Article info
PDFCommentary
Surgical castration, coercion and ethics
- Correspondence to Professor Jesper Ryberg, Department of Philosophy & Science Studies, Roskilde University, PO Box 260, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark; ryberg{at}ruc.dk
Citation
Surgical castration, coercion and ethics
Publication history
- Received May 7, 2013
- Accepted May 28, 2013
- First published June 19, 2013.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Article Versions
- Previous version (27 April 2016).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
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.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Other content recommended for you
- The kindest cut? Surgical castration, sex offenders and coercive offers
- Making the cut: analytical and empirical bioethics
- Chemical castration for sex offenders
- Offering castration to sex offenders: the significance of the state's intentions
- Surgical castration, Texas law and the case of Mr T
- There are (STILL) no coercive offers
- Should violent offenders be forced to undergo neurotechnological treatment? A critical discussion of the ‘freedom of thought’ objection
- Neurointerventions and informed consent
- Should neurotechnological treatments offered to offenders always be in their best interests?
- Surgical castration, coercive offers and coercive effects: it is still not about consent