Instructions
One (1) typewritten 2,000-word policy paper (+/- 500 words) is required (this number includes the title and reference pages). Please include the word count in the title page. The paper must be double-spaced, with 1.0-inch margins, in Times New Roman, 12-point type size, font. Paper must draw from 8–10 sources, which must be cited correctly in the text and be documented correctly in the reference page. Of the total works cited, at least five should be articles from academic journals or books published by an academic press. Works cited and the references must be in APA formats.
You need to write my policy brief in a professional manner, as the audience of my response is Governor Scott (FL) and his advisors. Organizationally, the policy report should include five sections that are consistent with a real-world policy brief/report. These sections include the following: Executive Summary (250-300 words only), Detailed outline of paper, Introduction, Review of Research and Policies, Conclusion, and Recommendation(s). Also note that the policy paper is subject to review for text comparison by Turnitin.com, a plagiarism detection service.
I have already done a Thesis statement development AND five relevant peer-reviewed articles to get you started, please use those 5 sources along with another 5 new sources.
Essay
Julian Martinez Criminal Justice & Public Policy 4497
Executive Summary
Sexual offenders have emerged as a big threat to the society. As a result, the government passed stringent laws against them all over the history. The laws have been passed that would see sex offenders to be sent to prison for an indefinite time. In some instances, the offenders would be released from their conviction. Nevertheless, they turned to be a big threat, especially to women and children. Breiding (2015) showed that when only 1.7% of the men were raped during their lifetime in the USA, the number of women was high standing at 19.3%. Victims of the rape experience detrimental effects such as the risk of Sexual Transmitted Diseases, mental and physical problems. Earlier policies on sexual offences have failed to address the needs of the community and the victims. Moreover, these policies have failed to address the issue of controlling offenders effectively. For instance, the community supervision increased the risk to the community while the incarceration caused more suffering to the offenders. Therefore, it would be prudent to formulate a policy that will ensure community protection and also be humane to the offenders. Chemical castration helps to meet these requirements. Chemical castration of offenders before their release from prison would ensure the safety of the community as well as the well being the sexual offenders. This paper spans the issue of the use of chemical castration in mitigating sexual offenders.
Detailed Outline
Castrating human beings seems barbaric, although chemical castration aims at a less lethal form of “cutting off the situation.”
- There was bias on the topic; extensive research helped in understanding the significance of chemical castration
- Thesis- I predict that if offenders can withstand treatment protocol, then in time they will adapt to a less lustful thought process, thus leading to a more acceptable and healthier lifestyle.
The sexual offence is a big threat to the members of the society but largely on women.
- The primary victims of the sex predators are women and children.
- Men have been found to be the main perpetrators of sexual crimes.
The effects of the sexual offences are detrimental to the victims.
- The increased sexual crime has greatly hampered the process of adequately addressing HIV/AIDS spread.
Historically, USA has adopted several policies addressing the sexual crime.
- The crucial punishment a sexual offender can get is incarceration.
- Mostly, the courts and the members of the public exaggerate the sex crimes compared to other crimes.
- In the USA, the governments have continuously enacted the laws to detain the extremely dangerous sexual offenders indefinitely.
The current laws do not address the issue of the sexual offence.
A new policy is required that meets the needs of the society, victims, and offenders as well.
Community supervision
The sexual offender is allowed back into the community after either undergoing the process of incarceration.
Chemical castration after incarceration
Sexual offenders should undergo through chemical castration before their release from prison. The phrase chemical castrations sound lethal to the victims, but it is not harmful compared to the adverse effects of sexual offence on victims.
Conclusion
The chemical castration of offenders prior to their release from prison would help to mitigate effectively the menace of the sexual offences.
Implement the elements of the chemical castration
Introduction
Castrating human beings seems barbaric, although chemical castration aims at a less lethal form of “cutting off the situation.” Citizens are frown upon sex offenders because they offer a disgusting personality to society, especially when focused on children. Sexual predators are a continuous threat to the society since they have high recidivism rates. My views on this topic were biased at first because let us face it; no man wants to be castrated in any way. However, extensive research helped me acquire knowledge on the significance of chemical castration for people with sexual problems. Chemical castration may help in many ways, but I do not think it is a permanent standard. I predict that if offenders can withstand treatment protocol, then in time they will adapt to a less lustful thought process, thus leading to a more acceptable and healthier lifestyle.
Review of Research and Policies
The sexual offence is a big threat to the members of the society. They endanger the life of children, men, women, and even domestic animals. Sex crimes are very dangerous since they have a lifetime effect on the victims. Majorly, the primary victims of the sex predators are women and children. Breiding et al., (2015) research in the USA, revealed that 19.3% of women have been raped in their lifetime. Also, the sexual predators had raped 1.7% of the men in their lifetime. Evidently, females are the main victims of the sexual violence. In the same research, 1.6% of the women in the USA had been raped one year before initiation of the research while an insignificant number of men had experienced the rape. Men have been found to be the main perpetrators of the sex crime. 99.0% of the perpetrators are men (Breiding et al., 2015). In most of the cases, the perpetrators and the victims are socially familiar with each other such as family members, close acquaintances, or intimates.
The effects of the sexual offences are detrimental to the victims. There is a great risk for rape victims to contract sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies. Afterwards, the victims may experience other mental and physical problems such as depression, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases. Once a child is raped, her life changes drastically to worse. The increased sexual violence is a crucial evidence of how many people are at a greater risk of getting the conditions mentioned above. Sumner et al., (2015) depicted that the sexual violence against females in Swaziland had affected 37.6% of the women. The figure in the USA is not very far from that in Swaziland with Breiding et al., (2015) recording a percentage level of 19.6%. The increased sexual crime has greatly hampered the process of addressing HIV/AIDS efficiently. Historically, USA has adopted several policies addressing the sexual crime. Nevertheless, many of the issues failed to address both affairs of the victims and the perpetrators. The result is the increased rape, and other sexual related offences. The main punishment used against sexual offenders is incarceration. The key goal of the incarceration is rehabilitation of the sexual offender. Ricket (2015) showed that sex offenders once imprisoned face ill-treatment by both the correctional officers and other inmates. Mostly, the courts and the members of the public exaggerate the sexual offences compared to other crimes. Mancini and Mears, (2013) noted that the courts exaggerated the rate of the sexual offences. In Mc Kune, the Supreme Court referenced to the research that stated that 355 00 rapes occurred in the United States. The research figure was used conclude that there was an unusual number of the sexual offences. Nevertheless, in the same year, 2, 593, 784 burglaries and 1, 099, 207 were reported (Mancini & Mears, 2013). It is factual that the court exaggerated the unusual manner of the sexual offences.
In the USA, governments have continuously enacted the laws to detain extremely dangerous sexual offenders indefinitely. Nevertheless, the result has been a legal battle and detrimental effects on the perpetrators. Young (2011) explained Comstock that he stayed in the prison, more than the time his imprisonment while the government and his lawyers argued on the constitutionality of the Civil Commitment Statute. In 1930, the federal government had created Psychiatric institutions where dangerous sex offenders would be detained after completing their jail term. In several cases like Baxstrom v. Herold, the Supreme Court had upheld the constitutionality of the civil commitments. Nevertheless, the psychiatric institutions became infamous, and a large number of States found the laws dysfunctional (Young, 2011). Despite that, in the 1970s, similar laws were adopted in the USA afterwards. In 2006, former USA President George Bush signed Adam Walsh Act that allowed the detention of sexually dangerous individuals. Similar laws would not adequately address the increasing sexual crimes.
The current laws do not address the sexual offences adequately. Members of the community and the lawful structures have exaggerated the understanding of the sexual offences (Mancini & Mears, 2013). The result is huge punishment and discrimination in the public, in court and prisons. The incarceration has not attained the desired objectives of rehabilitating the sexual offenders (Gannon & Cortoni, 2010). Once released, the individual end up in prison again. Similarly, detaining sexual offenders does not address their needs especially with the exaggeration of the issue in the society.
A new policy is required where the needs of the society, victims, and the offenders would be addressed. First, the policy would make certain the just treatment of the sexual offenders. They would serve their legal incarceration terms and be released back to the society. Second, the offenders would have the ability to create lasting relationships with the society. Third, the sexual predators would adopt a healthy lifestyle acceptable to the society. Moreover, act as a warning to other potential offenders. Lastly, the policy would ensure that the rate of the sexual offences has remained significantly low.
Policy options
Community supervision
The sexual offender is allowed back into the community after undergoing through incarceration. The main goal of this policy is to avoid the incarceration of the individuals. Once individuals are put under the supervision of the community, the punishment is normally viewed to be a lighter punishment than the incarceration. The main goal of the community supervision is to rehabilitate the offender back into the community. Nevertheless, the sex offenders face alienation from the society, who are unwilling to accept them back in the society. Klingele (2013) stated that 25% of the offenders placed under the community supervision end up in prisons. The release of the sexual offenders threatens the security of the community. During the period ranging 1991 and 1996, 67% of the cases of sexual assault in the USA was composed of the juveniles (Klingele, 2013). The offenders who molest children have a high rate of recidivism. Releasing them pose more danger to the children. The molester has a roughly likelihood of 50% to 70% being involved in the same offence even after many years of release from the prison (Klingele, 2013). The policy of community supervision does not address the needs of the victims, society, or the offenders.
Chemical castration after incarceration
The chemical castrations should be a requirement before the sexual offenders are released from the prison. The incarceration does not fully ensure the rehabilitation of the individuals, and many have the probability of committing the same offence once released. Similarly, the holding of dangerous sexual offenders indefinitely even after they finish their prison terms is against the rights of the offenders. Moreover, the community supervision does not serve the purpose. Lippke (2015) proposed the use of other methods, as masturbation, but those are highly unethical and against the cultural beliefs of many communities in the USA.
Chemical castration involves the use of a chemical to regulate hormonal levels in the perpetrator. Regular administration of medicinal drugs reduces the level of testosterone of the offenders (Kinnear, 2007). The result is the reduction in the libido level and consequently the loss of the fertility. The crucial aim of the chemical castration is to ensure that the sex offender are not capable of perpetuating sexual intercourse later in their lives. Consequently, the community is protected while the offenders have their freedom. However, sex as a need is eliminated in their daily lives.
The community members have raised a great concern on the sexual offenders compared to other crimes. Once imprisoned, they are victimized by the fellow inmates and the correctional officers. The government views them as dangerous to the community and continues detaining them. After, their release the community members are always keen on them and mostly they are alienated. The castration would make the society accept them back. At the same time, they would be safe from the lethal laws passed by the government against them. The castration would ensure they live a more controlled life. Sexual offenders are submissive to control their sexual drive emotions. Once castrated, they would have the ability to monitor their acts cautiously.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Chemical castration before the release of an offender has an upper hand in countering the vice compared to other policies. Prisons rarely impart correct behavioral changes to sexual offenders. Currently, there is an increased bias against the sexual offenders, and they are ill-treated in the public, prison and courts. The other policies enacted like community supervision, incarceration and holding offenders for indefinite times violates their right to freedom. Moreover, implementation of these policies often more adverse effects on perpetrators as compared to chemical castration. The chemical incarceration ensures justice for the victims and also safeguards the freedom of the offenders. Moreover, chemical castration is capable of inducing a lifetime change in behavior as offenders do not have lustful sexual desires.
Recommendations
- The government should make it a requirement that before the release of sexual offenders they should undergo chemical castration.
- All the laws that allow the dangerous sexual offenders to be held in prisons indefinitely should be repealed.
- The society should be encouraged to accept and appreciate the sexual offenders once they are castrated and released from the prison.
- The judges should streamline the judiciary to make certain that the decisions made against the sexual offenders are not biased. The evidence provided should be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
- The government should assist the released sexual offenders to settle and progress positively with the normal life.
References
Breiding, M. J., Smith, S. G., Basile, K. C., Walters, M. L., Jieru, C., & Merrick, M. T. (2014). Prevalence and Characteristics of Sexual Violence, Stalking, and Intimate Partner Violence Victimization — National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, United States, 2011. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 63(8), 1-18.
Gannon, T. A., & Cortoni, F. (2010). Female Sexual Offenders: Theory, Assessment and Treatment. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Kinnear, K. L. (2007). Childhood sexual abuse: A reference handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO.
Klingele, C. (2013). Rethinking the use of community supervision. Journal of Criminal Law& Criminology, 103(4), 1015-1069.
Lippke, R. L. (2011). Why sex (offending) is different. Criminal Justice Ethics, 30(2), 151-172.
Mancini, C., & Mears, D. P. (2013). U.S. Supreme Court decisions and sex offender legislation: evidence of evidence-based policy? Journal of Criminal Law& Criminology, 103(4), 1115-1153.
Newman, D., & Woolgar, B. (2013). Pros and Cons: A Debaters Handbook. Routledge.
Rickert, J. T. (2010). Denying defendants the benefit of a reasonable doubt: federal rule of evidence 609 and past sex crime convictions. Journal of Criminal Law& Criminology, 100(1), 213-241.
Sumner, S. A., Mercy, J. A., Saul, J., Motsa-Nzuza, N., Kwesigabo, G., Buluma, R., & … Hillis, S. D. (2015). Prevalence of Sexual Violence Against Children and Use of Social Services — Seven Countries, 2007-2013. (cover story). MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 64(21), 565-569.
Yung, C. R. (2011). Sex offender exceptionalism and preventive detention. Journal of Criminal Law& Criminology, 101(3), 969-1003.
