NationStates Jolt Archive

Can drugs help sex offenders?

Sex offenders are to be offered drug treatment under new plans announced by the Home Office. What would such a programme involve?

The list of potential side-effects might put anyone off, but a libido can effectively be reduced by a number of drugs.

These can either be administered through injection or tablet, but both have the same effect: cutting the amount of testosterone pumped around the body and thus curbing a man's sex drive.

The first is a pill taken daily known as cyproterone acetate - or Androcur. This is a drug that is usually prescribed to women with major hormone imbalances resulting in the growth of body hair or severe acne.

The particular disadvantage of this form of treatment may be the fact that it relies on the patient to take the medication each day - although given that the scheme will be voluntary in any case this may not present a grave problem.

The second option is a monthly injection, usually administered into the buttock. This is the drug leuproreline, which is used in the treatment of prostate cancer.

What next

The principle issue with leuproreline, experts say, is that in the four to six weeks following the start of treatment, testosterone levels rise before falling.

But once this period is past, sexual desire will drop dramatically.

A patient will still be capable of having sex - many eunuchs, who have been castrated, are still able to perform sexually.

But arousal will be significantly more difficult.

It would in most circumstances require the man to either come up with an extreme sexual fantasy or to watch some extreme pornography.

"Anybody who wanted to overcome the effects of these drugs, ultimately, probably could," said Professor Ashley Grossman, an endocrinologist at the William Harvey Research Institute.

"They help people who want to help themselves, so in that respect it's probably makes sense for it to be voluntary."

'Feminised'

The side-effects of the drugs are also likely to be taken into account by anyone considering joining the programme.

In addition to losing his sexual interest, a man taking them is likely to become more feminised.

He may lose his body hair, and gain weight around his middle. He may also experience hot flushes like those experienced by women during the hormonal changes of the menopause, lose muscle density, become anaemic and irritable.

In the long-term, he will also run the risk of osteoporosis as his bones get thinner.

"There are definitely adverse affects," says Dr Pierre Bouloux of the Royal Free Hospital.

He estimates the cost of the treatment to be in the region of £2,000 - £3,000 per year.

Other estimates suggest the cost may be even lower - perhaps as little as several hundred pounds.

Treatment which focuses on reducing libido is unlikely to be offered in isolation. Alongside counselling, many sex offenders are prescribed anti-depressants.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6748789.stm

Is any one else sort of bothered by the fact that they only have drugs to reduce the sex drive of male offenders? Aren't there female offenders too?

Is any one else sort of bothered by the fact that they only have drugs to reduce the sex drive of male offenders? Aren't there female offenders too?

The drugs are sexist? :confused:

so how long before this gets in the water?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6748789.stm

Is any one else sort of bothered by the fact that they only have drugs to reduce the sex drive of male offenders? Aren't there female offenders too?

Yeah, but they only get drugs if they aren't hawt. ;)

So, will this reduce their ability to become aroused, or reduce their desire to? It's a pretty important difference. If a sexual predator has to resort to extreme measures to get it up then sex crimes will only become more extreme. If he just couldn't give a toss about teh secks anymore, well then I can't really see him offending again.
But arousal will be significantly more difficult.

It would in most circumstances require the man to either come up with an extreme sexual fantasy or to watch some extreme pornography.

Oh joy, it's the former.

This is the wrong approach for sex offenders. Most sex offenders do not offend because of the sex act itself so much as the power it gives over people. They could be chemically and physically castrated and they would still have the urges to use their power over people.

But for those who do offend due to the sex itself...by all means, if this chemical castration can help, then let it help, at least till we find a better way where we reduce the urges permenantly so they can have a healthy sex life without worrying about hurting anyone.

Is any one else sort of bothered by the fact that they only have drugs to reduce the sex drive of male offenders? Aren't there female offenders too?

Most of these types of drugs can work on reducing female libido as well, seeing as theirs is also connected to androgens, most of which are produced in the adrenal glands of females. There are also oestrogen receptor blockers...

Most of these types of drugs can work on reducing female libido as well, seeing as theirs is also connected to androgens, most of which are produced in the adrenal glands of females. There are also oestrogen receptor blockers...

As the closest thing NSG has to a full medical expert(and I'd wager you probably qualify as a full one) do you think these drugs are a good idea when it comes to addressing sex offenses?

Sex offenders don't do what they do because they have a stronger sex drive than most folks. They do what they do because they want to do it. They want to force themselves on others. Sure, sexual satisfaction is a part of it, but there's much more to it or every guy would be out there looking for someone to rape.

Put them on drugs to reduce their sex drive and they'll just remember how much they enjoyed rape and go out to find some androgenic steroids to regain the ability to rape. Or maybe they'll use a stick or bottle next time.

If this medicine actually does help reduce repeat offenders thats great. Fines doesn't work very well, many will do it again. Jail doesn't do much good either, many will do it again when they get out. Anything that can prevent the tragedy from being repeated with another victim would be good.

It would in most circumstances require the man to either come up with an extreme sexual fantasy or to watch some extreme pornography.
So this is useless?

So this is useless?

Worse than useless: it creates more of a problem than existed before. As stated, they don't care about the sexual satisfaction aspect so much as the power it grants them over people, so no matter what is done to their libido, they'll still do it.

No, we need to combat that specific part of their mental illness, not the sexual act itself.

This is the wrong approach for sex offenders. Most sex offenders do not offend because of the sex act itself so much as the power it gives over people. They could be chemically and physically castrated and they would still have the urges to use their power over people.


Agreed, in rape cases, anyway. That's exactly right.

In cases involving children what one has to understand is that the cycle has very little to do with sex drive. It's actually very much like the alcoholic or drug addiction cycle. The answer isn't chemicals because those chemicals won't impact the factors that trigger the cycle in the first place.

The answer is education and therapy. FACT: People who have committed crimes in this category have (overall) the LOWEST recitivism rate, but only when therapy is involved.

A lot of people think it's the highest, which is what gives rise to these kinds of reactionary feel-good solutions. Itr used to be true, but no longer.

If this medicine actually does help reduce repeat offenders thats great. Fines doesn't work very well, many will do it again. Jail doesn't do much good either, many will do it again when they get out. Anything that can prevent the tragedy from being repeated with another victim would be good.

Treatment and education

The answer is education and therapy. FACT: People who have committed crimes in this category have (overall) the LOWEST recitivism rate, but only when therapy is involved.


Got a source on that?

Agreed, in rape cases, anyway. That's exactly right.

In cases involving children what one has to understand is that the cycle has very little to do with sex drive. It's actually very much like the alcoholic or drug addiction cycle. The answer isn't chemicals because those chemicals won't impact the factors that trigger the cycle in the first place.

The answer is education and therapy. FACT: People who have committed crimes in this category have (overall) the LOWEST recitivism rate, but only when therapy is involved.

A lot of people think it's the highest, which is what gives rise to these kinds of reactionary feel-good solutions. Itr used to be true, but no longer.

Actually, no, cases involving children are the same, for the most part. Children are just targeted by the sex offenders because they don't offer as much resistance and thus the sex offender can more easily exert power over them.

But the main point is that there is something wrong with the sex offenders that we have to correct. If we can correct it, they can live happy, healthy, normal lives, and I think we'd all like that for everyone. Or at least I would, anyway.

Got a source on that?

Yeah, but not on the Internet. He's an associate of mine who is a college professor specializing in psychology who deals directly with these issues.

If I find something clickable to share I will post it.

Actually, no, cases involving children are the same, for the most part. Children are just targeted by the sex offenders because they don't offer as much resistance and thus the sex offender can more easily exert power over them.

But the main point is that there is something wrong with the sex offenders that we have to correct. If we can correct it, they can live happy, healthy, normal lives, and I think we'd all like that for everyone. Or at least I would, anyway.

Actually that isn't so. Child molestors typically have an attraction to very specific ages. Children aren't targeted because they're easy. They're targeted because they, themselves are the object. For example, if you take someone who's got an itch to molest 7-ish year old children, they're typically not interested in teenagers or adults. They like kids of a specific age group. In fact, they often get even more specific still, desiring say, kids around 7 years old as opposed to 10 year olds.

Furthermore, the whole cycle is, as I mentioned earlier, comparable to the cycle of alchoholism and drug addiction. They don't enjoy the act per se, but get caught up in the cycle and "fall off the wagon" if you will. This is why treatment is effective, because it specifically focuses on education about the cycle and how to recognize the warning signs and break from it.

And if you wonder what drives them to their preferred age group in the first place, that's a lot more complicated.

As the closest thing NSG has to a full medical expert(and I'd wager you probably qualify as a full one) do you think these drugs are a good idea when it comes to addressing sex offenses?

Is Fass a med student or something?

Aren't there female offenders too?

no......, well not that I know of.

no......, well not that I know of.

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

do you think these drugs are a good idea when it comes to addressing sex offenses?

I have no idea since I've not read up on the subject or seen results of studies. If libido is a large part of sex offences, then theoretically this could be an attractive option as long as it's voluntary, but if not, then... Anyway, I simply don't know.

Agreed, in rape cases, anyway. That's exactly right.

In cases involving children what one has to understand is that the cycle has very little to do with sex drive. It's actually very much like the alcoholic or drug addiction cycle. The answer isn't chemicals because those chemicals won't impact the factors that trigger the cycle in the first place.

The answer is education and therapy. FACT: People who have committed crimes in this category have (overall) the LOWEST recitivism rate, but only when therapy is involved.

A lot of people think it's the highest, which is what gives rise to these kinds of reactionary feel-good solutions. Itr used to be true, but no longer.
Got anything to back that up because that's not what I've read.

And if "pedophilia" is a "disease," where is the cure? Recidivism rates^5 for predatory pedophiles are frightening. And when one considers that "recidivism" is only for those caught and convicted and that the average child molester has committed many dozen sexual assaults before he is first captured, that fear turns to terror.

What is the significance of recidivism statistics? They point out clearly that predatory pedophiles are committed to their course of conduct. Unlike, say, armed robbers, they do not "burn out" with age. Unlike, say, drug addicts, they are not amenable to treatment. Indeed, do you know what the pedophile organizations call an individual who claims to have abandoned his commitment to sex with children? A traitor.


Predatory pedophiles are not sick individuals who need our help. They are human beings whose preferred conduct is sexual exploitation of children. They cannot be "cured." And, given the softness of our existing laws—we live in a country where an offender can expect a life sentence for a pocketful of cocaine ... and probation for a trunkload of kiddie porn—deterrence is not to be expected either. Faced with predators, we have only two concurrent courses of action: One, we must interdict them wherever possible, and Two, once we catch them, we must keep them.


5) See, e.g., Recidivism of Child Molesters 20 Years After Treatment, by R. Karl Hanson* (York University), Richard A. Steffy (University of Waterloo), and Rene Gauthier (Hincks Treatment Center), presented at the 98th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association at Boston, August 13, 1990.
http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches/testimony.html

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

Well I thought about it, and i've realised that i've never heard of a single female pedo. It's not a no, just a "i've never heard of one".

This is the wrong approach for sex offenders. Most sex offenders do not offend because of the sex act itself so much as the power it gives over people. They could be chemically and physically castrated and they would still have the urges to use their power over people.

But for those who do offend due to the sex itself...by all means, if this chemical castration can help, then let it help, at least till we find a better way where we reduce the urges permenantly so they can have a healthy sex life without worrying about hurting anyone.
Good luck to anybody trying to argue that in the tabloids...one has to wonder whether 'human rights' or 'political correctness' would be mentioned first. Just being soft on crime isn't good enough for them these days. Perhaps I'm just cynical this evening.

Well I thought about it, and i've realised that i've never heard of a single female pedo. It's not a no, just a "i've never heard of one".

Maybe they just aren't reported as often.

Got anything to back that up because that's not what I've read.

http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches/testimony.html

I'll check to see if that professor I mentioned earlier has a website. He's my primary source. He probably knows a helluva lot more about tthis subject than all of us here posting pit together.

In searching around I did find this (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004902.html), but it only has forcible rape categorized in comparison to others, and it's not clear what all is included in that.

Here's (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-143920386.html) one that's more to the point, but you only get to read the first part of the article without a membership. for what it's worth, here's what you can see for free:


A recently published article by Langevin, Curnoe, Fedoroff, Bennett, Langevin, Peever, Pettica, and Sandhu (2004) reports a recidivism rate of 88.3% for sex offenders. A detailed analysis of the study demonstrates that this unusually high level is uninterpretable because the offenders whose criminal careers were followed are unlikely to be representative of sex offenders in general. Furthermore, the measure of recidivism used in the study not only distorts the normal meaning of recidivism but also artefactually creates an inflated--and consequently meaningless--recidivism rate.

Is Fass a med student or something?

As far as I know he's a fully licensed nurse, and possibly on his way to becoming a full M.D.

I'll check to see if that professor I mentioned earlier has a website. He's my primary source. He probably knows a helluva lot more about tthis subject than all of us here posting pit together.

In searching around I did find this (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004902.html), but it only has forcible rape categorized in comparison to others, and it's not clear what all is included in that.

My source, Andrew Vachss, has his credentials listed here. Just in case you want to know where I got my info.

http://www.vachss.com/vachss/credentials.html

Maybe they just aren't reported as often.

Have you ever heard of such a case?

My source, Andrew Vachss, has his credentials listed here. Just in case you want to know where I got my info.

http://www.vachss.com/vachss/credentials.html

Cool.

Here's (http://www.geocities.com/three_strikes_legal/recidivism_report.htm) a better one I just found: (better than my earlier links, I mean)


•The recidivism differences between the different categories of sex offenders is insignificant.
•Sex offenders all have significantly lower recidivism rates than all other classes of criminals.
•Percent rearrested for any new crime within three years: non-sex offenders--68%' sex offenders--43%.
•Percent reconvicted for any new crime within three years: non-sex offenders --47.8%; sex offenders --24%.
•Percent of sex offenders rearrested within three years for any new sex crime, by type of offender: All --5.3%; Rapist --5.0%; sexual assaulters (all)--5.5%; child molesters --5.1%; statutory rapists --5.0%.
•Percent of sex offenders reconvicted within three years for any new sex crime, by type of offender: All --3.5%; Rapists --3.2%; Sexual assaulters (all)--3.75; child molesters --3.5%; statutory rapists --3.6%.
•Released prisoners who did not serve time for sex offenses (non-sex offenders) committed 87% of the new sex offenses.

As far as I know he's a fully licensed nurse, and possibly on his way to becoming a full M.D.

Haha, where do people get these bios? I've seen so many variations...

No, I am not a "fully licensed" nurse, even though I've temped and summer worked as one. I am however in the last year (of 5.5) of med school and should be, if all goes according to plan, receiving my degree by next summer. At 24 years, I don't think one can expect me to have come further in the Swedish system which requires an additional 2 years working as an "AT-läkare" ("general practising doctor") before becoming licensed.

This is of course irrelevant to anything I say on this forum, since my "credentials" (hah!) are naturally not going to be corroborated or be of any inference to anything.

Have you ever heard of such a case?

There are female offenders out there, believe it.

I forget her name, but what was the name of the woman in that high-profile one where the teacher got knocked up by a student not once, but twice?

Well I thought about it, and i've realised that i've never heard of a single female pedo. It's not a no, just a "i've never heard of one".

Making Daughters Safe Again
mdsa-online.org
Online resources for mother-daughter incest survivors, including self-help, info, chat, public forums, info for students, researchers, loved ones, general research on female offenders, links.

Haha, where do people get these bios? I've seen so many variations...

No, I am not a "fully licensed" nurse, even though I've temped and summer worked as one. I am however in the last year (of 5.5) of med school and should be, if all goes according to plan, receiving my degree by next summer. At 24 years, I don't think one can expect me to have come further in the Swedish system which requires an additional 2 years working as an "AT-läkare" ("general practising doctor") before becoming licensed.

This is of course irrelevant to anything I say on this forum, since my "credentials" (hah!) are naturally not going to be corroborated or be of any inference to anything.
...

You're twenty four? :confused: I thought you were at least thirty or so. Damn it...that's the second well-educated, snarky, but overall loveable person I've thought was a lot older than they really were. And they both are actually the same age too.

That said, thank you for correcting me about your education when it comes to medical matters.

For men just castrate them. that alone would scare the crap out of them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6748789.stm

Is any one else sort of bothered by the fact that they only have drugs to reduce the sex drive of male offenders? Aren't there female offenders too?

Due to the fact that US troops seem to rape somebody whereever they go these days especially their female personnel are targeted, which I learned of from the CSmonitor. If this drug was mandatory in the military the sexual incidents would drop dramatically, female personnel would feel safe enough to not carry knives with them at all times and go to the loo safely without fear of rape thus makeing the US military seem less bad to the world.

For men just castrate them. that alone would scare the crap out of them.

As has been stated multiple times, rape is about power. If they can't dominate sexually they'll find another, probably more violent way to do it.

Have you ever heard of such a case?

There was a thread about such a case on here a few months ago.