11-12-2014 3:16 PM
I don't think anyone can deny that the recent rise in convictions of sexual offences is stretching the prison service to the brink.
Most don't believe there is any cure for paedophilia, so is chemical castration the answer for repeat offenders?
I'm not suggesting we go quite as far as Russia, where it can be ordered by a court, although I'm open to persuasion on that.
What surprises me is that while most offenders express deep sorrow for their crimes as mitigation, so few volunteer for the treatment. I see no better way to demonstrate true contrition than to have the temptation permanently removed.
11-12-2014 3:45 PM
11-12-2014 4:03 PM
I agree 100% saasher. So many times before I have heard that someone who has been convicted of this vile practice, has done it before, been convicted, served a few years and been let out. If wanting children comes naturally to them, then they will never be rehabilitated. I guess they can't help the way their bodies are made and the way they feel, but they should learn to control their urges. If they can't then it should be done for them. They may find they have a bit more control if this was the consequence.
11-12-2014 4:07 PM
Chemical castration sounds a bit drastic.
Instead, couldn't we just follow the example of Germany - and lower the legal age of sexual consent to 14.
This would reduce the number of guilty paedophiles at a stroke!
11-12-2014 4:14 PM
This is an interesting article - facts, users, pros and cons.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/18/chemical-castration-soft-option-sex-offenders
But it's only in the comments below that paedophiles are specifically mentioned.
I was told a while ago by someone who used to work with paedophiles (not in this country) that chemical castration does not always work, even when the person is willing to use it.
As mentioned in that article, there's a lot of other 'stuff' going on for people who have such urges and needs.
11-12-2014 4:17 PM
I don't think it would. And it's really not the answer as 14 year olds are still vulnerable to inappropriate persuasion as well as it being medically inadvisable in the long term.
Paedophiles have a mental state that is the problem and even removing their physical parts would not stop them assisting others in their activities to fill their unnatural drives, in fact may even exascerbate the situation.
11-12-2014 4:39 PM
In William Shakespeare's play "Romeo and Juliet", what age were the couple?
Would you have given Romeo a "chemical castration", for being a paedophile?
11-12-2014 4:53 PM
It's hardly a relevant comparison, not just because in those days (and in some cultures today) there was no age of consent and children were married off and even expected to be having intercourse at a very early age.
They also died early too, especially women. And that still happens today in other cultures.
It has no bearing on dealing with paedophiles whatsoever and there's is an urge which is often muddled with other forms of offending.
Paedophiles are generally not interested in teenagers, they are obsessed with young children at every point.
Medically, it is not a good thing for young people to be experiencing intercourse, and again it's considered worse for women in the long term.
It's also not right to expect 14 year olds to be able to judge what is 'right' or not about having sex (I expect the word will be bleeped out). It is far too easy to persuade a young girl or boy and especially around that age, that it's OK to 'do it', and the child has no protection if they agree because they feel presurised.
It doesn't matter that children even under 12 are experimenting, it's about whether they can be protected from those who are predatory for their own unacceptable demands.
11-12-2014 4:58 PM
11-12-2014 5:05 PM
No need to apologise, saasher.
The simple fact is that whilst it might work for some sex offenders, it doesn't for others and the only option to stop them from not just acting themselves but from interacting to help others is to lock them up.
What I find worrying is what is definitely an increase and not just with men either in all forms of sexual abuse and attacks.
We do need a serious review on how this is dealt with and for me it goes on to how convicted criminals in prison are allowed to live and the way we have simply failed to deal with the spiraling problems in society.
11-12-2014 5:24 PM
never mind chemical, go for the real thing.
11-12-2014 5:25 PM
So, you would arrest Romeo as a paedophile, for having underage sex with Juliet?
11-12-2014 5:29 PM
It seems to be of almost epidemic proportions that is if the statistics cited in the documentary ' The paedophile next door' are true.
That programme claimed that one in SIX children are subjected to sexual abuse at some time; one in FOUR girls and one in EIGHT boys. If true that is shocking and implies that a large proportion of offenders get away with it otherwise our prisons would either be full of them or I would think there would be a much higher number on the register of sex offenders living in the community.
Some forms of treatment are claimed to help and to reduce re-offending:
Large‐scale research indicates that sex offenders who receive treatment, in both prison and community settings, have a lower sexual reconviction rate than those who do not receive treatment1. Cognitive‐behavioural treatment is the most effective, especially if paired with pharmacological treatment (e.g. hormonal drugs that reduce sexual drive). Other approaches (psychotherapy, counselling and non‐behavioural treatment) generally do not reduce reconviction.
11-12-2014 6:20 PM
11-12-2014 6:24 PM
Suzie, could it be that a lot of people have seen the possibility of getting compensation money?
11-12-2014 6:33 PM - edited 11-12-2014 6:34 PM
I don't know Mal, that particular documentary which mentioned that level of abuse was not about convicted paedophiles or those who have claimed past assaults. It was a story of one brave man who came out on TV to say that he had feelings towards children but he has never offended and says he never will act on his feelings (I think they termed him a virtuous paedophile), and some attempts to understand the reasons.
That number of 1 in 6 children was given in the documentary but I don't know where they got it from. Even if it is higher than reality I rather suspect it is more common than most people realise or expect.
11-12-2014 8:10 PM
@suzieseaside wrote:
That programme claimed that one in SIX children are subjected to sexual abuse at some time; one in FOUR girls and one in EIGHT boys. If true that is shocking and implies that a large proportion of offenders get away with it otherwise our prisons would either be full of them or I would think there would be a much higher number on the register of sex offenders living in the community.
But has it ever been any different? The problem with a lot of these statistics is that the questions are often framed as to give the answer they want.
"Has any adult ever touched you in a way that made you feel uncomfortable?" Answer YES and that is recorded as a child that has suffered from sexual abuse.
Has an adult ever said things to you of a sexual nature that made you feel uncomfortable?" Answer YES and that is recorded as a child that has suffered from sexual abuse.
That and the fact that there are more ways for children to report abuse, and they are more likely to be beleived
and as for your opening statement
"I don't think anyone can deny that the recent rise in convictions of sexual offences is stretching the prison service to the brink"
Do you have any statistics to back this up? There may have been a few high profile paedophile cases in the press this year but has there actually been a massive increase in paedophiles locked up?
11-12-2014 9:13 PM
Just lock em up and chuck the key.
11-12-2014 9:14 PM
I didn't post the OP so I don't know. Neither did I suggest that the incidence of paedophilia has increased or is any different from the past, I only posted what was stated in the documentary and said if it were true then I thought it was shocking.
Perhaps eva (the OP) can answer you.
11-12-2014 9:15 PM