Castration

For quite some time, humans have had the reputation of always carrying out sins and criminal activity. In many societies, they have rules and regulation that govern them and have specific measures that they take once a person carries out a particular negative criminal act. Traditional societies have been on the frontline towards ensuring that criminal activities are minimized efficiently and effectively in their locations. There are different methods of punishment that exist and the most common ones are imprisonment or death.
However, contemporary societies have en to it that there be an introduction of another means of punishment and this Is through castration (Somerville, 2013). Castration Is a method of punishment that involves the authorities mutilating or interfering with the anatomy and hormones of those convicted of certain sexual offenses. Right now there are several states that practice this form of punishment via chemical castration or surgical. These states include Georgia, Florida, California, Louisiana, Montana, Oregon, Texas, and Wisconsin.
These states allow chemical and surgical castration as a condition for a educed sentence, which I don’t agree with. Chemical castration Is the administration of a medication given Intravenously or orally called AMP, which Is commonly known as Depraver, this medication is prescribed to women for various issues such as birth control, uterine, menstrual, menopausal issues but when used by men it decreases the hormone testosterone to the pre-puberty level. Health officials state that this procedure works by minimizing or reducing the desire, interest, libido and making it difficult to perform sexual activities.

Although this is said to work it has several side effects such as blood clots, menopausal symptoms, cardiovascular, blood level, blood pressure and allergic reactions, the effects are reversible. After the person stops taking the medication. Surgical castration is the removal of a man’s testicles or a women’s ovaries and is not reversible. Do not see where removing this part of the anatomy would prevent sexual activity. In my opinion, I do not believe that removing or lowering the hormone levels of men or women reduces or prevents sexual crimes, but I do not have a problem with using castration as a punishment to repeat offenders.
I do agree that pedophilia and rapist deserve this as punishment and this goes for men and women who commit these hideous crimes. In researching castration as a punishment I found no information pertaining to women being castrated only men, and if this is the case then I disagree I feel this should pertain to both sexes as both commit these terrible crimes although more men are charged, tried, convicted and sentenced, then women. Various debates have existed on whether this method of punishment is fair, Inhumane, violates the eighth amendment of cruel and unusual punishment.
I have several Issues that I will attempt to address on the pros and cons of castration as a punishment and is it appropriate or violates human rights in my own opinion. Many people have argued that this method of punishment is not fair, and it is inhumane while others argue that this form of punishment is just and appropriate for it assists in punishing and deterring criminals who engage In or attempt to commit these hideous sexual crimes (Golden, 2013). In my pollen, I have no sympathy for these Individuals as they had or punishment.
One issue that I have is if we are going to mutilate a person for the crimes they commit, then why aren’t we setting standards for all crimes committed, for instance if we are to mutilate and castrate for certain sexual crimes then wouldn’t it be fair to mutilate or remove an offenders hand or fingers for robbery or burglary, or surgically removing someone’s foot or legs for escaping. The other issue I have is forcefully removing a particular anatomy if an offender is a first time offender. What happens in a situation of innocence or wrongly accused.
There are so many cases where individuals are tried, convicted, sentenced, that are innocent, and years later proven and released, what happens in this case if we castrate, we cannot reverse this procedure once completed. I think repeat offenders should receive this punishment. In 2004, a man named David Wayne Jones, previously employed as a counselor at the east Dallas Ymca confessed to molesting over 40 young boys agreed to be punished by surgical castration, he would make the second offender to have had this reoccurred performed since the law was passed.
Although he voluntarily agreed to have this procedure done and was later released, I do not agree that these offenders should have the choice to have this as a sentence reduction. I feel that these criminals should have this procedure done in addition especially when it comes to violating young, helpless, defenseless, innocent children. Another argument that can be used to show the fact that these people ought to be castrated is the issue of repeat offenders. Many cases exist where the person who carried out the raping rime carries out the same mistake again and again (Becker, 2012).
After being caught and imprisoned for the first time, these people have the ability to feel as if they did not deserve the punishment and as a sign of rebellion may rape again. This matter has existed for a very long time. However, if a person is castrated after carrying out the crime for the first time, then there is no chance that he can carry out the crime again but the case has to be 100% proven guilty, I would not want to have the thought of castrating a innocent individual on my head.
Castration ought to be a sentencing option to the Judges and this is for the fact that when a person is sentenced to punishment of castration, he goes through much pain and suffering that may be effective enough to act as a warning and deterrent to other people that may have had similar intentions. Moreover, this method of sentencing ensures that the offender does not carry out the crime again even after the release (Tracy, 2013). There are different cases that have come up over the years where the offender may eel obliged and guilty to a point that he practices voluntary castration.
Voluntary castration is a method of castration where the Judge does not instruct the prosecutors to castrate the criminal but rather offers it as a suggestion. Now this I agree with 100% and have no issues or objections. The criminals that go for this option ought not to receive a shorter sentence and those that do not should receive the maximum time aloud. This is a very sensitive subject that has to evaluated more in depths before it can be completely considered, it has to be tweaked to perfection.