Kaine Vetoes Bill To Study Castration

By Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 11, 2007; B01



RICHMOND, April 10 -- Gov. Timothy M. Kaine vetoed a bill Tuesday that would have required state agencies to study whether Virginia should start castrating violent sex offenders instead of confining them, some for the rest of their lives.

The General Assembly, hoping to reduce the costs of housing the state's most dangerous sex offenders in prison or treatment facilities, overwhelmingly supported having state officials study whether criminals should have the option of "physical castration" in exchange for being released.

Kaine (D) vetoed the bill because, he said, he thinks health professionals, not legislators, are the most qualified people to determine how to treat sex offenders, some of whom might be mentally ill.

"This bill was overly prescriptive of matters best left to the professionals in our state mental health agency," Kaine said.

Also Tuesday, Kaine, as expected, vetoed a bill that would have eliminated nonsmoking areas in restaurants that posted "smoking permitted" signs at the front door. The governor plans to continue pushing for a total ban on smoking in restaurants.

Kaine's decision on the sex offender bill, however, put him in the midst of a national debate over the best way to deal with rapists, child molesters and other sexual predators.

Virginia is one of 17 states with a civil commitment law that calls for sex offenders who are deemed too dangerous to be released to be confined to a treatment center after they have served their prison sentences.

But the costs are high, prompting Sen. Emmett W. Hanger Jr. (R-Augusta) to develop the alternative of removing testicles.

"It is going to be tremendously costly to taxpayers if we just continue to park [offenders] in a treatment facility that is not effective when there is an effective remedy for many of them," Hanger said.

Hanger's bill, which the House and Senate passed overwhelmingly, calls on the attorney general's office and the state mental health agency to explore the use of physical castration.

After the bill was approved, Kaine proposed amending it by striking all references to castration. He suggested that the state "study a full range of options" to help sex offenders gain release from confinement without endangering the public.

Last week, when legislators returned to Richmond to consider Kaine's amendments, the Senate voted to accept the governor's suggestions. But the House voted 63 to 32 to reject them.

Kaine said he had no choice but to veto the bill after the General Assembly left town, which means that legislators cannot attempt to override him. Kaine said he will direct the appropriate state agencies "to review, on an ongoing basis, the appropriate options for sex offender treatment."

J. Tucker Martin, a spokesman for Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell (R), said that McDonnell does not object to Kaine's decision.

"We believe there are some legal issues that need to be addressed and also issues of the efficacy of the practice," Martin said. "There are some real questions that need to be answered before we could endorse castration as a possible treatment."

But Fred Berlin, founder of the Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic in Baltimore and a professor in the medical school, said he does not understand why Kaine vetoed the bill. Berlin said that castration is "a sexual appetite suppressant" that can be used "for those sex offenders who seem to be driven by abnormal sexual cravings."

"I do find it difficult to understand what the harm would have been to look into this as a way of releasing some of these people from confinement," Berlin said.

He and several other health professionals also said that chemical, not surgical, castration is a more humane and widely used procedure.

Removing the testicles limits the production of testosterone. Chemical castration can achieve basically the same effect for certain periods of time through the use of hormone-based drugs.

Hanger said he and other GOP lawmakers sought physical castration because it is permanent.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, eight states allow the medical castration of some offenders. California, Florida and Texas give sex offenders the choice between chemical and surgical castration.

Like many states grappling with high-profile cases of sex offenders who commit crimes once out of prison, Virginia has moved aggressively in recent years to keep such offenders incarcerated.

In 1999, Virginia started its confinement program, which is designed to keep the most violent sex offenders off the streets once they leave prison. At the attorney general's request, a judge can order an inmate into a treatment facility if he is considered a public threat.

Forty-seven inmates have been confined under the program, which the Virginia Supreme Court has ruled constitutional.

It costs the state about $420,000 over 20 years to keep a sex offender in prison, but it could cost as much as $2.2 million in that time to house an offender in a treatment facility.

Hanger estimates that the program will soon cost taxpayers at least $50 million a year. He said he thinks that locking someone up for life is "more inhumane" than giving that person the option of castration.

"It's a simple operation that can provide a cure for many of these individuals, and taxpayers are relieved of a burden," Hanger said.