SURNAME1

Name

Professor’s Name

Course Title

Date

Effectiveness of Castrations in reducing Sex Crimes

Surgical Castration has been used as a means of social control for centuries. During the

late 1800s, Dr Harry Sharp of Indiana surgically castrated nearly 180 male prisoners to reduce

their sexual urges. As a result of his efforts, Indiana began using physical Castration to decrease

recidivism in prisoners and became the first state to legalize the sterilization (Lee, and Kang Su

Cho 117). Castration involves suppression of testosterone, the hormone that drives sexual urges.

The process takes two forms: surgical- physical removal of testes- organs producing testosterone

and chemical Castration- use of drugs that reduce the production of testosterone (Lee, and Kang

Su Cho 120). Chemical Castration is the more popular of the two; this is because of its reduced

side effects. Nonetheless, the process has faced stiff criticisms from opponents who see it as a

violation of constitutional rights; they argue the procedure violates the Eighth Amendment's ban

on cruel and unusual punishment and the First Amendment rights.

Nonetheless, Castration remains to be an effective method of controlling the propagation

of sexual offences. It reduces recidivism (individuals commit a sex crime a second time).

Moreover, it is safe, cost-effective, makes individuals more open to rehabilitation programs, and

the effects of Castration are reversible.

Castration is the most effective in reducing recidivism

 SURNAME2

Castration method is more successful in deterring perpetuation of sexual offence a second

time. The reduction of testosterone hormone reduces sexual drive making individuals less

interested in intercourse—this strategy when used with procedures such as guidance and

counselling help rehabilitate chronic sexual offenders. A 1997 study by Hansen and Lykke‐

Olesen involving 43 inmates in Herstedvester sentenced for committing violent sexual offences;

showed out that out of the 43 inmates- 21 accepted to undergo Castration and were released from

prison 6-18 months after the treatment. Out of these only two re-committed sexual crimes and

that was after 15 years and after stoppage of chemical castration treatment. In contrast Of the 22

inmates who were not castrated 8 of them committed sexual crimes less than two years after

being released- this was after they had spent more than 20 years in correctional facilities going

through rehabilitation (Hansen and Lykke‐Olesen 231). This research questions the effectiveness

of extended jail terms in rehabilitating sex perpetrators and provides Castration as a better

alternative.

Castrations are safe

Castration is a safe process and does not expose individuals to life-threatening conditions.

Although the term "Castration" refers to torture, in the modern world, the approach is humane

and is only practised by professionals. Besides, medical practitioners use Castration as a

treatment method for Cancer patients- showing how much safe it is. Although there some

concerns with the side effects caused by rapid reduction of testosterone hormones: Growth of

breasts (in men), depression, weakening of bones and increase in weight; all these effects are

easily manageable with straightforward psychiatry and supplements (Scott and Trent 502).

Several pieces of research show the negative outcome is significantly diminished when

testosterone is gradually reduced (Scott and Trent 502; Hansen and Lykke‐Olesen 231).Chemical
 SURNAME3

Castration offers a better alternative to surgical Castration in that chemical injections are

administrable over an extended period and is less complicated for women. Furthermore, research

by Edmonds on 900 castrated sexual offenders' shows only 5% developed severe outcomes

associated with the castration process; on the pro side out of the 900 only 3% developed

recidivism (477). From a Utilitarian point of view use of Castration to protect the health and

safety of the public service of Castration regardless of its side effects to the perpetrator is

permissible. Considering the ability of Castration satisfy all the goals of criminal punishment:

retribution, deterrence, incapacitation and rehabilitation all with minimal effects to psychology

and wellbeing of sex offenders warrants its discretionary use as a means for social control.

Castrations are cost-effective

Castration through the surgical and chemical process is inexpensive when compared to

lengthy jail terms. In most states in the U.S. Jail term for sex offender range between 5 years to

lifetime incarcerations in extreme cases involving children violations (Scott and Trent 502). Such

Jail terms are costly to governments- the average annual cost of incarcerations has increased by

about $32,000 or about 58 per cent; this includes an increase of $11,300 for security and $12,200

for inmate health care, leading to a total government expenditure of $81,203 per inmate (Scott

and Trent 502). The feasibility of maintaining incarcerations is uncertain, considering the rapid

increase in sex offences. Apart from being expensive to sustain imprisonments rob the economy

of labour and other labour related resources leading to less than expected economic progress.

Also, Prison overcrowding is an emerging issue that is affecting the delivery of essential services

and puts prisons at increased risks of getting infected with highly infectious diseases such as

tuberculosis.
 SURNAME4

Castration reduces time to rehabilitation- Eight states: Louisiana, California, Montana,

Oregon, Texas, Florida, Georgia and Wisconsin offer inmates charged with certain sex offences

with the provision of reduced sentences when they willing fully accept treatment. Besides, most

of these states require inmates, especially second-time offenders, to foot their treatment bills

after Castration- further reducing the cost of Castration (Scott and Trent 502). Taking to account

the high costs involved in maintaining prisoners, it becomes imperative to think of alternative

techniques of rehabilitation such as Castration.

Most of the outcomes of castration process are reversible

Individuals can still be capable of intercourse even after Castration. While Castration

aims to reduce sex drive by suppressing testosterone production, it is opposite to achieve the

opposite with testosterone injections; thus, fully rehabilitated individuals get to have the chance

of getting close to normal coitus (Weinberger et al). However, some outcomes caused by

Castration are irreversible or are too expensive to reverse. One of the permanent consequences of

the process is infertility- a castrated individual cannot reproduce. Other effects are manageable

through surgical treatments, i.e., breast reduction in males (one of the side effects caused by

reducing testosterone levels).

Reversibility of sex drive is much higher in Chemical castration treatment methods;

individuals can resume Normal erectile functioning by simply discontinuing the treatment

process(Weinberger et al). States such as Louisiana are well aware of this possibility and have

strict laws to deter individuals receiving chemical castration treatment from discontinuing the

therapy. The State penal code has a 50-100 prison sentence with no possibility for parole for

individuals who prematurely stop the treatment process (Weinberger et al). The likelihood for a
 SURNAME5

castrated sexual offender to achieve coitus reduces the probability of adverse outcomes such as

depression associated with the inability to enjoy sexual contact.

Reduced testosterone levels improves other rehabilitation processes

Reduction in testosterone levels can make individuals more teachable. Generally, sex

offenders are driven by an uncontrollable urge for pleasure and exhibit symptoms related to toxic

masculinity such as violence and anger issues which limit the extent of rehabilitation programs.

Several studies have shown correlations between higher than usual testosterone levels with

incidence violence. According to hg, reducing these hormones help can help reduce anger and

violence outcomes. He observes that individuals who have undergone Castration are docile and

receptive, which makes it easier for psychologists to effectively carry out rehabilitation programs

and guidance and counselling services to the sex perpetrators.

Critiques to the use of Castration as a means of social control

Opponents to such laws contend that Castration decreases or eliminates deviant sexual

thoughts and fantasies, thus infringing the liberties of the First Amendment, which grants

freedom of expression to people, which the Supreme Court has generally held to include the right

to produce ideas (Oswald 470). Irrespective of their social worth. Proponents of Castration argue

that perpetrators of sex crimes void their constitutional rights when they become a threat to the

public. Emphasizing that by committing sex crimes, offenders demonstrate lack of mastery over

their fantasies and as such Castration is justified to help control their behaviour.

A second legal concern involves whether forced Castration violates the Eighth

Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. In a case of State v. Brown that involved
 SURNAME6

three defendants who had pled guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct in connection with a

brutal sexual assault (Oswald 470).The South Carolina Supreme Court overruled their sentence

on Castration held that surgical Castration was cruel and unusual punishment, as prohibited by

South Carolina (Oswald 470). Proponents of chemical Castration for sex offenders propose that

the use of anti-androgens such as MPA does not satisfy the three-pronged test for cruel and

unusual punishment articulated earlier (Lee, and Kang Su Cho 117). Furthermore, the use of

chemical agents is not excessive when considering previous harm and the importance of

preventing future sexual victimization.

In conclusion, Sexual crimes are a significant public health problem, efforts to prevent

recidivism and protect the community are worthy, and public safety can take precedence over

criminal's rights. The body of the research established Castration as a better strategy for social

control- it produces fewer cases of recidivism while being cheaper compared to alternative

approaches.
 SURNAME7

Works cited

Lee, Joo Yong, and Kang Su Cho. "Chemical castration for sexual offenders: physicians'

views." Journal of Korean medical science 28.2 (2013): 171-172.

Oswald, Zachary Edmonds. "Off with His-Analyzing the Sex Disparity in Chemical Castration

Sentences." Mich. J. Gender & L. 19 (2012): 471.

Scott, Charles L., and Trent Holmberg. "Castration of sex offenders: prisoners' rights versus

public safety." JOURNAL-AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PSYCHIATRY AND THE LAW 31

(2003): 502-509.

Traish, Abdulmaged M. "Testosterone therapy in men with testosterone deficiency: are the

benefits and cardiovascular risks real or imagined?." American Journal of Physiology-

Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology 311.3 (2016): R566-R573.

Weinberger, Linda E., et al. "The impact of surgical castration on sexual recidivism risk among

sexually violent predatory offenders." Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry

and the Law Online 33.1 (2005): 16-36.