Running head: THE DEATH PENALTY DISCUSSION The Kids Serving 50+ Years for Murder Within this documentary, several different teenage inmates are interviewed to review their life regarding their incarceration and crime that got them to where they are at. The Wabash Valley Correctional Facility is home to many individuals such as these, with many of them serving sentences that will not allow them to re-join the general population until they have served sentences that can extend beyond 30 years. Specifically, this documentary looks at the younger inmates the likes of which are from about 15-18 years of age that have been tried as adults because of their crimes. In the interviews, the several teens describe the instance that changed their lives and presented them with an entirely different future than was expected. They reflect on their regret for the day and how they wish it had gone differently, while also retaining regret and dread for the future amount of time that they will be forced to endure within the prison. They are, however, afforded some correctional and rehabilitation activities that is meant to encourage them, prepare them for society upon exit, as well as possibly shortening their sentence with good behavior. These activities include schooling, counseling, as well as aiding the staff of the prison around the facility with different tasks. All in all, it is a fairly bleak existence, with 18 hours of confinement a day that is either solitary or with a bunk mate, with 1 hour of recreation time in the morning and 1 hour in the evening for the inmate. There wasn’t much of an agenda within this video as their wasn’t exactly an aim to convince the viewer of one thing or another. It does, however, present a case with the review of these inmates of the immensely life changing position they are in as a result of poor decisions. In a way, I would describe this a sort bias as the documentary is not arguing for this treatment of individuals as wrong with the duration that they are held or the solitary confinement that they endure. This, I would say, is some of the main ethical themes and issues that are presented within the documentary. Seeing that these are basically kids that are being treated as adults within the penal system and are being held for such a long duration. It presents different ethical issues surrounding the treatment of people under these conditions, both psychologically and physically with this length of incarceration and type of confinement. With seeing these individuals within prison over certain crimes, they describe and review their experience that put them in that place and their beliefs that presented them with the situation. This is where I believe that there lies some connection with a level of ethical relativism. That under their certain beliefs that they had, it pushed them to commit egregious acts of violence or burglary based upon the idea they believed that it was not only ok, but also right, with a sense of justification. This can even be seen with a couple of the interviews as they describe that the people that they had murdered or committed the crime against had deserved it or they were just in their act against that 1 THE DEATH PENALTY DISCUSSION individual because of a past transgression. Acting out in their own way and their own personal belief system that did not stay in line with what the societal laws or standards are. 2 THE DEATH PENALTY DISCUSSION 3 The Death Penalty • What are the basic issues and main themes addressed in the videos? The basic issue discussed throughout the documentary is primarily concerning the morality of death row. The documentary spends a great deal of time displaying what life is like on death row, in their individual cells, and at the entire facility that houses death row and high-security inmates. • Were the issues addressed from a biased or unbiased perspective? Were the presenters operating with an underlying agenda? I think this documentary did a fairly good job of staying unbiased. Some of the questions were definitely used to provoke questions to make you feel bad for the inmates and the people on death row but the majority of the documentary does a good job of showing both sides of the coin. For example, it shows the joy experienced by an inmate when he was taken off of death row yet they also showed inmates stating that they deserved the death penalty and that execution was the right call for them because they would be dangerous if they were ever let out. I am sure they had an underlying agenda because everyone does but for the most part, I think the film was designed to pull back the curtain that separates the real world from the prison world. I don’t know that it was really trying to press a major viewpoint. • Was there agreement or disagreement among presenters regarding the main issues addressed? If we look at the prisoners as the “presenters,” there was definitely disagreement on what they wanted for themselves but from what I could tell, the majority of inmates at least felt that there were situations where the death sentence was justified depending on the crime which I thought was interesting. Even some of the inmates that were on death row felt that they should be executed. There was definitely disagreement among the presenters though. • What were the major moral/ethical issues related to these topics? The main issues presented covered the topics of the dilemma of whether or not death row is ethical and if the prison system conditions as a whole are ethical. It talks about the mistakes that people made as young men or even kids, leading them to execution in adulthood. The other issue is humans being locked in cells for 23 hours a day. • How does the concept of ethical relativism relate to this topic? THE DEATH PENALTY DISCUSSION Ethical relativism relates to this topic because most of these men on death row are there for committing one or more murders. It would be a fair question to ask, who has more murders on their hands, the inmate or the executioner. Some may say that the inmate has more murders on their hands but some may say the executioner does. Is it murder if the kill is court-ordered or is it all the same? Ethical relativism means that a person’s definition of right and wrong can differ from one person to another. 4
Purchase answer to see full attachment