Bingowings said:

Can it be reversed?

Does it have damaging side effects?

I ask because should a miscarriage of justice occur (and they frequently do) and this be done on an innocent person how would you compensate them if they are screwed up by this procedure?

Also the link between sex drive and child abuse has not be proved.

It could create an impression of safety which may not exist.

This sort of thing used to be done to homosexuals (back when that was illegal) and it led to awful side effects and suicides.

Containment seems to be the safer option (if someone is later found to be innocent you can compensate them as much as that is possible and set them free).

Dug a bit more about it. It seems the treatment would last at least 15 years, so if not reversible per se, it's not permanent.

Side effects: Possible heart disease after a very long exposure to the drugs.

---

I see what you're getting at and I agree, the chance of someone being wrongly accused is significant simply because no law system in the world is perfect. Even an angry ex-wife could accuse her ex just to get back at him; extreme, I know, but it could happen.

Would it be better to administer the drugs only to repeat offenders? Possibly although I believe the parents of that one second molested child wouldn't agree.

Same thing should be done with rapists IMO. All this will no doubt cause controversy as the death penalty does, what I will never understand is how human rights activists still defend or try to defend these people when they're clearly not human and should have no rights at all.