Convicted paedophiles could face mandatory chemical castration to suppress their libidos under plans being considered by the justice secretary. Shabana Mahmood is said to be weighing up giving the drugs to sex offenders to reduce reoffending and free up prison space. But while the idea – announced on the Sun’s front page yesterday under the headline ‘paedos to be castrated’ – is sure to be popular, chemical castration isn’t as effective as its supporters might hope. Its use could lull courts, and society in general, into a false sense of security about the danger that sex offenders pose.
Chemical castration isn’t as effective as its supporters might hope
The use of drugs to suppress the production of testosterone – which could form part of the chemical castration of criminals – is commonly used as a treatment for prostate cancer. But even when given to older men, such as my late husband, Jeremy, who died of prostate cancer two years ago, it can take a long time, years even, for it to reduce both libido and sexual function.
Unsurprisingly, the effectiveness of the drugs can vary between patients.
Britain’s best politics newsletters
You get two free articles each week when you sign up to The Spectator’s emails.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in