Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
John McMillan's article raises numerous important points about the ethics of surgical castration of sex offenders.1 In this commentary, we focus solely on and argue against the claim that the offer of release from detention conditional upon surgical castration is a coercive offer that compromises the validity of the offender's consent. We take no view on the question as to whether castration for sex offenders is ethically permissible. But, we reject the claim that it is ethically permissible only if competing ethical considerations outweigh worries about coercion. For in the situation described, the proposal is not coercive at all.
McMillan states that if offenders agree to castration because they fear long-term detention, then ‘it seems, intuitively, as if agreeing to be castrated under these conditions makes the decision coerced in some way.’1 He adds that if castration is ‘the only way that they will be released back into the community, the status of this decision as a genuine expression of their autonomy is questionable.’1 In defence of his claim, he uses two analogies that he borrows from Joel Feinberg. First, if a governor offers to commute a death sentence if the prisoner agrees to participate in a medical experiment, then ‘it's clear that the governor is coercing the prisoner.’1 Second, if a millionaire offers to give a woman $1 000 000 …
Contributors Both authors are responsible for the drafting and editing of this manuscript.
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
↵i Also see Wertheimer A. Coercion. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987.
- Feature article
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The kindest cut? Surgical castration, sex offenders and coercive offers
- Surgical castration, Texas law and the case of Mr T
- Surgical castration, coercion and ethics
- Offering castration to sex offenders: the significance of the state's intentions
- Making the cut: analytical and empirical bioethics
- Chemical castration for sex offenders
- Should neurotechnological treatments offered to offenders always be in their best interests?
- Neurointerventions and informed consent
- Surgical castration, coercive offers and coercive effects: it is still not about consent
- Payment for research participation: a coercive offer?