Dilemmas in administering the death penalty

This article critiques ethical arguments against conducting forensic evaluations of capital defendants or condemned prisoners and against treating prisoners found incompetent for execution, and considers the impact of widespread professional abstention on the legal system. It concludes that arguments for abstention by forensic evaluators are grounded mainly in personal moral scruples against capital punishment, rather than in tenets of professional ethics, but that abstention would be ethically required if the evaluator's scruples preclude objectivity. It also concludes that treatment of incompetent prisoners known to want treatment is ethically permissible but that treatment for the sole purpose of readying the prisoner for execution is not.Editor's note: Adversary Forum is edited by Gary B. Melton. Stan Brodsky was asked to respond to Professor Bonnie's article, and Professor Bonnie was given an opportunity to reply.This article is based on a paper presented as the Keynote Address to the Annual Meeting of the     

Closing the Organ Gap: A Reciprocity-Based Social Contract Approach

Organ transplantation has become a proven, cost-effective lifesaving treatment, but its promise is contingent on the number of available organs. The growing gap between the demand and supply results in unnecessary loss and diminished quality of life as well as high costs for surviving patients and health insurers. Twenty years after the enactment of the National Organ Transplantation Act, it is time to rethink the moral basis and overall design of organ transplantation policy. We propose a national plan for organ transplantation insurance under which the federal government would assume responsibility for increasing the organ supply and would cover all costs associated with transplantation for patients not otherwise covered.     

Experimental Methodology in Political Science

Experiments offer a useful methodological tool to examine issuesof importance to political scientists. The historical and culturaldifferences between experiments in behavioral economics andsocial psychology are discussed. Issues of central concern toexperimentalists are covered, including impact versus control,mundane versus experimental realism, internal versus externalvalidity, deception, and laboratory versus field experiments.Advantages and disadvantages of experimentation are summarized.     

Evaluating the Comprehensibility of Jury Instructions: A Method and an Example

Methodological problems in jury simulation research involve issues of sampling, choice of stimulus materials, appropriate unit of analysis, appropriate dependent variable, corroborative data, and problems of role playing. Despite these issues, comprehension of jury instructions may be suitable for examination by jury simulation techniques--if certain of these methodological concerns can be satisfied. In a series of 5 experiments using typical Canadian legal instructions on criminal conspiracy and the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule, this study attempted to validate a simple and inexpensive technique for testing the incomprehensibility of a given set of jury instructions by requiring participants to apply those legal instructions to a set of facts. The results demonstrate the utility of an application test, and suggest that for assessing the comprehensibility of jury instructions, it may be acceptable to use undergraduate students as participants, to use individual participants without group deliberation, and to employ written stimulus materials.     

Blaming the jews

His most recent publication is Interminority Affairs in the U.S.: The Challenge of Pluralism,a special issue of The Annals of the American Academy of Social and Political Science.He is author of Mainstreams and Margins: Jews, Blacks, and Other Americans,published by Transaction.