preview

Pros And Cons Of Chemical Castration

Decent Essays

For centuries, society has said, the punishment should fit the crime, but at what point do we reach a line we aren’t willing to cross. Sexual assault is a serious problem we are faced with every day, and it does not discriminate between men, women, or children. In fact, every 98 seconds, someone is sexually assaulted in America and every 8th minute of that, the victim is a child. Mandatory chemical castration in convicted sex offenders is a debate that has long been analyzed and attacked from both sides and each have shown to offer valid points, but the deterrence and recidivism rates have proven that rendering a sexual offender impotent with chemical castration is more effective than prison, can free the offender of unwanted sexual urges, and shows we take this issue seriously by putting the victims’ rights above the predator.
When considering the pros and cons of effectiveness between chemical castration vs prison, studies performed have given us ample choices to discuss in favor of castration. At the very top of that list, we have money. Who doesn’t love to save a dollar here and there? Or a few thousand, to be exact. On average, it costs tax payers in the United States, $51,286 a year to house an inmate in prison, with the most expensive state being California, costing north of $80,000. On the other hand, chemical castration costs approximately $9,000 a year for testosterone lowering drugs and funding is the sole responsibility of the offender. What if they refuse to pay for the medication or are financially incapable of it, you ask? Even when paired with the necessary psychological treatment, the drug program for a sex offender would still cost less than half for tax payers than prison housing. Furthermore, we can prove the effectiveness of castration thanks to studies conducted and documented over decades on recidivism. One performed out of a California maximum security prison, observed 260 convicted sexual predators once released. They were divided into two groups; medicated and non-treated, and then divided into two sub groups; rapists, and child molesters. Treatment results varied based on the type of sexual offender, but the one consistency to the study was that in both groups, the rate of

Get Access