# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Contests

One of our 2017 editorial winners wrote about China's unofficial ban on Korean cultural exports, such as the boy band Exo. Credit... Starnews, via Agence France-Presse - Getty Images

The challenge is fairly straightforward. Choose a topic you care about, gather evidence from sources both within and outside The Times and write a concise editorial (450 words or less) to convince readers of your view.

Because editorial writing at newspapers is a collaborative process, you can write your entry as a team effort or by yourself. When you're done, submit it using the contest form below by Thursday, April 5, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern. Be sure to read the rules, also below, before posting.

Our judges will then use this rubric (PDF) for selecting winners to publish on The Learning Network.

As teachers know, the persuasive essay has long been a staple of high school education, but the Common Core standards seem to have put evidence-based argumentative writing on everybody's agenda. You couldn't ask for a more real-world example of the genre than the classic newspaper editorial - and The Times publishes, on average, two of them a day.

And at a time when breaking out of one's "filter bubble" is more important than ever, we hope this contest also encourages students to broaden their news diets by using multiple sources, ideally ones that offer a range of perspectives on their chosen issue.

So what issue do you care about? Gun violence? Sexual harassment? Social media? You decide.

Good luck, and please post any questions you might have in the comments. We'll answer you there.

_________
Note: The submission form has been removed from this page. The contest is closed.
_________

Video

The New York Times's editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal provides seven tips for writing an effective editorial.

To help with this challenge, Andrew Rosenthal, in his previous role as Editorial Page editor of The Times, detailed seven pointers in the video above. And we have published related lesson plans, including " For the Sake of Argument: Writing Persuasively to Craft Short, Evidence-Based Editorials," " I Don't Think So: Writing Effective Counterarguments" and " 10 Ways to Teach Argument-Writing With The New York Times," that offer additional teaching ideas.

We have also culled a list of 401 prompts for argumentative writing organized by category, to help inspire you - although, of course, you are not limited to those topics.

We encourage you to look at both our comments on last year's winners and the winning essays themselves. They can serve as excellent models, and they cover topics from active-shooter school lockdowns to Korean television shows in China.

In addition, you can watch our free, archived webinar, featuring the Op-Ed columnist Nicholas Kristof and Kabby Hong, a high school English teacher.

1. Use at least one Times source. You can write your editorial about any topic, as long as you use at least one source from The Times. That should pretty much open the whole world to you, as you may be surprised how much you can find in The Times.

Be advised that nytimes.com has a digital subscription system in which readers have access to five free articles each month, but after that you will be asked to become a digital subscriber. The Times also offers K-12 digital subscription plans for schools. But all Learning Network activities for students, including our daily writing prompts, as well as Times articles linked from them, are free, so you can access them without exceeding the five-article limit.

2. Use at least one non-Times source. But make sure that the source you use is a reliable one. We encourage you to find sources that offer different perspectives on an issue.

3. Always cite your sources. Our submission form contains a required field for entering your citations. We include an example as well, though you can use M.L.A. or A.P.A. styles, or just list the website URLs. Even if you use a print source or an expert interview, you must provide a citation. Readers (and judges) should always know where you got your evidence.

4. Be concise. The editorial must not exceed 450 words. Your title and list of sources are separate, however, and do not count as part of your 450-word limit.

5. Have an opinion. Editorials are different from news articles because they try to persuade readers to share your point of view. Don't be afraid to take a stand.

6. Write your editorial by yourself or with a group. If you are working as a team, just remember to submit all of your names when you post your entry. But please submit only one editorial per student. If you're submitting as part of a team, you should not also submit as an individual.

7. Be original and use appropriate language. Write for a well-informed audience, but include enough background information to give context. Be careful not to plagiarize: Use quotation marks around lines you take verbatim from another source, or rephrase and cite your source.

8. Submissions must be from students who are 13 to 19 years old, and they may come from anywhere in the world. Unlike in previous years, students can now use their entire name if they want.

9. All entries must be submitted by April 5 at 11:59 p.m. Easternusing the contest form above. If you have questions about the contest, feel free to post them in the comments section, and we'll respond to you there.

10. Follow these instructions if you need proof that you entered this contest. Within an hour of submitting your editorial, you should receive an email from "The New York Times" with the subject heading "Thank you for your submission to our Student Editorial Contest." If you don't receive the email within an hour, even after checking your spam folder, then you can resubmit your entry. Be sure your settings allow emails from nytimes.com.

After two attempts and waiting over one full day, if you still have not received a confirmation email, you can contact us at LNFeedback@nytimes.com with the email address you used in the contest form. Use the subject heading "Please send me an email confirmation for my editorial contest submission." Be sure to include your name and editorial title (or subject) in your email. You may have to wait up to a week for a reply.

11. We will use this rubric (PDF) to judge entries, and the winning editorials will be featured on The Learning Network.

" Writing an Editorial" Unit Plan, by Lindsay Thompson

" Reader Idea | He Said, She Said, I Say: A Researched Argument Essay," by Danielle Harms

" Reader Idea | Using an Op-Doc Video to Teach Argumentative Writing," by Allison Marchetti

" Reader Idea | Using Room for Debate to Teach Argumentative Writing and Discussion Skills," by Gerard Dawson and Justin Rex

" Reader Idea | An Argument-Writing Unit: Crafting Student Editorials," by Kayleen Everitt

Good luck and have fun. We welcome your questions and comments if we have omitted details that might be useful. Let us know how we can help.

_________
The Learning Network runs contests for teenagers all year long. See our full calendar.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Our Fifth Annual Student Editorial Contest: Write About an Issue That Matters to You (Published 2018)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Contests The challenge is fairly straightforward. Choose a topic you care about, gather evidence from sources both within and outside The Times and write a concise editorial (450 words or less) to convince readers of your view. Because editorial writing at newspapers is a collaborative process, you can write your entry as a team effort or by yourself.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Contests

One of this year's winners wrote about school lockdown drills. Related Article Credit... Alec Soth/Magnum, for The New York Times

Update | Read the work of _________ this year's 10 winners here and this year's runners-up here.
For the past four years we've invited students to write short editorials about issues they care about, and each year thousands take up the challenge.

Students often start with thoughtful questions from their own lives: Why is my school's athletic program better funded than its music program? Why do we hide in the corner of our classroom during active shooter drills? Why don't my classmates stand during the Pledge of Allegiance? And they develop sophisticated, sincere and well researched answers in response.

Students look at the nation's and world's problems and hunt for solutions - to improve the plight of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in China, for example, or to reduce recidivism rates for U.S. prisons.

We really like this contest because it asks students to look closely at their world and find something, large or small, they want to change. So, if you don't like being last in line all the time because your surname starts with "Z," then take a stand. If you want more characters in books and movies to be more like you, then write about it. If you want society to be less wasteful or more tolerant, then tell the world. Change starts with noticing, thinking critically, and starting meaningful conversations - and that's what these students have done in their editorials.

But winning this contest? It's no easy task being selected as a winner out of 7,895 entries, a record. How do you make your writing stand out from the piles of other editorials submitted to our contest - especially when you have no more than 450 words to get your point across?

Here's one way: Start strong. Grab our attention in the first few sentences, but don't take too long to state your argument.

Here's another: Pick a fresh topic, or a new angle on a popular topic, and be very clear about what you are arguing. Often when students narrow in on a specific concern, their editorial becomes more persuasive.

What else? Write with an original, confident voice and avoid formulaic language and structure. And if appropriate, acknowledge, and deftly dispatch, counterarguments.

Below, we list 10 winners, 15 runners-up and 45 honorable mentions. We also include a PDF of all the finalists, including 58 who made the cut to the third round of judging, but didn't quite reach the winner's circle.

Starting May 22, we will be publishing one of the Top 10 essays each weekday in posts that we hope you will spread on social media, hang on school bulletin boards and perhaps even use as "mentor texts" for next year's contest.

Thank you for participating - and we hope you'll take part in our Summer Reading Contest, starting June 16.

_________

Each category below lists our favorites in alphabetical order by title. Where titles were missing, we came up with our own.
Top 10 Winners
" A Psychedelic Cure?" by Reagan Briere, age 16
" In Nothing We Trust" by Francesca Kelley, age 18
" Leave the Citizens to Their TV Shows" by Yijia Hu, age 17
" Losing the Internet" by David Scharts, age 15
" Reform the Prison, Then the Prisoner" by Katherine Leonard, age 16
" Stopping Bullets With Locked Doors and Silence Is Already Pulling the Trigger" by Daina Kalnina, age 15
" The Anguish of the Rich" by Yiqi Wang, age 17
" The Asian Misnomer: What the Affirmative Action Debate Misses" by Matteo Wong, age 16
" The Collateral Damage of Defending Democracy" by Sarah Heiland, age 18
" The Missing Anthropological Exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History " by Alec Farber, age 16
_________ Runners-Up
"America First" by Safa Saleh, age 17
"America? More Like Ameri-Can't Vote" by Gianni Carcagno, age 17
"Climate Literacy: A Critical Step Toward Climate Stability" by Ella Shriner, age 14 and Hannah Witscher, age 15
"Cultural Appropriation: A Measure of Empathy" by James Chang, age 16
"Discourse Is Democracy: Allowing Uncensored Speech on College Campuses" by Abigail Hogan, age 17
"Drone Warfare: The Failing Fight Against the Modern Hydra" by Michael Levinger, age 16
"Generation Code Red" by Grace Scullion, age 16
"Humane Human Zoo?" by Ella Ward, age 15
"Paper or Plastic? How About a Paper ON Plastic!" by Melody Markert, age 17
"The Future Disintegration of American Democracy Through Athletics" by Julianne Yu, age 16
"The Case for Teaching News Literacy" by Mary Hannah Grier, age 17
"The Unspoken Alphabet Problem" by Stephanie Zhang, age 14
"The 'War on Drugs' Will Never Work; Legalization Will" by Kristina Vakhman, age 18
"There Is No Happily Ever After Without Once Upon a Time" by Bridget O'Leary, age 17
"When Will This Class Be Useful?" by Casey Stark, age 15
_________ Honorable Mentions
"#WorldChanger" by Joyce Zhou, age 17
"A Case for Impassiveness" by Lea Marchl, age 16
"A Scoop in the Right Direction" by Emma S., age 18
"AP Tests Don't Leave Enough Room for the Human Side of History" by Tom Malmgren, age 16
"Are My Shoulders Distracting You?" by Mairi Alice Dun, age 17
"Autism: Educated and Extraordinary" by Isabella Zhang, age 17
"Bittersweet" by Rena Rachlin, age 15 "Child Labor in the U.S. Today" by Jasmine Campos, age 16 and Charlotte Principal, age 16
"China Needs Silver Lining" by Wangchen Zhou, age 17
"Colleges Should Abandon Race-Based Affirmative Action to Achieve True Diversity" by Eric Davis, age 18
"Embrace the Mess" by Chi Yu, age 14
"Fast Fashion Is Destroying Our World" by Melissa Wang, age 17
"Food Stamps Need a Change" by Patrick Meara, age 17
"Governor Cuomo Frees the Plastic Bagss" by Jiayan Chen, age 17
"Help Wanted: Moderate Politicians" by Ireland Degges, age 17
"High School Should Not Just Be About Sports" by Swathi Kella, age 16
"How Far Can Post-Truth Democracy Take Us?" by Jiahe Yang, age 18
"How to Revitalize the Public Education System" by Dhara Yu, age 18
"Last Man Standing" by Kathryn Porter, age 16
"Leave Me Alone" by Celia Silver, age 17
"More Than a Morning Kick" by Emma Cary, age 16
"Multiple Choice: Not Multiple Enough" by Yi-Mei Templeman, age 17
"Picking Cotton: An Immigrant's Perspective" by Allan Njomo, age 16
"Post-Democracy" by Nadav Ziv, age 17
"Should Juvenile Offenders Receive Life Sentences Without Parole on Their First Offense?" by Tayler Gavetti, age 16
"Should Obamacare Be Repealed?" by William Pharo, age 16
"Single Payer: A Cure for America's Healthcare Woes" by Akshay Manglik, age 13
"Streaky Friendship" by Yuxin Long, age 16
"Technology: A Hindrance to Learning" by Zachary Weiss, age 17
"Teens, Technology, and The Pursuit of Happiness" by Sam Jagolinzer, age 17
"The Bluest Note" by Nicholas Dasoveanu, age 18
"The College Conspiracy" by Serenity W., age 17
"The Cost of Health Care May Be in Your Genes" by Sophia Lo, age 16
"The Demoralizing of the Elizabethan Language" by Olivia Seymour, age 14
"The Disposable Nightmare" by Tianxin Guo, age 14
"The Education Gap" by Adam Traweek, age 16 "The Environment in the Age of Trump" by Elliot Tuttle, age 17
"The Growing Problem of Screen Addiction" by Kaitlin Craig, age 16
"The Picture of Education We Must Change" by Danielle Naidrich, age 17
"Tipping the Pay Scale" by Ruhee Damle, age 14
"Untitled" by Melinda Hartz, age 16
"We Should Be Teaching Rap Music in Schools" by Jack Zuckerman, age 19
"What Do You Call Someone That Only Speaks One Language? An American." by Paige Patton, age 16
"Where Are All the Rainbows?" by Storm Viridian Murray, age 17
"Where Trump's Ban Stands Legally" by Marcus Linde, age 16
_________ And All the Finalists, Including 58 More Great Editorials That Made It to Round 3 (PDF) Judges: Amanda Christy Brown, Shannon Doyne, Caroline Crosson Gilpin, Michael Gonchar, Annissa Hambouz, Thomas Houston, Shira Katz, Willow Lawson, Linda Leavitt, Sue Mermelstein, Anna North, Roxie Salamon-Abrams, Katherine Schulten, Matt Schwarzfeld, Natlie Shutler and Kate Spence-Ado

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Call to Action: Winners From Our Fourth Annual Student Editorial Contest (Published 2017)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Contests Update | Read the work of _________ this year's 10 winners here and this year's runners-up here . For the past four years we've invited students to write short editorials about issues they care about, and each year thousands take up the challenge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Library Guides: Evaluating resources: Home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Library Guides: Evaluating resources: Home

# data[].attributes.body
https://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/12/should-engineers-pay-less-for-college-than-english-majors/

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/learning/lesson-plans/401-prompts-for-argumentative-writing.html

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbh64LX6-HY&disable_polymer=true

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Overview | How can writing change people's worldview? How can it influence public opinion? How can it lead to meaningful action?

The persuasive essay is a quintessential high school writing assignment. With the Common Core standards, it seems to have taken on a new urgency in many school districts and classrooms. But students should know that evidence-based persuasive writing is more than just an academic exercise - it is very much alive in the real world. Perhaps one of the best and most widely recognized examples of persuasive writing in action is the classic newspaper editorial, three to four of which The New York Times publishes every day.

In this lesson, we offer suggestions on how to guide students through the writing process when writing editorials - from brainstorming a topic to publishing their work - and all the steps in between. This lesson can be used in conjunction with our Student Contest on editorial writing, or with any argumentative writing project you do with students.

Materials | Computers with Internet access. Optional copies of one or more of these three handouts: Debatable Issues (PDF), Problem-Solution Organizer (PDF), and the rubric for our Student Editorial Contest (PDF).

Step 1 | Brainstorming: What Do You Care About?

Finding the right topic is essential. Students should pick something that a) they genuinely care about; b) other people would want to read about; c) they can make an argument about; and d) they can find evidence about to support their claim.

You might get students started brainstorming ideas by having them journal about or discuss with partners questions like:

What would you like to change if you could? What problems or policies do you think should be addressed - whether something global, like climate change, or something closer to home, like a later start time for your high school classes? Make as long a list as you can.

What issues, topics and fields are you passionate about? Make a list. Your list might included fields as broad as "music" or as specific as "the early days of hip-hop." What questions or controversies in these fields do experts or fans often argue? Where do you stand?

What do you do outside of school? What are some things you're an expert on? What aspects of those hobbies or interests do you find yourself having to explain to others? Why?

What issues or ideas do you often find yourself discussing or arguing about with friends, your family or online?

What issues or controversies have you followed recently in current events? What are your opinions about them? What might you need more information about?

Students can then share their ideas and, as a whole class, compile a list on the board or on a class blog or wiki.

To open the class to even more ideas, you might then invite students look through our list of 200 Student Opinion questions that invite argument. Not only can this list help students pick a topic, but each question links to a relevant New York Times article, which may be very helpful when students begin to look for evidence.

A Note on Collaboration: The editorial writing process at The New York Times is done collaboratively. That means, a team of writers works together from choosing a topic through researching it and drafting the writing. Teachers may want to give students opportunities to collaborate on their editorials as well, whether for only one step of the project, such as research, or from beginning to end.
Step 2 | Modeling: What Is An Editorial?
To help students envision what they will be writing, it is worth spending time discussing what an editorial is and looking at some examples.

Ask students: What is an editorial? Have you ever read any? Where would you find one? What do you think is the purpose of an editorial?

We selected three recent examples from the Times editorial page that students can look over as models, though you or your students may pick others from the thousands in the Opinion archives:

Have students choose an editorial to read on their own or as a whole class. As they read, have them note:

What is the opinion or call to action in this editorial?

What evidence does it use to make its argument?

How persuasive do you find the editorial? Is it effective?

What do you notice about the language and tone of the editorial? About other choices the writer(s) have made?

Students may want make annotations or use highlighters as they read, then discuss their findings as a class.

Note: You may want students to look at the rubric you will be using to grade their editorials before they start the research and writing process. Here is our the rubric (PDF) that we are using for our Student Contest.
Step 3 | Researching: What Do the Experts Say?
Once students have selected a topic, they should begin their research by gathering background information. That might mean reading newspaper articles, consulting an encyclopedia, finding reliable websites or reaching out to an expert to make sure they have enough context about why their topic is important to write a strong persuasive essay.

As they do their research, students can take notes using index cards or in a notebook, or they can use our Debatable Issues (PDF) handout. Alternatively, if students plan to offer a solution to a problem in their editorial, they may want to use our Problem-Solution Organizer (PDF).

For more detail about the nitty-gritty of the research process, the Online Writing Lab at Purdue University provides a guide to conducting research that can be helpful with areas such as evaluating source reliability and doing Internet searches.

Students can find articles in The Times by using the search feature. For our contest, we ask that students have at least one Times and one non-Times source for their evidence, although of course we hope most will read far beyond that requirement as they learn about the topic.

Students might be grouped by common interests to work together during the research portion of this process, then write individual editorials, or they might do the entire assignment in partners or as a group.
Steps 4 and 5 | Outlining and Drafting; Revising and Editing: How Do You Write an Editorial?
Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor at The Times, explains in this brief video that a good editorial consists of "a clear position that is strongly and persuasively argued." He then goes on to recommend seven pointers for students.

1. Know your bottom line. "You have to know what you want to say. You have to have a clear opinion - what we call a bottom line."
2. Be concise. "You need to get to the point of your editorial quickly. You have to state it clearly and you have to be concise."
3. Give an opinion or solution. "There are basically two kinds of editorials. One expresses an opinion about a situation, like if you want to write about human rights abuses in some part of the world or the country that you're concerned about. The other kind of editorial proposes a solution to a specific problem. For example, if you want to write about traffic congestion in northern New Jersey, where I live and there's a lot of traffic, you should have an answer to how to fix the traffic problem."
4. Do your research. "Everyone is entitled to their opinion, you're not entitled to your own facts. Go online, make calls if you can, check your information, double-check it. There's nothing that will undermine your argument faster than a fact you got wrong, that you did not have to get wrong."
5. Write clearly. "Good writing is important. Make your writing clear and easy to understand. Write as if you're sending a letter to a well-informed friend who cares about what you think. But don't use any slang. OMG - no. Use examples whenever you can. It's better to use an example than just to use a word or an adjective that describes something. If you want to say that the mayor's pre-K policy is wrong, explain how - don't say it's just stupid. In fact, never use the word stupid."
6. Every writer needs an editor. "After you've written your editorial, give it to someone you trust to read and listen to what they say. If they don't understand it, that means it's probably not clear."
7. Be prepared for a reaction. "When you write something and you publish it, be prepared for a reaction. If you write a good editorial, people are going to respond to it. And if you criticize people, they definitely are going to respond. So if someone writes you a letter, write them back. Be prepared to defend your position. Don't get defensive, just explain why you said what you had to say. And if they question your facts, be ready to show that you were right."

The Online Writing Lab at Purdue University has a guide to writing argumentative essays that may also be helpful for students as they think about organizing their editorial and developing a logical argument.
Step 6 | Publishing: How Can My Editorial Reach an Audience?
Students will have the chance to publish their editorials as comments on the Learning Network on or before March 17, 2014, as part of our Student Contest. Along with our partner, the Center for News Literacy at Stony Brook University, we will then choose the best to publish in a separate post. But even if your students aren't writing for our contest, the genre is meant to have an audience. That audience can start with the teacher, but it ideally shouldn't end there.

Students can read their editorials to the class or in groups. Classmates can have a chance to respond to the author, leading to a discussion or debate. Students can try to publish their editorials in the school newspaper or other local newspapers or online forums. It is only when editorials reach a wider audience that they have the power to make change.

Teachers: How do you teach the persuasive essay? Let us know, below. And if you ever use The New York Times to do it, consider writing in to our Reader Ideas column.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
For the Sake of Argument: Writing Persuasively to Craft Short, Evidence-Based Editorials

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Overview | How can writing change people's worldview? How can it influence public opinion? How can it lead to meaningful action? The persuasive essay is a quintessential high school writing assignment.

# data[].attributes.body
Should the voting age be lowered to 16?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Is the minimum legal voting age of 18 years old fair and appropriate, in your opinion, or should it be lowered?

In your view, at what age should people be able to vote in the United States? Why?

In " Why We Should Lower the Voting Age to 16," Laurence Steinberg writes:

The young people who have come forward to call for gun control in the wake of the mass shooting at their high school in Parkland, Fla., are challenging the tiresome stereotype of American kids as indolent narcissists whose brains have been addled by smartphones. They offer an inspiring example of thoughtful, eloquent protest.

Unfortunately, when it comes to electing lawmakers whose decisions about gun control and other issues affect their lives, these high schoolers lack any real power. This needs to change: The federal voting age in the United States should be lowered from 18 to 16.

Skeptics will no doubt raise questions about the competence of 16-year-olds to make informed choices in the voting booth. Aren't young people notoriously impulsive and hotheaded, their brains not fully developed enough to make good judgments?

Yes and no. When considering the intellectual capacity of teenagers, it is important to distinguish between what psychologists call "cold" and "hot" cognition.

Cold cognitive abilities are those we use when we are in a calm situation, when we are by ourselves and have time to deliberate and when the most important skill is the ability to reason logically with facts. Voting is a good example of this sort of situation.

Studies of cold cognition have shown that the skills necessary to make informed decisions are firmly in place by 16. By that age, adolescents can gather and process information, weigh pros and cons, reason logically with facts and take time before making a decision. Teenagers may sometimes make bad choices, but statistically speaking, they do not make them any more often than adults do.

Students: Read the entire article, then tell us:

- At the end of the article, Professor Steinberg writes:

The last time the United States lowered the federal voting age was in 1971, when it went from 21 to 18. In that instance, the main motivating force was outrage over the fact that 18-year-olds could be sent to fight in Vietnam but could not vote.

Do you agree with the writer's proposal to lower the voting age to 16 so that those most vulnerable to school shootings have a say in how those shootings are best prevented? Why or why not?

- Do you agree that the brain science discussed in the article supports the argument for lowering the legal voting age in the United States? If so, how and why?

- What other reasons might you have for lowering the voting age, or for keeping the status quo, and why?

- If the voting age were lowered, would you vote? Why or why not?
Students 13 and older are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is the minimum legal voting age of 18 years old fair and appropriate, in your opinion, or should it be lowered? In your view, at what age should people be able to vote in the United States? Why?

# data[].attributes.body
Death penalty. Is it justified?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Editorial

Credit... Yarek Waszul

Alva Campbell was supposed to die on Nov. 15. That was the date chosen by the State of Ohio, which had convicted and condemned Mr. Campbell for murdering a teenager, Charles Dials, during a 1997 carjacking in Columbus.

Inside the death chamber that morning, prison officials spent more than an hour searching Mr. Campbell's arms and legs for a vein into which they could inject the lethal drug cocktail. They comforted him as they prepared to kill him, providing the 69-year-old with a wedge pillow to help with breathing problems related to his years of heavy smoking.

After about 80 minutes, they gave up and returned Mr. Campbell to his cell, where he sits awaiting his next date with death, now set for June 5, 2019.

The pathetic scene was a fitting symbol of the state of capital punishment in America in 2017, a vile practice that descends further into macabre farce even as it declines in use. Mr. Campbell would have been the 24th person put to death last year. That's less than a quarter of the 98 executions carried out in 1999.

The number should be zero. As the nation enters 2018, the Supreme Court is considering whether to hear at least one case asking it to strike down the death penalty, once and for all, for violating the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments.

Whether the justices take that or another case, the facts they face will be the same: The death penalty is a savage, racially biased, arbitrary and pointless punishment that becomes rarer and more geographically isolated with every year. In 2017 the total number of people sitting on death rows across America fell for the 17th straight year. In Harris County, Tex., the nation's undisputed leader in state-sanctioned killing, the year passed without a single execution or death sentence - the first time that's happened in more than 40 years.

Still, Texas was one of just two states - Arkansas is the other - responsible for almost half of 2017's executions. And nearly one in three of the nation's 39 new death sentences last year were handed down in three counties: Riverside in California, Clark in Nevada and Maricopa in Arizona.

It would be tempting to conclude from this litany, which is drawn from an annual report by the Death Penalty Information Center, that capital punishment is being reserved for the most horrific crimes committed by the most incorrigible offenders. But it would be wrong.

The death penalty is not and has never been about the severity of any given crime. Mental illness, intellectual disability, brain damage, childhood abuse or neglect, abysmal lawyers, minimal judicial review, a white victim - these factors are far more closely associated with who ends up getting executed. Of the 23 people put to death in 2017, all but three had at least one of these factors, according to the report. Eight were younger than 21 at the time of their crime.

More troubling still are the wrongful convictions. In 2017, four more people who had been sentenced to death were exonerated, for a total of 160 since 1973 - a time during which 1,465 people were executed. In many of the exonerations, prosecutors won convictions and sentences despite questionable or nonexistent evidence, pervasive misconduct or a pattern of racial bias. A 2014 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences extrapolated from known cases of wrongful convictions to estimate that at least 4 percent of all death-row inmates are wrongfully convicted. Against this backdrop, it would take an enormous leap of faith to believe that no innocent person has ever been executed.

This page has long opposed the death penalty, and would continue to even if the penalty's application were completely free of bias and error. That is an unattainable goal, as should be obvious by now. Perhaps this explains why Americans, whose support for capital punishment climbed as high as 80 percent in 1994, have increasingly lost their appetite for state-sanctioned killing. Support is down to around 55 percent, its lowest level in 45 years.

The rest of the developed world agreed to reject this cruel and pointless practice long ago. How can it be ended here, for good?

Leaving it up to individual states is not the solution. It's true that 19 states and the District of Columbia have already banned capital punishment, four have suspended it and eight others haven't executed anyone in more than a decade. Some particularly awful state policies have also been eliminated in the past couple of years, like a Florida law that permitted non-unanimous juries to impose death sentences, and an Alabama rule empowering judges to override a jury's vote for life, even a unanimous one, and impose death.

And yet at the same time, states have passed laws intended to speed up the capital appeals process, despite the growing evidence of legal errors and prosecutorial misconduct that can be hidden for years or longer. Other states have gone to great lengths to hide their lethal-injection protocols from public scrutiny, even as executions with untested drugs have gone awry and pharmaceutical companies have objected to the use of their products to kill people.

Last summer, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested that the death penalty would eventually end with a whimper. "The incidence of capital punishment has gone down, down, down so that now, I think, there are only three states that actually administer the death penalty," Justice Ginsburg said at a law school event. "We may see an end to capital punishment by attrition as there are fewer and fewer executions."

That's a dispiriting take. The death penalty holdouts may be few and far between, but they are fiercely committed, and they won't stop killing people unless they're forced to. Relying on the vague idea of attrition absolves the court of its responsibility to be the ultimate arbiter and guardian of the Constitution - and specifically of the Eighth Amendment. The court has already relied on that provision to ban the execution of juvenile offenders, the intellectually disabled and those convicted of crimes against people other than murder.

There's no reason not to take the final step. The justices have all the information they need right now to bring America in line with most of the rest of the world and end the death penalty for good.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Capital Punishment Deserves a Quick Death (Published 2018)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Editorial Alva Campbell was supposed to die on Nov. 15. That was the date chosen by the State of Ohio, which had convicted and condemned Mr. Campbell for murdering a teenager, Charles Dials, during a 1997 carjacking in Columbus.

# data[].attributes.body
Is physician- assisted suicide ethical?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"We can place a long-term breathing tube in her neck and a feeding tube in her stomach," I said, "but there are no cases in the medical literature of someone like her living independently again. The best we could hope for is a life of near-complete dependence."

"When we first came to the hospital, doctors told us my mom might be brain-dead," one of Geraldine's daughters countered. "Now, she takes breaths on her own sometimes. She's already improving."

Just as Geraldine was stubborn and exceptional in life, her family believed she would be exceptional in beating her prognosis.

"It might be different if my mom was 70 or 80," her daughter went on, "but she's only 56."

For Geraldine's family, the immediate fear of watching her die outweighed the unfamiliar pain of sustaining her on machines and watching her disappear in a long-term care facility.

Our medical team had seen hundreds of people like Geraldine, most of whom returned to the hospital month after month to manage complications of immobility. Sparse cases of recoveries were overwhelmed by painful, expensive, drawn-out deaths, ones we would never wish for ourselves or our own families.

But for Geraldine's family, every decision was new. For them, nobody was like Geraldine.

In every other part of medicine, doctors make recommendations for medications, lifestyle changes and surgeries. We don't offer cancer patients six different chemotherapy regimens and ask them to weigh the pros and cons. Yet when it comes to end-of-life decisions, doctors are terrified of violating patient autonomy. We are scared of our own medical opinions.

Instead of saying, "I recommend...," we often offer a platter of life-prolonging measures, most of which are unlikely to improve a patient's quality of life, but which offer the possibility of hope. The patient's heart will still beat. Her personality will be gone, but her chest will still rise and collapse. Families see an opportunity for loss to be delayed, perhaps even dodged. Then we are surprised when they take us up on the offer to prolong dying.

"I think she would want more time to try and recover," Geraldine's daughter said.

So we kept Geraldine alive. A plastic breathing tube sprouted from her neck and a feeding tube with peach-colored formula buried itself in her stomach.

In the hospital, Geraldine's family learned the common complications of immobility: infection, blood clots and bedsores.

When the infection started, a fever sounded the alarm. We counted the possible causes. Geraldine had a breathing tube in her windpipe, a feeding tube in her stomach and an IV line in her neck, each an access road for bacteria. Lying in bed put her at risk for pneumonia and urinary tract infections. Like mosquitoes in standing water, infections proliferate when the body is still.

Geraldine's blood clots weren't a surprise. Medical students are inculcated with the famous triad of conditions that predispose patients to clots, and Geraldine had all of them. Her body was inflamed and torn from the heart attack, infections and procedures that caused her blood vessels to release molecules that helped blood to clot. Lying in a hospital bed, not moving anything unless it was moved, her circulation slowed. Pools of static blood dried into a thick paste in her blood vessels.

Thanks to aggressive nursing care, when Geraldine developed a bedsore it was managed at an early stage. But the term "bedsore" is an understated euphemism. It recalls the annoyance of a cold sore or the tenderness of muscles after the gym. The grotesque image of bone pressing through skin is hidden.

In people who are immobilized, bedsores develop under bony prominences like the heels and the skull. At first, the skin becomes red. If the bedsore progresses, the skin's outer layer, then the inner layer, breaks down. Finally, in the most severe stage, bone, muscles and tendons are exposed. The entire process can happen in just a few days.

Sixty days after her heart attack, Geraldine was stable enough to leave the I.C.U. She was in a persistent vegetative state - unresponsive to external stimuli. She opened her eyes, as if she were about to say something, but nothing ever came out. Her gaze roved around the room. An ambulance took her to a long term care facility, where she was dependent on machines and people.

"When you first hear someone you love is sick, you think it's a short term thing," her daughter told me over the phone a month later. "It's adjusting to the long term aspect that's hard." Geraldine's daughter woke up at 5 a.m. every day to spend time with her mom before work.

"I think it's more of a disappointment for my dad," she said. "He told us that if he ever gets sick, he doesn't want any of this."

Geraldine's family lived between hope and guilt, with the weight of each side in flux. "If my mom knew what we were doing right now, she'd probably be mad at us," her daughter reflected a few weeks ago.

Yet in the same breath, her voice rose and she said: "My mom's a fighter, so I think she would be happy with us giving her a shot. We're hoping for this miraculous turnaround."

It did not come. Geraldine died of sepsis earlier this month, after more than four months of care.

"People don't know what they're in for," Geraldine's daughter reflected after the funeral. "It hurt all of us to see her like that."

In the final days of Geraldine's life, a doctor asked if the family of another patient in the I.C.U. could visit Geraldine to see what prolonged dying looked like. Geraldine's family was kind enough to agree.

The visiting family chose to transition their loved one to hospice care.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"We can place a long-term breathing tube in her neck and a feeding tube in her stomach," I said, "but there are no cases in the medical literature of someone like her living independently again. The best we could hope for is a life of near-complete dependence."