Coercion, Incarceration, and Chemical Castration: An Argument From Autonomy

Abstract

In several jurisdictions, sex offenders may be offered chemical castration as an alternative to further incarceration. In some, agreement to chemical castration may be made a formal condition of parole or release. In others, refusal to undergo chemical castration can increase the likelihood of further incarceration though no formal link is made between the two. Offering chemical castration as an alternative to further incarceration is often said to be partially coercive, thus rendering the offender’s consent invalid. The dominant response to this objection has been to argue that any coercion present in such cases is compatible with valid consent. In this article, we take a different tack, arguing that, even if consent would not be valid, offering chemical castration will often be supported by the very considerations that underpin concerns about consent: considerations of autonomy. This is because offering chemical castration will often increase the offender’s autonomy, both at the time the offer is made and in the future.

Rethinking responsibility in offenders with acquired paedophilia: Punishment or treatment?

“…The very real possibility of subjective expert reports within criminal justice settings, due to the adversarial nature of court systems, needs to receive increased attention when confronted with invasive treatments like ADT. For further reading and references concerning the debate on coerced treatment see: Douglas et al (2013). excuse an individual should take all relevant information into account, both neurobiological and other evidence, and should proceed on a careful case by case analysis.…”

“…In recently discovered cases of acquired paedophilia, there is growing evidence that individuals may suddenly experience pathological paedophiliac behaviour due to the onset of brain disturbances. As in the case of offenders with other late onset brain disturbances (e.g., clinical disinhibition following cingulotomy for obsessive compulsive disorder), we are then faced with the important and difficult question of whether to offer treatment measures to offenders with acquired paedophilia either as a condition of probation/parole (alternative sanction) or as a requirement for reduced sentencing is called for and/or warranted (Douglas, Bonte, Focquaert, Devolder, & Sterckx, 2013).…”

Sex Offenders Seeking Treatment for Sexual Dysfunction—Ethics, Medicine, and the Law

“…Others believe that deviant sexual preferences, such as pedophilia, are exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to change, and evidence of sexual deviance is a reliable predictor of recidivism [20–22]. In addition, some experts postulate that not all who commit these crimes are distressed by the crime or by the urges that they experience and would have little motivation for change [27].…”

Sex Offender Policy and Prevention

“…Not content to simply increase sentence lengths, institute registration and community notifi cation, and introduce civil commitment procedures, several states in the United States began to pass laws allowing for mandatory chemical castration of sex offenders upon their parole to the community (Douglas, Bonte, Focquaert, Devolder, & Sterckx, 2013 ;Pratt, 2000 ). California introduced the fi rst chemical castration law in 1997 (Conroy, 2006 ) and continues to use the sanction against repeat child molesters today, as do other states like Florida.…”