Analysis of physician's views towards enacted chemical castration implementation in sex offenders in Turkey from medical ethics perspective


Thesis Type: Postgraduate

Institution Of The Thesis: Uludağ Üniversitesi, Turkey

Approval Date: 2017

Thesis Language: Turkish

Student: GÜLER KAYABAŞLI

Consultant: ELİF ATICI

Abstract:

Introduction: Sexual offenses have become a phenomenon that is seriously damaging the physical, mental, cognitive and social integrity of the individual and becoming increasingly common. The authorities resort to various legal enforcement in order to prevent sexual assaults. For this purpose, chemical castration in Turkey has been legalized since July 2016 as in some countries in the world. The aim of the thesis is to examine whether chemical castration in sex offenders is a treatment as it is in the relevant Regulation or a practice that based on gender, caused medicalization and justification of the crime and incorporates the physician into the social control system with evaluating the discussions in the medical, legal, political, economic, psycho-social areas within the scope of ethical values and the obligations of the physician. Matrial and Methods: The research was conducted with the participation of 130 academic physicians in Uludag University Medical Faculty Health Practice and Research Center Hospital (SUAM). The data were collected by questionnaire. The questionnaire consists of independent variables; knowledge and learning outcome of medical ethics or deontology and 35 likert type items. The research items were prepared on the basis of the discussions specific to the medical ethics, law, physician obligation, political and economic, psycho-social fields included in the literature in the framework of the Regulation. The items are grouped on the axis of discussions and correlations between the items and basic variables were investigated. Results: The rate of accepting chemical castration as a treatment and do not are closed. Rate of not finding the practice as a healer is 73,8%. Physicians agree that the application of chemical castration is a punishment. There is a significant relationship between the argument that physician will be a part of the social control system and that it will lead to the medicalization and legitimization of sexual crime. They think that the purpose of the practice is not to have a precautionary measure, that the cost should not be covered by the state, and that it should not be applied to any sexual crime. Physicians who approach according to the medical indication also accept the necessity of informed consent. Discusion and Conclusion: The legal implication of the chemical castration is not clear. It is seen that what physicians and lawmakers understand about treatment is different. If chemical castration is to be performed as a treatment, it is necessary to have scientific evidence and to get informed consent. Physicians can stay away from medication if they practice on the basis of indication and consent. Legislator should consider whether the legal regulations are functional on the field. Since the sexual offender profile can be very diverse, there is a danger that social and cultural factors can be ignored.