Chemical Castration Law
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Today, as it tries to deal with the reality of the sexual abuse of children within its borders, the state of California is faced with a quandary. On the one hand, the sexual abuse of children is an appalling fact that devastates thousands of innocent victims each year (Stadler, 1997, p. 1285). On the other hand is the proven fact that traditional criminal penalties such as prison, probation or parole, or even sexual registry laws such as Megan's Law, do not prevent many sexual offenders from re-offending. California, therefore, is forced to come up with innovative and alternative ways of protecting the state's children without running afoul of state and federal constitutional guarantees. Unfortunately, the recently adopted law misunderstands the way chemical castration works on sexual offenders and will not protect the state's children.In its discussion of the new law, the California Legislature stated that it was imposing a chemical castration requirement simply and solely as a punitive measure for sexual offenders who harm children. The law requires that any man convicted of a sexual offense involving a victim under age 13 must agree to be "chemically castrated" before he will be released from prison. A "sexual offense" under the law is defined as "touching in a manner intended to arouse the genitalia of the victim, or the coercion of the victim to touch in a manner intended to arouse the genitalia of the perpetrator, or the possession with
. . .
. Imprisonment is a widely-accepted form of punishment, as are probation and parole conditions aimed at rehabilitating the offender. However, a state cannot punish an offender beyond the length of time provided for by law and conditions of release or probationary conditions must be reasonably related to the crime for which the offender was convicted, to the rehabilitation of the offender in order to prevent future criminality, or to the promotion of public safety (Spalding, 1998, p. 117). In addition, the conditions must be narrowly tailored to meet the goal of rehabilitation "without unnecessarily restricting the probationer's otherwise lawful activities" (Spalding, 1998, p. 117). Moreover, once a convict has completed his or her sentence or probation or parole, his or her debt to society is considered paid and he or she cannot be compelled to do anything (Meisenkothen, 1999, p. 139).
As adopted, this California law could violate these rules. For example, the law does not identify the castration as a condition of probation or parole, merely a condition of release. This means that an offender can serve the full term of a sentence in prison and then be required to essentially serve an additional sentence after he is release
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Eighth Amendment, Supreme Court, Depo-Provera Stadler, California Legislature, Castration Law, Megan's Law, chemical castration, Turk August, Stadler Summer, LH Winter, stadler 1997 1285, stadler 1997, sexual offenders, 1997 1285, Meisenkothen Spring, spalding 1998, 1998 117, probation parole, spalding 1998 117, cruel unusual, eighth amendment, meisenkothen 1999 139, punitive measure, harm children law, types sexual offenders,
Approximate Word count = 1646
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Chemical Castration Law
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
