These are the responses to my March 12th, article, "Both Houses Pass A Bill To Keep Sex Offenders In 'Civil Confinement' Until They Are Cured Thanks to all, please continue to provide us with your feedback
Chemical castration would be a particularly useful, specific and cost effective treatment for sex offenders- for your information, some facts about current therapies available:
1. Androgen ablative therapies work at the level of the pituitary gland, essentially blocking the production of Leutinizing Hormone which is responsible for stimulating the Leydig Cells of the Testes to produce testosterone, resulting in castrate levels of the male hormone and reduced libido.
2. Treatments available today involve either Intramuscular Injections, given every 4-6 months or a titanium implant, about the size/shape of a match stick [Bayer:”Viadur”] surgically placed in the upper arm (procedure is painless and takes about 5 minutes) which releases drug over a 12 month period of time. The individual has no awareness of the presence of the implant once it is implanted; The implant is removed and replaced with a new implant yearly; The implant can be removed at anytime with complete restoration of testicular function if for some reason, the individual no longer requires castrate levels of testosterone. I think that this implant technology would be an appropriate and cost effective option in the management of sex offenders and would be worth looking at by our legislators.
As usual, it was well written and fairly in-depth for the space allotted. At best, it is a very difficult problem to discuss and emotions and moral background may play heavily in the form of response from your readers.
As one interested in civil liberties and civil rights, I am still not prepared to make a definite decision on the law. I tend to lean in the direction of the no voters, but there is always the possibility of recidivism, which, in the case of children being involved, plays heavily in the equation. I may not be around to see it, but I would bet the farm that this issue will come up before the Supreme Court at some future date.
As much as I want so strongly to protect children, I fear the erosion of any civil liberties to a greater extent. Having paid with time in jail, a criminal should be free. But where is the justice if that person reverts to repetitions of their sexual offenses against others? This is one for the wisdom of King Solomon, but he is no longer here to order his swordsman to raise his weapon and cleave the baby in two.
Once again, an enigma of major proportions, perhaps resolved by the stupidity of legislators, who are only interested in the political aspects and not necessarily the reality of the issue. This one is in the Books until the next case in court. I guess if you trust the people charged with enforcing the new law, it may be an over-all benefit, but ultimately, I doubt it, because so far, with criminals in general, we have failed miserably in all directions and it probably will not get much better in the next few generations.
Perhaps the only salvation is in looking forward to the future where chemistry and medicine can combine to create a drug or potion to alter the mind sufficiently to avoid such future occurrences. Star Trek, where are you?
I must admit I regard confinement, not mandated by a court engaged in the day-to-day vigilance over civil liberties, disturbing. Laws passed on a foundation of fear and emotion rather than science and a paramount interest in the dispensing of justice are notoriously subject to abuse and difficult to repeal; and no one knows what remedies to present dilemmas, the future might hold.
It seems to me that the monies to be allocated for the long term incarceration of sexual predators, who otherwise function normally in society, might be better spent in close surveillance and monitoring the activities of the subject threat. I could support the forced administration of libido-inhibiting drugs, after even a single repeated offense, and extended incarceration and treatment for the serially predatory seems a better course of action to me than continued confinement in anticipation of some as yet uncommitted outrage after a court-ordered sentence has already been served. There just simply seems to be something fundamentally unfair and irresponsible about mandating a life of incarceration in response to even understandable hysteria and in mere contemplation of possible future criminal activity.
By "... treating and supervising the large cohort of criminals who would never qualify for civil commitment..." I think the Times means those people whose offense under the new law would qualify them for both commitment and treatment but who could not under existing laws be committed to the less costly - and less salutary - prison system.
In Germany both physical castration and chemical castration have been tried against sex offenders.. First off the sadistic drive is not stopped with this procedure and secondly the offender can obtain testosterone as a prescription to restore the sexual drive as did the rapist murderer of 7 year old Anna Bachmeier in Lübeck, Germany..
In Germany both physical castration and chemical castration have been tried against sex offenders.. First off the sadistic drive is not stopped with this procedure and secondly the offender can obtain testosterone as a prescription to restore the sexual drive as did the rapist murderer of 7 year old Anna Bachmeier in Lübeck, Germany.. This violent sex offender agreed to physical castration as a prerequisite for probation and later obtained a prescription for testosterone and murdered this girl shortly afterwards.. The case vbecame international famous because anna's mother Marianne Bachmeier smuggled a pistole into the courtroom and shot the predator to death after he claimed the 7 year old girl forced him to rape her by flirting with him.. Marianna Bachmeier was sentenced to 6 years by a German court for her act.
My Name is Henry Stern, President of New York Civic. Please feel free to comment on our articles, and give us your feedback. What you have to say is important to us.
DK
ReplyDeleteRe: Chemical Castration
Chemical castration would be a particularly useful, specific and cost effective treatment for sex offenders- for your information, some facts about current therapies available:
1. Androgen ablative therapies work at the level of the pituitary gland, essentially blocking the production of Leutinizing Hormone which is responsible for stimulating the Leydig Cells of the Testes to produce testosterone, resulting in castrate levels of the male hormone and reduced libido.
2. Treatments available today involve either Intramuscular Injections, given every 4-6 months or a titanium implant, about the size/shape of a match stick [Bayer:”Viadur”] surgically placed in the upper arm (procedure is painless and takes about 5 minutes) which releases drug over a 12 month period of time. The individual has no awareness of the presence of the implant once it is implanted; The implant is removed and replaced with a new implant yearly; The implant can be removed at anytime with complete restoration of testicular function if for some reason, the individual no longer requires castrate levels of testosterone. I think that this implant technology would be an appropriate and cost effective option in the management of sex offenders and would be worth looking at by our legislators.
As usual, it was well written and fairly in-depth for the space allotted. At best, it is a very difficult problem to discuss and emotions and moral background may play heavily in the form of response from your readers.
ReplyDeleteAs one interested in civil liberties and civil rights, I am still not prepared to make a definite decision on the law. I tend to lean in the direction of the no voters, but there is always the possibility of recidivism, which, in the case of children being involved, plays heavily in the equation. I may not be around to see it, but I would bet the farm that this issue will come up before the Supreme Court at some future date.
As much as I want so strongly to protect children, I fear the erosion of any civil liberties to a greater extent. Having paid with time in jail, a criminal should be free. But where is the justice if that person reverts to repetitions of their sexual offenses against others? This is one for the wisdom of King Solomon, but he is no longer here to order his swordsman to raise his weapon and cleave the baby in two.
Once again, an enigma of major proportions, perhaps resolved by the stupidity of legislators, who are only interested in the political aspects and not necessarily the reality of the issue. This one is in the Books until the next case in court. I guess if you trust the people charged with enforcing the new law, it may be an over-all benefit, but ultimately, I doubt it, because so far, with criminals in general, we have failed miserably in all directions and it probably will not get much better in the next few generations.
Perhaps the only salvation is in looking forward to the future where chemistry and medicine can combine to create a drug or potion to alter the mind sufficiently to avoid such future occurrences. Star Trek, where are you?
I must admit I regard confinement, not mandated by a court engaged in the day-to-day vigilance over civil liberties, disturbing. Laws passed on a foundation of fear and emotion rather than science and a paramount interest in the dispensing of justice are notoriously subject to abuse and difficult to repeal; and no one knows what remedies to present dilemmas, the future might hold.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that the monies to be allocated for the long term incarceration of sexual predators, who otherwise function normally in society, might be better spent in close surveillance and monitoring the activities of the subject threat. I could support the forced administration of libido-inhibiting drugs, after even a single repeated offense, and extended incarceration and treatment for the serially predatory seems a better course of action to me than continued confinement in anticipation of some as yet uncommitted outrage after a court-ordered sentence has already been served. There just simply seems to be something fundamentally unfair and irresponsible about mandating a life of incarceration in response to even understandable hysteria and in mere contemplation of possible future criminal activity.
By "... treating and supervising the large cohort of criminals who would never qualify for civil commitment..." I think the Times means those people whose offense under the new law would qualify them for both commitment and treatment but who could not under existing laws be committed to the less costly - and less salutary - prison system.
I know of no doctors who feel that we can cure sex offenders. I believe that a lobotomy may be the answer.
ReplyDeleteCastration is the only economic and foolproof solution.
ReplyDeleteIn Germany both physical castration and chemical castration have been tried against sex offenders.. First off the sadistic drive is not stopped with this procedure and secondly the offender can obtain testosterone as a prescription to restore the sexual drive as did the rapist murderer of 7 year old Anna Bachmeier in Lübeck, Germany..
ReplyDeleteIn Germany both physical castration and chemical castration have been tried against sex offenders.. First off the sadistic drive is not stopped with this procedure and secondly the offender can obtain testosterone as a prescription to restore the sexual drive as did the rapist murderer of 7 year old Anna Bachmeier in Lübeck, Germany..
ReplyDeleteThis violent sex offender agreed to physical castration as a prerequisite for probation and later obtained a prescription for testosterone and murdered this girl shortly afterwards.. The case vbecame international famous because anna's mother Marianne Bachmeier smuggled a pistole into the courtroom and shot the predator to death after he claimed the 7 year old girl forced him to rape her by flirting with him..
Marianna Bachmeier was sentenced to 6 years by a German court for her act.