Voluntary Chemical Castration - Is It Moral?

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/world/europe/11castrate.html?_r=1"]Article here[/url]
Now, i'm not talking about involuntary castration, but voluntary castration (what the Czech Republic offers). would that be a moral option according to Church teachings?

[HisChildForever]

The man they mention in the article did it for the sake of the community. Clearly the castration convinced him, psychologically, that he is now somehow "cured" of inappropriate sexual thoughts and behaviors. Maybe the physical urges and arousal have diminished if not vanished completely, but the thoughts can still be there. However, a sex offender [b]can[/b] still violate and molest an individual, castrated or not.

[quote]“Sex offenders are requesting castration in hope of getting released from a life of incarceration,” he said. “Is that really free and informed consent?”[/quote]

I have to hope that the castrated sex offenders are [i]still[/i] being monitored. In the States there are life sentences of probation and parole for sex offenders. I actually finished a paper the other day about the management, treatment, and containment of sex offenders in America and the restrictions are [i]crazy[/i] strict.

It is dangerous to assume that castration will solve all problems.

Edited March 11, 2009 by HisChildForever

[CatherineM]

If rape were about sex, then castration, either physical or chemical, might be looked at differently. Rape is about power and control. The reason chemical castration doesn't get wider use is that there have been cases of those on the meds who still commit sexual assaults.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1803839' date='Mar 11 2009, 02:57 PM']If rape were about sex, then castration, either physical or chemical, might be looked at differently. Rape is about power and control. The reason chemical castration doesn't get wider use is that there have been cases of those on the meds who still commit sexual assaults.[/quote]

This is true. I should clarify: When I said "physical urges and arousal" I meant more along the lines of physical responses as opposed to what [i]makes[/i] those physical responses (which would be, as you said, power and control).

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
okay, but would it be moral for a man to choose this according to the Church's teachings?

[MissyP89]

I don't think so. If you lump rape in with other, "milder" sexual sins, you might look at porn, but you should still be open to life. You might masturbate, but you should still be open to life, etc. Castration takes away that God-intended purpose, so I'd say it would be immoral, regardless of intention. Think of it as a woman getting sterilized because getting pregnant would endanger her--that doesn't make it right.

Just my opinion, though.

[MIKolbe]

I would say no.

We all have our crosses to bear. To reject your cross is to reject Christ, imho.

I think there was a religious guy (back in the day) who did this to himself, or had it done; and it is argued that is why he is not a saint now. (but then i heard that and can't back it up)

[ardillacid]

[quote name='MIkolbe' post='1803872' date='Mar 11 2009, 03:20 PM']I think there was a religious guy (back in the day) who did this to himself, or had it done; and it is argued that is why he is not a saint now. (but then i heard that and can't back it up)[/quote]
...how could anyone argue against this?

[CatherineM]

I'd say no. He might do better with a 24 hour babysitter. I'm not sure we have the scientific means to rehab guys once they become abusers. They either find some way of fixing themselves, or they need to be separated from society.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='MIkolbe' post='1803872' date='Mar 11 2009, 07:20 PM']I think there was a religious guy (back in the day) who did this to himself, or had it done; and it is argued that is why he is not a saint now. (but then i heard that and can't back it up)[/quote]
Origen of Alexandria

[MIKolbe]

yeah...that guy!!

[rhetoricfemme]

Since he's volunteering himself for the procedure, wouldn't that be considered self-mutilation?

I would say no to castration. It seems like a good idea on the surface, but if it's providing relief to the pedophile, I don't see how that's right. Not to mention that there is not a 100 percent guarantee that his sexual arousal will be eliminated. And if the problem goes further than arousal, a castrated offender can find other outlets to control and hurt somebody. You just never know.

Mikolbe has a good point in that we all have our cross to bear, and denying our cross would be denying Christ.

[HisChildForever]

I also vote no.

[Jesus_lol]

if it meant one child might have one less HUGE cross to bear, then i would say fine!
in fact, the fact that they are volunteering just seems a happy coincidence.

[cmotherofpirl]

Life imprisonment with no chance of parole is rather an expensive option for an ever increasing number of pedophiles. So are we going to designate an island so we can babysit them for the rest of their natural lives?