Much of bioethical discourse is concerned with enhancement. How about dis-enhancement, or shedding, rather than adding to physical abilities? With the return of former rock star Gary Glitter to the UK in disgrace as a convicted paedophile in the news, a Canadian scheme to treat paedophiles with chemical castration is being studied as a solution. Serious sex criminals and men who have not offended but are afraid that they might are being treated with psychotherapy, group counselling and drugs.

“I have seen many patients who have committed murders and rapes, who have been involved in sexual torture of victims, who have changed dramatically on these medications, to the point where they are nowhere near the risk they were,” says Dr Paul Fedoroff, of the Royal Ottawa Mental Healthcare Centre.

Chemical castration, or antilibidinals, as doctors term them, are not new and are already being used by psychiatrists in the UK. But there are no systematic protocols. The medication would have to be voluntary, as castration as a punishment or condition of parole would probably breach human rights codes. One problem with relying upon these drugs is that offenders might stop taking them. There have been no studies of their effectiveness, but doctors interviewed by the London Times say that anecdotal evidence suggests that only about 3% of patients re-offend.

“There may be those who don't like the idea of offenders receiving help,” says one doctor. “But these are not individuals who are going to be released because of this treatment. They are offenders who have served their time. This isn't part of the punishment, but aims to reduce the likelihood that they will need to be punished again. The question is: do you want them out there with treatment, or without it?” ~ London Times, Aug 25