The topic of chemical castration for sex offenders remains a continuous subject riddled with debates and ethical questions. While the debate still continues, some countries like Russia and Poland permit mandatory chemical castration for sex offenders. Certain states in the U.S. permit mandatory chemical castration for certain crimes.
Chemical castration is done using medications that suppress testosterone and opponents of it argue it has serious hormonal side effects. Feminists argue that chemical castration only treats physiological components without addressing psychological factors that led to sexual abuse.
Italy’s New Approach to Sex Offenses
Last year, the Italian government made steps towards legalizing chemical castration which would draft laws on treating sex offenders with androgen-blocking drugs. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government has proposed chemical castration to deal with the endemic of sexual violence, especially against underaged girls in Italy.
An underdeveloped town called Caviano near the edge of Naples gained a tarnished reputation after 2 preteen girls were violently gang raped in the town. Meloni has led the redevelopment of Caviano and prioritized safety. Meloni’s governing coalition proposal to put forward the motion would offer convicted sex offenders suspended sentences for voluntarily undergoing chemical castration.
How Chemical Castration Works
Chemical castration is a non-invasive oral therapy that uses medication to lower testosterone and sexual drive. It is a reversible and a non-surgical alternative. Chemical castration is administered alongside psychiatric therapy targeting sex offenders with compulsive, invasive and inappropriate sexual thoughts. European countries, Germany and Denmark have implemented the use of voluntary chemical castration whereas Poland has made it mandatory.
Legislative Background and Political Drivers in Italy
The legislative shift and implementation of stricter law-and-order began with Meloni’s administration and the League Party’s campaign. Since coming into power in 2022, Meloni’s right-wing coalition has introduced tougher legislation and increased punishments for sex and other criminal offenders. Meloni’s government’s push came after a notorious gang rape case in Caivano, which sparked outrage and demands for reform.
Parallel Developments in the UK: Pilots and Policy
While Italy still debates new laws, England is rolling out pilot programs for voluntary chemical castration in 20 prisons. Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced the expansion following an independent review. The UK is exploring voluntary and mandatory approaches to chemical castration but no timeline for the decision has been solidified.
However, critiques of mandatory chemical castration voice ethical concerns. Forensic psychiatry Prof. Don Grubin said mandatory chemical castration is unethical and most doctors would likely refuse to administer it. He also states that it would not help the government “get the mandatory element of it off the ground.”
The pilot has been suggested to continue in England and Wales. The Independent Sentencing Review, led by David Gauke, was commissioned to examine the causes of prison overcrowding. One recommendation was to expand alternatives to prison for more offenders. Gauke’s report showed that 21% of incarcerated adults are for sexual offenses as of March 2025. Gauke’s review urged building evidence on chemical suppression for sex offenders and funding those services further. Mahmood plans to further expand the pilot and to explore “whether mandating the approach is possible”.
Legal and Ethical Debate
While Germany and Denmark only allow voluntary chemical castration, Poland and Ukraine have made it mandatory for some sex crimes. It is almost always paired with or substituting custodial sentences . Certain states in the U.S. permit mandatory chemical castration for certain crimes like pedophila and sexual abuse of a minor. Human rights groups have called forced castration “cruel and inhuman.”
Many in Italy and abroad argue that involuntary chemical castration breaches constitutional and ethical boundaries. In Italy, League chief Matteo Salvini celebrated pushing the motion forward, calling it a “victory for the League!”. MP Simona Bonafè of the opposition center-left Democratic Party called the motion “unconstitutional.” She said it was “undermining the foundation of our legal system that has overcome the use of corporal punishment for centuries.”
Doctors in several countries have refused coercive participation, citing medical ethics and legal principles based on informed consent. Gauke’s review warned medications should never replace proper rehabilitation or serve as risk management. Other jurisdictions’ handling of ethical issues requires careful study, including valid informed consent.
Assessing Effectiveness
Research suggests chemical castration reduces repeat offenses, but evidence is limited and sometimes contested. One study found that “reoffending rates were 60% lower among the group who had been chemically castrated” compared to those who had not received the drugs. However, some experts question these results. Some studies challenge the interpretation of data, noting selection bias: Those who choose treatment may have less risk of reoffending anyway.
Prof Grubin explained that the intervention is “about doctors treating patients.” He emphasized it is not about doctors working for criminal justice agencies. According to Grubin, “a side effect is that reoffending is likely to be reduced.” He added, “we know an important factor in sexual offending and sexual reoffending is sex drive.” However, he mentioned that it is difficult to demonstrate its effectiveness in long-term study as it takes years to observe.
Feminist argue that chemical castration neglects to address psychological and cultural factors behind violent sex crimes as rape. While it is suggested that chemical castration be administered alongside psychological therapies, it does not address the cultural attitudes.
Risks and Side Effects
The side effects of hormone-suppressing drugs can be severe, ranging from cardiovascular problems to mental health risks. Common side effects include depression, suicidal ideation, hot flashes, anemia, infertility, and weight gain.
Patients face increased risks of long-term problems such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, osteoporosis, and decreased bone density. Doctors urge providing comprehensive psychiatric care when administering chemical castration, because the treatment poses risks such as osteoporosis, diabetes, and depression.
Policy, Consent, and Rehabilitation
Italy’s parliament has expressed support for a voluntary, reversible approach, focused on reducing recidivism, while fierce debate continues over constitutionality and ethics. In the UK, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood is “expanding a pilot scheme in 20 prisons,” stating she is “exploring whether mandating the approach is possible”. However, experts and doctors warn that consent must remain central to medical ethics and patient rights.
Human rights organizations caution against mandatory measures, calling forced castration “cruel and inhuman.” True rehabilitation, experts argue, requires more than hormone suppression. It must also address power, control, and psychological causes of offending. As both countries move forward, lessons from other jurisdictions stress the importance of ongoing oversight, transparency, and respect for individual rights.