Chemically castrating sex offenders

[Irritateddaily]

Just seen this news article www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cql22xwg62vo on BBc news regarding the current trial on voluntary chemical castration for violent criminals. Some unanswered questions - is early release guaranteed if they agree to this ?

I haven't looked into this further yet, but thought it was quite interesting.

Aibu to think chemical castration for early release or violent criminals isn't going to ensure no repeat offences ? - we know that a lot of violent sexual crimes are done to feel power/ in control not always inherently sexual satisfaction so is this going to stop repeat offences?

Realistically there is no room in prisons for the amount of sex offenders. People viewing abusive images don’t go to prison unless they have been caught multiple times. There’s no room for them all. You can’t keep them in prison forever. That’s the case with almost all offenders. You have to consider the risk the person poses when leaving prison because you can’t possibly hold them all forever.

More prisons need to be built and are being built but it’s not the whole answer to this problem.

Castration has been shown to reduce offending by a much greater degree than the courses etc they tried to put on (which sometimes increased offending). Men commit sexual offences for a whole range of reasons but sex drive is one factor which if removed theoretically will reduce reoffending. Many offenders will agree to it voluntarily.

Im not sure about forcible chemical castration. I suppose it feels a little off when the state is injecting someone against their will but when you consider the awful things that person has done and the lives they’ve ruined…. Additionally mental health patients are sometimes adminstered drugs forcibly (albeit for their own good) so there is some precedent.

I understand that there are not enough prisons.

I am fed up of criminals(who have committed the worst offenses) being released early for a multitude of reasons. Why the hell should a man be given early freedom when they have ruined the life and possibly the innocence of another adult or child.

I dont care of they repent or now want to change. They had a choice not to harm someone but did it anyway.

The only way to solve the issue is to literally stop them being born - there are generations of dysfunctional and abusive families which drain the state of resources.

often (but not all) children born into dv relationships or abusive / neglected households grow up to have complex needs and many of them sexually or domestically offend. The effect of this trauma shadows their lives and impacts their ability to parent future generations

the country can’t stop people breeding and despite addiction these people have lots of children- I know of one alcoholic who was pregnant with her 9th child after her others being taken into care.

its a seriously complex issue which takes generations of investment and intervention to have an impact

one thing I would support is giving a financial incentive to people to get sterilised who have had kids taken into care- this would save a fortune and prevent so much abuse

we have to balance human rights and also the impact on society - it’s a really tough dilemma

You also have the incredibly complex problem of sex offenders with learning difficulties / dementia and special needs - where they themselves lack capacity

But it is doing something. And that is all that matters .... 🤔

It won’t happen ( at least not mandatorily).

Its the dead cat to distract from the rest of the document and its been very successful. Pretty much every news outlet today is identifying it as a dead cat whilst going on to spend much air time debating it.

This is a really interesting idea…

Labour must have news to bury, like a u-turn on the winter fuel allowance or giving up the Chagos islands, they're out blowing the reform dog whistle loud, what's their next announcement, they going to look at ways of legally sinking dinghies in the Channel?

@plantsnpants sometimes those kids have one safe, normal parent, and one dangerous sex offender parent. The government appears to be trying to guarantee that these children end up becoming criminals by not protecting them from sex offender parent until after that parent has abused them: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/mums-fury-new-law-fails-31676381.amp , thereby guaranteeing that the poor kids are as screwed up as possible.

If we want to reduce offenders in this country, sex offenders need to be kept away from everyone's children, including their own. In an ideal world we would just exile all the sex offenders to an island so they can all abuse each other while the rest of us live in peace.

Some really interesting points here. I was comparing in my head to sterilisation of parents who repeatedly have kids taken in to care and wasn’t sure how I felt about it. Youre right, it’s a tough dilemma but you’re idea about a financial incentive is an interesting one

Just give them a big dose of anti psychotics, I’ve known several on them and it makes them into zombies.

It’s refreshing to hear an emphasis on men changing their behaviour, rather than women staying in/covering up.

Yup fine with surgical castration too, the numbers speak for themselves really don’t they.

I read that something like 1% of people are responsible for around 60% of violent crime. The solution presents itself. When gregs is locking up pasties theres a massive problem in society I actually think we need a swing to being extremely punitive to correct this. A lot of us come from families with substance abuse problems and other those abuse and we don’t behave like animals. Stop punishing the rest of society in an effort to “be kind” to people who only harm.

I read a fucking appalling case where a mum had to spend thousands because her paedophile ex was trying to get access to their children. She was dragged theough the courts again and again. I think it was in “The Times” a few years ago. I hadn’t realised how utterly appalling our family court system is.

I think it’s sammy woodhouse who was a grooming gang victim who had to still give her rapist access to her son. The council actually made a point of visiting him to make sure he knew he could legally seek access. I mean just WTAF. Who in their right mind thinks thats a good thing!?

I’m not convinced that rape is always about power. I know it’s what people always say but I actually do think we are giving rapists too much credit here. I suspect sexual violence is often about sex.

Yep. I think some of them think so little of women that they'll put them through a rape as long as they can get what they want, and others will find the distress actually arousing.

I read that something like 1% of people are responsible for around 60% of violent crime.

I fantasise about a scenario where a lab developed virus targets that one percent, and the rest of us live happily ever after in safer, nicer world.

I’m all for this.

The government are looking at making this mandatory and I agree with it.

If that means strapping rapists down to administer the chemical castration drugs, I have no problem with it whatsoever.

If it saves one child from being raped or interfered with, then it’s worth it on a human rights balancing scale.

There's something i know that happened to someone as part of the CSA they faced. All I can say is that there are some paedophiles who would be extremely mentally aroused by only being able to "do things" and not receive pleasure themselves.

💐

You can't rehabilitate a sex offender. I have known some who have voluntarily taken the injections in prison but I'm cynical enough to wonder if that's some parole driven ploy. Plus, it's not just one injection it's regular injections and I wouldn't be surprised if many just stopped attending and absconded.

I tho

I thought it was found to make the violence and harm done even worse.

Followed by cutting off the hands of someone convicted of theft . . .

What a stupid policy. If we had a proper police force and a working prison system we wouldn't need these stupid ideas.

I’m pretty sure it works on animals, it’s a fairly common procedure for dogs, for example, used by owners to see how the dog changes behaviour if it’s a humper, for example. Some owners prefer this to removing bits.