Email | Print

Last year in a series of cynically worded and factually inaccurate editorials, the Daily News bombarded New Yorkers with their obsessive agenda to end the insanity defense. More recently, after the guilty verdict on the trial of Andrew Goldstein, they wrote about the subject once more, this time with a style devoid of sarcasm (perhaps a sign of their triumphant mood upon the tragic decision by a misguided and vindictive jury).

The Daily News proposes that instead of finding a person "not guilty by reason of insanity" (technically, "not responsible by reason of mental defect"), he or she should be found "guilty, but mentally ill." The mentally ill convict would be treated in maximum-security hospitals and then, "if cured," sent to prison to serve yet one more time. The paper encourages support for Republican State Senator Frank Padavan who has introduced a bill in the legislature to abolish the insanity plea and institute the "guilty, but mentally ill" statute.

The award-winning editorial board of the Daily News is usually responsible. But responsibility is what they and their voices in Albany lack on this issue. Cruelty and malice abound as it is evident not only by what they propose, but by their shameful choice of words. On this issue, their agenda borders on the criminal.

We all know there are many faces to mental illness. They seem either not to know it or simply don't care. Let's consider the following scenario. Let's say that one day any of the beloved columnists of the Daily News or their respected chairman, Mr. Mortimer Zuckerman (or Frank Padavan himself) call from Rikers Island where they are being held after being arrested for a criminal offense they committed a few hours after leaving the premises of the newspaper on 33rd Street. Their Daily News comrades are in shock. "My God, I know this man. He is a kind human being. He wouldn't hurt anybody. For God's sake, you got to tell me, what happened?" they would ask. "I was psychotic," would be the reply. "You have to believe me. I had never been psychotic before. I didn't know what that was like. I have learned the hard way. Oh my God! I'm sorry! I'm sorry!"

The gentleman are found not responsible by reason of mental defect and sent to a hospital for custody and treatment. Several years later-four in some cases, 15 in others, 20 in another -- after a solid state of remission and stability, the former model citizens -- members of the Daily News family -- are back in their true selves. They want their lives and reputations back. Even though upon discharge they will be under a five-year, court-imposed order of conditions. They want some sense of normalcy back in their lives. "This illness did too much damage already. It's time to rebuild." You wouldn't punish someone for having cancer or diabetes, would you? But neither cancer nor diabetes would make you become psychotic. Mental illness does. So, you wouldn't punish someone for having a mental illness. Right?. Wrong! The Daily News and Mr. Padavan would send their respected colleagues to prison with hard-core, unrepentant criminals. "You are guilty even though we know you were terribly sick at the time," they would say. "We know the type of person you are. We worked with you. You even published some good columns that showed your great sense of community and citizenship. Yet, we have to punish you because you became sick. Sorry."

I don't know if the level of cruelty on the part of whoever is responsible for the Daily News editorials would reach that point. But hopefully, when mental illness hits home, the Daily News and Mr. Padavan would reconsider.

The norm is that -- contrary to what the Daily News would have you believe -- people who serve time in hospitals serve more time than what they would have served in prison. When a convict finishes up his sentence -- if not on parole -- there are no conditions and his civil rights are restored. Mental patients who serve time in hospitals for a criminal offense once, if discharged, carry the weight of at least a five-year, court-imposed order of conditions. That, whether you did four, five, 10, 15 or 25 years in the hospital. Sometimes, it seems the burden never ends.

Mentally ill people are victims who have already been wronged by psychological and biological factors. They are not criminals and should not be treated as such. They do not deserve punishment. That much the Daily News should know. I have to conclude that neither Mr. Padavan nor the Daily News understand mental illness, what psychosis and recovery is, nor do they understand the many faces of mental illness -- even those who have committed a criminal offense. Mr. Padavan's bill and the Daily News editorials are vindictive, self-righteous, narrow-minded and plain cruel. There is a human face to mental illness. Padavan and the Daily News seem to be unable to acknowledge this.

In other articles, we could discuss the issues of responsibility on the part of those who carry the burden of awareness of their illness and the responsibility on the part of the mental health establishment to care for the mentally ill. At this moment, however, every conscious and compassionate human being must be outraged at the brutal, cynical and irresponsible rhetoric that comes out of Mr. Padavan's office and from the editorial pages of the New York Daily News.