From Misery to Mission: Forensic Social Workers on Multidisciplinary Mitigation Teams

Abstract

Social workers are well-equipped by experience and education to play a pivotal role in death penalty mitigation teams. They offer expertise in researching complete social histories, providing for people under threat of execution, and helping those individuals cope with that threat. The social worker's primary role is to develop the client's story through an extensive empirical inquiry into the person's life. An equally important role for social workers is to work with the multidisciplinary defense team to ensure that the client's life story becomes a part of the defense. This article, through a case example of a condemned prisoner, examines the mitigation team concept, focusing on the social work role.

Childhood Adversity, Substance Abuse, and Violence: Implications for Trauma-Informed Social Work Practice

“…S. Young, 2014). Social workers are especially wellpositioned to use their skills and knowledge in the context of the biopsychosocial and PIE frameworks to provide forensic services to individuals who have engaged in substance abuse or interpersonal violence (Guin, Noble, & Merrill, 2003;Sheehan, 2012).…”

Pathways to Death Row for America's Disabled Youth: Three Case Studies Driving Reform

“…Sentencing experts and capital mitigation specialists use criminal life-history investigation as the method for organizing information about capital clients that is later presented in court to guide sentencing decisions (Alfonso & Baur 1986;Guin et al 2003;Schroeder 2003). This method of research relies on a theoretical framework that links substantiated individual, family and environmental characteristics to the development of delinquent behavior in youth and ongoing adult criminality.…”

“…The total known cost of services for the three inmates was nearly two million dollars. As a result of this cost analysis and other research that examined the increasing budget in the Department of Corrections, the state senate judiciary committee requested testimony on the results of this life-history method of research (Guin 1999). The testimony on the three cases, in addition to other public policy testimony, resulted in a senate bill and the passage of a legislative act that funded the development of pilot truancy intervention service centers (TASC).…”

Life or death decision making: Qualitative analysis of death penalty jurors

“…Specifically, social workers can serve as mitigation specialists and experts or consultants in all 32 of the states currently adjudicating capital cases. In this area of capital adjudication, forensic social workers serve as members of multidisciplinary mitigation teams, assist with juror selection, consult counsel and provide expert testimony and evidence to assist with juror decision-making regarding mitigation (Guin et al, 2003;Schroeder et al, 2006;Weisberg, 2005). As supported by the responses of the study sample, there are ample opportunities for social work skills and advanced professional competencies to successfully counter the effects of juror emotion, confusion, frustration or abdication of constitutionally mandated roles and responsibilities evinced in post-Gregg proceedings (Antonio, 2006;Schroeder et al, 2006).…”

“…Moreover, as Schroeder (2003) noted, social workers create possibilities for intervening at multiple points in the legal procedure, combining psychotherapeutic elements with broader social contexts and a specialized understanding of relevant law and policy, which can bridge the gap between juror education and instruction which is desperately needed, according to the CJP juror sample. For example, a forensic social worker creating a comprehensive social history for the defendant that is introduced as expert testimony during the penalty phase of the trial, incorporated into the guided discretion of the jury instructions, and given full and individual consideration of the jury, meets constitutional requirements while also having a greater chance of clarifying, integrating, and articulating special circumstances for the jurors that bear directly on their decision-making process (Guin et al, 2003;Ritter, 2004;Schroeder, 2003;Terrell and Staller, 2003). Moreover, forensic social workers can draw upon a wealth of policy knowledge of capital procedure to advocate publicly for judicial review, policy reform, or adoption of instructions that comport with both constitutional mandates and the needs of jurors as final arbiters of fact in capital cases (Betancourt et al, 2006;Schroeder et al, 2003).…”