On Monday, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed into law a controversial measure. Those who have been convicted of sex crimes, with a child under the age of 13, want to receive parole, then they have to be chemically castrated.
The details of this new law stated that those offenders who wish to obtain parole are now being required to undergo the reversible procedure of chemical castration. The treatment must begin at least one month before the individual's release date, and the treatments must be continued until a judge determines otherwise.
Governor Ivey had not made any indications as to her support one way or the other, until Monday. That was the deadline and last day that she could sing the bill into law. She also chose to make no form of public statement on the measure to date.
Representative Steve Hurst, a Republican that represents Calhoun County, has been known to state that if he had it his way, offenders would not have the choice of reversible chemical castration but permanent castration through surgery.
Hurst spoke with an NBC affiliate stating: “If they’re going to mark these children for life, they need to marked for life.” He went on to say that his preference for someone who would do such a thing to a small infant child is that they need to die. He finished up by stating: “God’s going to deal with them one day.”
The local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has spoken up in opposition of the measure claiming it to be unconstitutional. The chapter's executive director, Randall Marshal, said: "It could be cruel and unusual punishment. It also implicates the right to privacy. Forced medications are all concerns."
Alabama joins six other states that either allow or require either physical or chemical castration of sex offenders. The other states include California, Florida, Louisiana, Montana, Texas, and Wisconsin. In most of the seven states that have enacted the law, the treatment is the reversible chemical procedure. It is also a means of the individual being able to win or speed up their parole.
In the US Territory of Guam, chemical castration is voluntary, but to date, the procedure has never actually taken place. A bill currently in the Legislature is currently seeking the right to make the procedure mandatory for all offenders who are seeking parole.
So, what’s the verdict—you decide.
Should the other states follow suit and require some form of castration for these types of offenders as a condition of parole?Sex