities, particularly in contrast to those that have been based on biological traits and defects. However, although they asserted that there are differences at the level of construct between the terms intellectual disability and mental retardation, they reaffirmed Schalock et al.’s (2007) point that this does not translate into any difference in the diagnostic process and that ‘‘the term intellectual disability covers the same population (as those) diagnosed previously with mental retardation in number, kind, level, type, and duration’’ (p. 317). The authors also called for input from the field in preparation for the upcoming manual on Definition, Classification and Systems of Support. This article provides input by calling attention to borderline intellectual functioning, a term referring to a potentially large group of people who may also manifest intellectual disabilities. I begin with a brief overview of the history of the term and then address the need for meaningful dialogue of this issue, both to enhance understanding of the intellectual disability construct and to refine clinical practice and education while developing a clear agenda for reinvigorated research.

Perske, R. (2009). Joe Arridy, ''The Happiest Man Who Ever Lived on Death Row''. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 47(5), 390-394. (click here to view)  --- Additional information re: Joe Arridy can be found at a website devoted to his story.

Most persons would feel an unspeakable repulsion about ever living on death row of an American prison. The lights are kept on night and day. Guards watch closely so no inmate can quietly sneak into oblivion before the official government sanctioned ‘‘send-off’’ day. As the day of death comes closer, the physical and mental strain can be awful. How could anyone laugh for joy in a setting like this? There was once a man who did.

Technorati Tags: psychology, forensic psychology, criminal psychology, criminal justice, school psychology, educational psychology, neuropsychology, intelligence, IQ, IQ tests, IQ scores, MR, ID, mental retardation, intellectual disability, borderline intelligence, death penalty, capital punishment, AAIDD, Joe Arridy