As far as I can tell, the only places on the globe that allow castration as a punishment are the United States, Czech Republic, Madagascar, Pakistan, South Korea, Ukraine, and one state in Nigeria.

In the U.S., ten states currently allow a form of castration as punishment for sex offenders. This practice started in 1996 when California became the first state to use the method.

Louisiana is the only state permitting a judge to order surgical castration as a sentence for some crimes. If the offender refuses the surgery, they get a longer prison sentence. Louisiana also offers chemical castration for certain crimes.

Nine other states allow voluntary castration, often as a condition for parole:

• Florida, California, and Iowa give a choice of chemical or surgical castration.

• Alabama, Georgia, Montana, Oregon, and Wisconsin allow chemical castration only.

• Texas allows surgical castration only.

• In addition, Oklahoma îs currently working on legislation allowing chemical castration also.

In Brazil, some deputies have been trying to allow chemical castration for more or less 10 years, that I'm aware of. Last year, there was another law project, but I'm skeptic that this will be successful.

It's a start

It's rather ironic that the very procedure many law-abiding people jump through hoops to get is freely available as punishment in some instances. I've always had that same gripe about assisted suicide being illegal when capital punishment isn't. You're not allowed to die unless the government tells you to die.

Evolve wrote: Wed Mar 26, 2025 5:03 am It's rather ironic that the very procedure many law-abiding people jump through hoops to get is freely available as punishment in some instances. I've always had that same gripe about assisted suicide being illegal when capital punishment isn't. You're not allowed to die unless the government tells you to die.

I agree, but I don't think we should advise going to one of those places and doing a crime as a way to get surgery... To many other complications that go with it.

(Note that this is a quite reasonable comment that I agree with, but folks need to be careful not to cross to far into the 'political' side of this debate)

WheelyFixed wrote: Wed Mar 26, 2025 7:49 am

Evolve wrote: Wed Mar 26, 2025 5:03 am It's rather ironic that the very procedure many law-abiding people jump through hoops to get is freely available as punishment in some instances. I've always had that same gripe about assisted suicide being illegal when capital punishment isn't. You're not allowed to die unless the government tells you to die.

I agree, but I don't think we should advise going to one of those places and doing a crime as a way to get surgery... To many other complications that go with it.

(Note that this is a quite reasonable comment that I agree with, but folks need to be careful not to cross to far into the 'political' side of this debate)

I agree re- the need to keep this topic from veering down the political rabbit hole. I feel it can be avoided as long as specific political figures aren't mentioned and the topic stays on the intended course of discussion about bodily autonomy.

Oregon no longer uses physical or chemical castration as punishment, even if voluntary. They stopped in 2010 because no one would perform the surgeries (or administer the meds) due to ethical concerns and potential liability.
Source: I recently asked a judge to consider short term chemical castration as a condition of probation in lieu of prison on several felony charges, and after his head stopped spinning around, he declined and said “sorry, we just don’t do that anymore.” I believe the forced castration part of the law was repealed in 2011. An endocrinologist confirmed that he would not do it, either.

guzzler14 wrote: Mon Mar 31, 2025 9:40 am Oregon no longer uses physical or chemical castration as punishment, even if voluntary. They stopped in 2010 because no one would perform the surgeries (or administer the meds) due to ethical concerns and potential liability.
Source: I recently asked a judge to consider short term chemical castration as a condition of probation in lieu of prison on several felony charges, and after his head stopped spinning around, he declined and said “sorry, we just don’t do that anymore.” I believe the forced castration part of the law was repealed in 2011. An endocrinologist confirmed that he would not do it, either.

Interesting. Thank you for the updated info.

Interesting, thanks for posting about this...

We had a thread about the idea of castration as punishment a few weeks back, viewtopic.php?t=155

The general consensus seemed to be opposed, on the dual grounds of not being able to 'unfix' it if the conviction was overturned (we know that mistakes happen...) and concern about the stigma it might make for those of us who have chosen to be castrated voluntarily. Personally I sort of agree, while also seeing the emotional appeal, and 'misuse it and lose it' logic in the case of sex offenders....

Purely theoretical speculation, certainly not legal advice... I know that prisons are now supposed to allow inmates to do 'binary' transitions, including providing medical support, etc. Given that the SOCv8 now also allows M->E transitions, is that an option available to prisoners? While I can see why they wouldn't accept it as a 'judicial condition' to do castration for early release, what would happen if one started the SOCv8 process, and got to the chemical castration point, could that be used as a factor when appearing before a parole board?

As a side note, when I did my Lupron shots, all the TG doc did was write the prescription and have the nurse give me a training session on how to do the shot w/ a dummy pad and empty syringe - *I* was the one that had to pick up the prescription from the pharmacy, and do my own injection... It might be harder to arrange that for an inmate (though I could think of a way it could be done if the inmate volunteered for it) but it seems like all they'd need the doc to do was write the scrip...

WheelyFixed