It should be compulsory for all convicted paedophiles. It seems a lot more humane than what some would want to be done to them when convicted and certainly a lot more humane than what these monsters subjected their victims too.
These people must know they are ill (sick). I think it would be difficult for them to refuse treatment as a condition of their "rehabilitation".
Good topic to provoke a simplistic reaction. The question is does it work - and it seems that under the right circumstances it does so I think the current initiative seems to be a good thing. For people who really want to do something to stop reoffending it seems hard to argue against it Is it going to work in all cases - that I dont know - how do you force someone who doesnt want it to take the drug - I assume it wears off after a while. are there other side effects? Its also a dangerous area and there is definitely a risk of wrong conviction - bad enough as it is but then to start applying forced medication to modify behaviour - I am not so sure its right myself also what level of child abuse qualifies like all offences there is a grey scale from at one extreme monsters who forceably rape children to the other extreme where a 16 year old lad has sex with his 15 year old girlfriend in the same school year not sure many one here would insist on chemical castration for life in those circumstances but there is a whole range in between I have no idea where the line should go. As to actual castration with a blunt knife - the idea is appealing - but really I think a civilised society shouldnt be doing that - what next chopping off hands for shoplifting?
Louis Theroux did a programme on paedophiles. Chemical castration was mentioned in this documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdQlng_-Jog
Re: Louis Theroux You're all happy to castrate paedaphiles etc. but are probably unwilling to 'top' bloody murderers.
Re: Louis Theroux If thats the american one then it was a really good documentary. I seem to recall one man on there was due for release but kept getting knocked back because nobody wanted him living near them. He said he didn't blame them and that it was his own fault. I thought that was quite good of him (if good is the word), at least he was taking responsibility for his own actions. I'm not sure if ALL paedophiles should be castrated, as Farnham says there is a big grey area. Also, I know this might be an unpopular view point but is the crime a 'man' who rapes a child really any worse than raping an adult? I know that it sounds a lot worse and sounds more shocking but in reality is it much different? A woman who has been forcibly raped will be traumatised and it will live with her forever. A child who has been raped will be traumatised and it will live with them forever. What is the difference? Both are defenceless victims who have had their life changed forever by a rapist. Don't get me wrong i'm not defending them at all and I don't mean it to sound like im saying 'oh its not so bad'. what I mean is the opposite, that 'normal' adult rape is equally as bad. If we are castrating Jim for raping a 12 year old should we not also be castrating Jims next door neighbour who raped an 18 year old? Effectively the same crime, just two different people. My own opinion is that chemical castration can be a good thing but that maybe it should be voluntary and not used as a punishment. If someone GENUINELY is remorceful and wants to stop having the desires that they have (I have always said that I feel sorry for people with those desires and do not blame them one bit for having them, I only blame those who ACT on them) then the chemical castration option should be there for them and that person should be helped in every possible way. If someone doesn't want to go down that route then we shouldnt force them BUT we should treat them differently, the one who went for the treatment should be praised, the one who didnt should have restrictions placed on him or her even after release because the fact that they haven't shown that level of remorse to seek treatment suggests that they may reoffend. It is a minefield though because as Farnham said, would we chop peoples hands off for stealing? Would we even dream of altering that persons mental being to stop them thinking as they naturally do? Essentially changing who they are. I'm not sure but I do think that at the very least the OPTION should be there for it to be done voluntarily. In fact that option should be open to anyone in the same way that hormone replacement medication is available to people who feel they are the wrong gender.
I don't think shoplifting and paedophilia can be compared as crimes. Chopping hands of shoplifters is not really something many would contemplate.
I'm normally a bleeding heart liberal but: "Psychologist Dr Ludwig Lowenstein told the Daily Mirror: "Apart from lengthy jail sentences, the only other way to deal with most of these people is through chemical castration." I can think of a few other ways to be honest.