Legislative sessions in New Mexico often include bills that court controversy.
This year, a pair of House Republicans could stir up the Roundhouse with a proposal that would allow a court to order a convicted sex offender to undergo chemical castration as a condition of their parole.
Reps. John Block of Alamogordo and Stefani Lord of Sandia Park say House Bill 128 would offer sex offenders an option for early release if they agree to the treatment.
…
HB 128 would require sex offenders who choose to undergo the process for parole to begin treatment at least 30 days before their release from prison. Inmates who choose to pursue the option must pay for the treatment unless they can prove they are indigent.
While an offender on parole could not be forced to continue the treatment, the bill says those who end the process before a court determines it is no longer necessary would be in violation of their parole and charged with a fourth-degree felony.
…
A 2013 study published on the National Library of Medicine website said the aim of both surgical and chemical castration is to “reduce testosterone to a prepubescent level, thereby attenuating the offender’s sexual urges and helping to suppress sexually deviant thinking and behavior.”
The study said compulsory surgical castration has been practiced for thousands of years for various purposes, including as criminal punishment. It found there was “no robust data” on the efficacy of chemical castration.
However, the report said recidivism rates among sex offenders who underwent surgical castration ranged from 2.5% to 7.5% over a period of one to 35 years, compared to 60% to 84% for sex offenders left “untreated.”
Alexandria Taylor, executive director of the New Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault programs, said there is no evidence chemical castration “prevents sexual violence or sexual perpetration against children.“
“We’re focused on primary prevention of sexual violence so people never experience the harm to begin with,” she said. “We would urge elected officials and lawmakers to focus on measures to prevent violence from happening against children in our communities.”
HB 128 goes first to the House Health and Human Services Committee.
Click here to read the full article
ACSOL ACTION ALERT:
Let’s squash this barbaric bill before it causes needless pain and suffering!
If you are a New Mexico resident, click here to find your state senator and house representative. Write down their mailing information and phone.
No matter what state you are in, contact the authors of the bill:
Representative John Block – (R) 505-986-4220
Representative Stefani Lord – (R) 505-986-4453
Mailing address for both:
New Mexico State Capitol
[NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE GOES HERE]
490 Old Santa Fe Trail
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Next, write a letter to each representative. You don’t have to mention you are a registrant or are a supporter of a registrant. Suggestions you can include in the letter:
- You strongly oppose House Bill 128.
- Mention the quotes that Alexandria Taylor made in the article about castration not preventing sex offenses, and how it would be better to focus on prevention.
- Mention the National Library of Medicine study that says there was “no robust data” on the efficacy of chemical castration.
- Chemical castration can damage a person’s health.
- Parolees should not be threatened with a felony for refusing to have their bodies altered.
Next, on a separate piece of paper write “Phone call script” and reduce your letter to just a few sentences of the most important things you want to say. The staff person on the phone doesn’t want to hear a speech, just the main points, primarily that you oppose House Bill 128.
Make your calls to your representatives. Tell them you want to comment on House Bill 128. Read your short script.
Now pat yourself on the back for doing a great job, justice warrior!
Please write a comment here on your experience 🙂
“However, the report said recidivism rates among sex offenders who underwent surgical castration ranged from 2.5% to 7.5% over a period of one to 35 years, compared to 60% to 84% for sex offenders left “untreated.”
Um… do they have this research available to review? Or is this one of those playing with number things like eating bacon will increase your cancer chances by 90%, but what it really means is that it’s current1% to now being 1.9%.
More barbarism disguised as “justice”.
Curious about this “study” they are quoting.curious about how it could reach such radically different findings from every other study that had ever been conducted on this subject. Even more curious to know why the DoJ SMART department send to be totally unaware of this study…and why it is just now being mentioned.
Also curious, why is it when a “Study” shows high recidivism rates, is it an undeniable fact that our legislature must immediately spring into action to respond….but hundreds of studies done over decades all concluding very low recidivism require no response or even acknowledgment of their existence? Why does our legislative bodies completely ignore, and even denounce any and all data that indicates low recidivism…then demand that this one single study, done a decade ago is conclusive proof that this course of action must be taken immediately?
It would be interesting to see some justify their way around that, but not here. That would only be interesting in a nation that had at least a casual association with the basic concept of justice. America however has tossed that aside in favor of, “Do as much of what ever you can justify by any means as you want…then just say that is justice.” These question will be ignored, or simply dismissed with whatever is most convenient.
Next step, massive increases to SO sentencing. So as to create the following:
Option 1: “Volunteer” for this “Program” and get out of prison in a month.
Option 2: Decline to “Volunteer” and wait another 10+ years for your parole to be denied because you declined. Then loop through that process every few years until you, “Volunteer”, your 50 year sentence is completed, or you die.
They will use this, “Voluntary” program as their excuse, if needed.
“Sure we’re increasing the sentence for ______ from 5 in 5 out, to 50 years….but with our wonderful new program it can be just 5 in 45 out!”
Of course if you do take option #1 you will be on parole for 40+ years. If you drop out of this, totally voluntary program, at any point, you go back to prison to finish your sentence, with no credit for the time successfully spent on parole, plus a new class 4 felony, with enhanced sentencing, that will be fun consecutively to your original sentence. No problem whatsoever to offer this to a 40+ year old man! It’s not like you’re forcing him to chose between life long chemical castration, or dying in prison!
Not sure what the track record for the current composition of the NM Supreme Court of Tyrannical Enablement is, but I’m seldom hopeful when it comes to getting the various Justifiers to see anything other than the Tyranny of the Majority Enablement documents we like to call our State and Federal Constitutions.
We should all contact these representatives to file our concerns.
Oh well parole definitely isn’t worth that. Just stay in prison and don’t let the board approve you for parole. Finish your sentence then get outta state.
I will take drug if all the people pushing for it will take it as well , you can bet the percentages of offences will go down then , since its people not even on the lame registry that are the threat , but they must take the castration first because I know how much they lie/cheat/steal
How about a bill that requires brain transplants for stupid politicians??????
The 3-page bill can be found here
The referenced sex crimes, NMSA 30-9-11 Criminal Sexual Penetration, 30-9-12 Criminal Sexual Contact, and 30-9-13 Criminal Sexual Contact with a Minor. Note that in one case of sexual contact, it is only a misdemeanor.
Due to the word “shall”, judges are allowed no discretion in sentencing, and no individual determination of dangerousness is required. The word “shall” is used throughout the bill. However, a parolee “may” elect to stop receiving the treatment but “shall be immediately” remanded to the corrections department due to a parole violation. It sounds like this sidesteps any parole revocation hearing. The wording “for the remainder of the sentence” may even forclose the possibility of any future parole.
This provision cannot be applied to current parolees due to ex post facto. It cannot apply to anyone on federal supervision for equivalent crimes. This applies only to persons on parole and not if probation is imposed. These exclusions tend to blunt any public safety arguments.
A black letter reading of this bill indicates it must apply to women as well. To exclude women could raise equal protection questions. Is there even a medical protocol for female medical castration? I suspect no studies–dubious or not–have included women.
These observations resulted from a quick scan of the bill. There are many more arguments against the use of chemical castration itself.
They just use the high percentages thinking that no one will be fact checking them and if they did who cares. Sex offenders deserve the worst punishment there is – right?
When I was on parole I was on a heavy dose of antidepressants. My sex offender treatment (if you want to call it that) did not like that I was on them because I had no feelings of sexual desire so when I was asked questions during group I would simplly say “I don’t know how I feel about-” this or that because I really did not have any sexual feelings or desires at all. The doctor who prescribed them to me even wrote out a note on script paper to the group leader indicating that my dose over x period of time removes all feelings of sexual desires, fantacies etc – which they actually did in reality. The group leader did not like that though but she learned to live with it.
Long term use of chemicals for castration can caused permanent health damage even using antidepressants can do the same thing causing ED etc.
These politicians are radical and NUTS!! overall. All they care about is what will give them better chances of being reelected.
The woman was on Tucker last night. Of course he was just lovin it. I find it hilarious how these talking heads will talk about on one hand how the government is corrupt on xyz and then on the other hand praise the govenrment on the next segment as if now all of sudden you can trust the same people.
I have made the phone calls and I’ve written the letters. Hopefully, it will help
F.
Don’t tell me; REPUBLICANS proposed this! No! I don’t believe it! Surely the Democrats are just as bad! Again, thanks to the news media for making it blindingly obvious just where the greatest threat to us is TODAY, not twenty years ago, not thirty years ago, but TODAY! Sleep and reminisce at your peril.
ACSOL is it just as effective to email these representatives as opposed to mailing a letter? Or would a letter with the call be more impactful? Thank you.
I want to support New Mexico registrants, so I just mailed my 2 letters and made two calls. Easy!