The issue of castration has many layers in terms of its use punitively. The biggest area of debate is the rate of success and if sex offender’s problem is physical or psychological. In addition, is the use of castration constitutional? Some people argue that compulsory castration is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Eighth Amendment. However, does the unconstitutional nature change when castration is voluntary and the decision is made by the offender? Moreover, does labeling castration as a treatment make it constitutional? There are many questions that need to be addressed, and these are only some of the reasons the use of castration is debated. These issues will be addressed by discussing the support of castration through empirical data, the constitutional issues involved and issues associated with the morality of castration.
Numerous studies have been conducted on the use of castration for sex offenders. The two main points addressed were the rate of success in decreasing sex drive and rate of recidivism. A number of studies had similar findings. Analysis of 104 individuals in a German study, conducted between 1970 and 1980, showed that there was a decrease in sexual drive and interest by 75 percent within six months of the operation. Additionally, rate of recidivism was found to be 3 percent, while non-castrated individuals had a 46 percent chance to recidivate. Various studies in Europe reflect similar results (Hickey, 2010). John Branford, a doctor of the Royal Ottawa Hospital, says “as a rule, the recidivism rate of sex offenders averages 80 percent before castration, dropping to less than 5 percent afterwards” (Hickey, 2010, p. 132). Based on study data the use of castration in sex offender...
... middle of paper ...
... if the individual chooses to be castrated? Whether or not castration is used for punitive purposes the right to procreate and privacy should still be considered.
References:
Berlin, F. S. (1997). "Chemical Castration" for Sex Offenders. Retrieved August 12, 2010, from The New England Journal of Medicine: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199704033361420
Davenport, A. U. ( 2006). Basic Criminal Law: The US Constitution, Procedure and Crime Custom Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Hickey, T. J. (2010). Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Crime and Criminology, 9th Edition. New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Spalding, L. H. (1998). FLORIDA’S 1997 CHEMICAL CASTRATION LAW: A RETURN TO THE DARK AGES. Retrieved August 12, 2010, from http://neuro.bcm.edu/eagleman/neurolaw/papers/%5BSpalding%5DFloridasChemicalCastrationLaw.pdf
Yates, P. M. (2005). Pathways to treatment of sexual offenders: Rethinking intervention. Forum on Corrections Research, 17, 1-9.
...aker, J. (2007). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 1-25.
Pollock, J. M. (2012). Crime and justice in America: An introduction to criminal justice (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
There is much debate as to whether a sex offender should be released into the public, this debate stems from the idea that a sex offender cannot be treated and that they are a danger to the public as they are ‘purely evil’ (Burke, 2005), however there is much evidence that sex offenders can be treated and re-introduced into society as a productive member. Sex offender is a general term used to refer to any person who has been convicted of crimes involving sex, from rape and molestation to exhibitionism and pornography distribution. There are many theories which try to explain why people are sexual offenders, these theories along with treatments for sex offenders will be looked at to help explain why people sexually offend and to help evaluate whether sex offenders should be released.
Daly, Kathleen, Goldsmith, Andrew, and Israel, Mark. 2006, Crime and Justice: A guide to criminology, third addition, Thomson, Lawbook Co.
3. Report of the Interagency Council on Sex Offender Treatment to the Senate Interim Committee on Health and Human Services and the Senate Committee on Criminal Justice, 1993
There are many topics nowadays that are still hard to talk about openly. Though we’ve opened the door on many controversies, some of the simplest parts of life can be the hardest to discuss. For most of us, sex in particular can be a taboo topic, which may be the reason why so many children and teens are misinformed on the inner workings of sexual relationships and how they develop as we grow and mature. For some adolescents, this can lead to an unhealthy fixation on the concept of sex, and in some cases, lead them to take action on a situation they do not fully understand. Sexual offenses are perceived as some of the most heinous crimes, but how could our views be affected if those acts were performed by a teenager? We may sometimes consider that they are the same as adult sex offenders; however our judgment can often be clouded by our lack of understanding. Adolescent sex offenders are different from adult sex offenders, are treated in a different way, and often have very different circumstances of their crime.
Witt, P., Greenfield, D., & Hiscox, S. (2008). Cognitive/behavioural approaches to the treatment adult sex offenders. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 36(2), 245-269, retrieved from EBSCOhost
The acceptance that the court system often treats female offenders differently than male offenders is an accurate statement; however, it comes with many caveats. Generally, the public views women as nurturers, motherly and incapable of harming a child. Research indicates that female sex offenders capable of committing such acts have serious psychiatric and psychological problems. In comparison, research indicates male sex offenders are more callous, more antisocial, and promiscuous, involved in the criminal justice system, and have more victims (Miccio-Fenseca, 2012, slide 7). The consensus is that men commit their acts for sexual pleasure while women commit their acts due to psychiatric and psychological problems. Law enforcement, juries, and judges tend to empathize more when there are additional mitigating factors such as emotional or psychological problems. Due to these mitigating factors, it appears treatment of female sex offenders is more lenient than male if their crimes are similar in nature. Research by Miccio-Fenseca (2012) indicates that in comparison to their male counterparts, “female sex offenders rarely use force or violence far less than often…rarely use threats of violence to silence victims…rarely use threats o...
Cole, G. F., & Smith, C. E. (2008). Criminal Justice in America (5th ed.). : Thomson Learning.
problem for the public, as potential victims, and the legal system which is entrusted by the public for protection. It would be irresponsible for the legal system to ignore the criminal class of sex offenders, for they are subject to a recurring physiological urge that requires the use of effective restraints that would curb the habitual repetition of episodes producing the harmful consequences to the public(Schopf 95). In light of this realization, steps beyond treatment have been taken to reduce the recidivism rate of sex offenders. Notification laws, special supervising techniques by parole officers, and both surgical and chemical castration are techniques used in various forms in this country and abroad with success. However, notification laws and both forms of castrations
Schmalleger, F. (2009), Prentice Hall, Publication. Criminal Justice Today: An introductory Text for the 21st century
Large‐scale research indicates that sex offenders who receive treatment, in both prison and community settings have a lower sexual reconviction rate than those who do not receive treatment. Cognitive‐behavioural treatment is the most effective, especially if paired with pharmacological treatment e.g. hormonal drugs that reduce sexual drive. Other approaches such as: psychotherapy, counselling and non‐behavioural treatment generally have not been shown to reduce reconviction (Hanson, 2009). The most recent reviews (Hanson, Bourgon, Helmus, L. & Hodgson, 2009) have also found that sexual of...
Much like many medications, there is no absolute guarantee that chemical castration will be effective when used on everyone. However, there are multiple studies that prove its success rate and other advantages. Although an absolute direct correlation between sexual offences and hormonal imbalance has not been completely proven, various theories prove that sexual offending has incorporated hormonal factors and that chemical castration reduces sexual interest and repeat sex offences (Joo Yong Lee, 2013). In 2014, a study was conducted by the International Society of Sexual Medicine to evaluate the effectiveness of chemical castration on sex offenders. 56 offenders, arrested for sexual offences, were used as subjects. Group A had 38 offenders and were injected every three months with leuprolide acetate (a synthetic gonadotropin releasing hormone) and group B had 18 and was injected with leuprolide acetate every six months. It was found in group A that sexual thoughts decreased significantly by 76% and 71% and masturbation decreased by 74%. In group B sexual thoughts decreased by 78% and 72% and masturbation declined by 83% (Koo KC, 2014). This evidence therefore supported that chemical castration was a very viable option in order to decrease their libido and sexual fantasy. Chemical castration also plays a key
Second time offenders of sex crimes such as rape should be castrated and emasculated slowly with a dull, rusty knife. The criminal should be revived every time he passes out from pain. This heinous crime deserves this much at the very least. After all, this person has violated another person and taken something away, a trust that can never be fully restored. The victims of these crimes never fully trust again.