Blog #3: "Dead Teen Walking"

As I read “Dead Teen Walking,” I was amazed at how my opinion changed. As I read into this story, I both favored the death penalty and was against it in regards to juveniles. Being underage myself, I would find it pretty hard to contain my anger with our judicial system, if I were convicted wrongly, and sentenced to death as a result. That being said, I’m not saying that Shareef Cousin was innocent or guilty of the crime he was punished for, only that if he was wrongly accused and sentenced, this incident is more than just unfair, it’s immoral. I’ll start at the beginning and with my initial thoughts:

The first sentence of the article, “Dead Teen Walking” astounded me. “The U.S. is one of the few nations that put juveniles on death row” (1). My immediate response was “WHAT?” Never in my wildest dreams would I have guessed that we, as the “free world” and the leader in so many things, would be capable of legally killing kids. The article later mentions that only “Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria, Yemen—and the U.S. have executed juveniles” (3). Compared to the rest of the list, the U.S. stands out above the rest of being more humane, except in this circumstance. It just amazes me that this occurs here. As Cousin’s story unfolds, I initially take his side, partly because I feel sorry for him (the article mentions being locked up 23 hours of the day), and partly because he was a victim of child abuse. Growing up, the article mentions many things that I can’t imagine having to live through day after day. Such things as “being thrashed with wooden sticks and electric cords, hit in the head with bricks, breaking a baseball bat over his head, and smashing a dinner plate, also on his head” were common and never once treated. Being that most of this abuse was primarily done to the head, both the aspect of abuse as well as brain damage come up as issues. Being that he was a kid taught that violence was part of the “norm,” and that he had substantial brain damage, perhaps could have contributed to the potential violent action for which he was sentenced and imprisoned.

As the story continued, I began to turn away from Cousin. It was pretty interesting to find myself changing “sides” as more evidence was presented and different sides of the same story were told. At this point, I stated to view Cousin as a criminal, just because the prosecutors made it seem that he was one. Yet as time marched on, certain things were omitted or “lost” that favored the prosecutors. At this point, I started to favor Cousin again, especially after the listing of evidence that could prove his innocence was shown, but not used in court.

Whether or not Cousin was actually guilty, I do not know. I do know, however, that I believe that we, as a nation, should not “put teens, guilty or not, in a situation where they are forced to fight for their lives” (4). There are many more possibilities, especially for teens, than simply killing them.

Connecting this article to Jack London’s White Fang proved to be challenging. The differences between the two writings significantly outweigh the similarities, but nonetheless, there are a few. First, both articles deal with survival. The “main characters” were forced to adapt to what was happening around them in order to stay alive. White Fang had to change into a “pet” in order to earn his keep with Weedon Scott, while Shareef Cousin had to fend for himself after his dad left and his mom gave up on him. (On a side note, I can’t imagine being in this situation. I feel as though every kid deserves a good childhood. Sadly, this isn’t the case, as shown by Shareef Cousin’s childhood.) Both characters adapted to their surroundings, which would lean to the “nurture” side of the debate of whether people (or beings) are evil by birth or by choice. They were able to change to survive, and that could’ve been good or bad.

Looking back at my final opinion of teens on death row, I would say that White Fang only strengthened my choice. I believe now that teens should not be placed on death row. This is mainly due to the fact that I believe that people are influenced by their surroundings or the environment into being the person they eventually become. This is the “nurture” side again, and both White Fang and “Dead Teen Walking” show this. First, in “Dead Teen Walking,” Shareef was the subject of harsh child abuse that influenced both his character and brain. This was an outside force that changed the way he thought of the world. Next, in White Fang, White Fang changed many times throughout the book, from violent and savage, to calm and mellow because of the situations he found himself in. Both the story and the article reflect my view on the debate between nature and nurture, and that is nurture.