By: Mark Nelson
The New York Times recently featured an article discussing castration of sex offenders in Europe.
One of the Law and Literature class themes is that there is an absence of morality in the legal system. Some argue that castrating sex offenders is immoral and unethical. After all, castration is not a medical necessity and the right to reproduce is generally accepted as an unalienable right—nobody wants a legal system condoning eugenics. Castrating sex offenders can be seen as a classic example of the law continuing to ignore morality. But from another perspective, preventing the physical and spiritual harm of other potential victims is just and an essential element of moral remedy.
Another class theme is that the law doesn’t care about back-story and emotional complexity. Judging by the article, castration as an elective remedy for sex offenders takes into account at least some back-story and emotional complexity. The Czech Republic sex offender who asked for and received castration said, “[Castration] was like draining the gasoline from a car hard-wired to crash.” His crime was violent and sexual, but post-castration he feels like he “can finally live knowing that [he is] no harm to anybody.” While his comments do not reflect how he became a sex offender, they do seem to show the articulation of emotional complexity that allowing castration as a remedy can provide. In other words, making castration available may reflect the law’s willingness to contextualize sexual crime.
Finally, another class theme is that law is built around the reasonable person while society is made up of irrational people, so the law will not produce moral and just results. The castrated Czech sex offender is not a reasonable person—he watched a Bruce Lee movie then knifed a young boy repeatedly, deriving sexual satisfaction. After twelve years of prison and institutionalization, the offender asked to be castrated. Offering castration may seem like taking advantage of a handicapped, irrational individual—a normal male wouldn’t willingly part with what makes his body biologically male. But the offender seems to be happy with his new life, recidivism seems unlikely, and society is arguably shielded. Whether castration is definitively moral and just remains to be seen.
