by Jo Ellen Nott

In a controversial move among its “get tough on crime” measures advanced in the February special legislative session, Louisiana became the first state to permit surgical castration as a punishment for sex crimes under a new law signed by Republican Governor Jeff Landry on June 11, 2024.

The new law took effect on August 1 of this year. SB 371 authorizes judges to order surgical castration for individuals convicted of certain sex crimes against minors. Surgical castration, which involves the removal of the testicles or ovaries to halt sex hormone production, is a rare and extreme measure. This type of permanent and mutilative castration is only practiced in a few places globally, such as the Czech Republic, Madagascar, and a state in Nigeria. These laws have faced sharp criticism from human rights organizations like Amnesty International.

Previously, Louisiana and other states have permitted chemical castration, using pharmaceuticals to reduce offenders’ sex drives. California, Florida, and Texas are among the eight states that have laws in place allowing chemical castration. In some states, offenders can opt for the surgical procedure if they prefer. The National Conference of State Legislatures said it is unaware of any states that allow judges to impose surgical castration.

In 1996, California became the first state in the U.S. to authorize castration as a condition of parole for certain sex offenses. California Penal Code § 465 provides that offenders convicted of certain sex crimes against children under 13 years of age may undergo chemical or surgical castration before parole. On a first offense, whether to impose the pills or an equivalent treatment on parole falls to the discretion of the court. On a second offense, the law mandates chemical or equivalent treatment on parole. As an alternative, the offender can elect to undergo surgical castration and avoid hormone therapy.

Louisiana made history in 2024 with SB 371, sparking heated debate among criminal defense lawyers, advocates, and medical experts, in addition to triggering ethical and constitutional concerns. Gwyneth O’Neill, a criminal defense attorney and member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, described the law as “unprecedented and draconian.” Despite this, Democratic State Rep. Delisha Boyd, one of the bill’s drafters, argues that the law will serve as a strong deterrent to potential child sex abusers and aims to protect children.

Boyd, whose district is New Orleans, was prompted to author the bill with Democratic State Senator Regina Barrow when she read about a 51-year-old registered sex offender who had raped a 12-year-old after having been convicted of raping a 5-year-old in 2007. Boyd’s family was marked by the trauma her mother suffered from being a rape victim. Boyd contends that opponents of the law misunderstand its provisions, claiming that the true cruelty lies in the crimes committed against children.

SB 371 targets offenders guilty of aggravated sex crimes, such as rape, incest, or molestation of a child under 13, and allows for the punishment at a judge’s discretion. The surgery must be performed by a physician and necessitates a court-appointed medical expert to evaluate the offender’s suitability for the procedure. Offenders can refuse the surgery but face an additional three to five years in prison without the possibility of early release. The law does not apply to offenders under 17 years of age.

Experts like Maaike Helmus, an associate professor at Simon Fraser University’s School of Criminology, question the effectiveness of castration in preventing sex offenses. Helmus points out that the motivations behind sex offenses are complex and not only driven by high sex drive or testosterone levels. She emphasizes that castration, whether chemical or surgical, may not address these underlying issues. Research on recidivism rates for sexual offenders suggests that castration may not significantly reduce reoffending, particularly since offenders can still experience psychological arousal and may not need an erection to commit certain offenses.

In the final analysis, the debate centers on whether such extreme measures will effectively deter sex crimes or simply add to the complexities and potential injustices of the criminal justice system in Louisiana. While Boyd believes the law could prevent future offenses, experts like Helmus warn that without considering the broader psychological and social factors involved in sex crimes, castration offers a false sense of security.

Sources:  Findlaw, The Guardian, The New York Times, NPR

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login