How medicine and the law characterize sex offenders, and how they fight back

What is it about?

Civil commitment of sex offenders--that is, confining them to treatment centers after their criminal sentences have expired--is controversial on legal grounds, but we wanted to see how medical and legal professionals collaborated to characterize sex offenders and how they tried to resist those characterizations. We examined court opinions from commitment hearings and observed a trial in federal court on the constitutionality of these commitments. We found that one result of this medico-legal collaboration is the marginalization or othering of sex offenders by essentializing, dividing, shaming, and impeaching them. We also found that this group attempted to resist othering by rhetorical strategies such as providing evidence of change in character, distinction within the othered group, and proof of internal controls over unacceptable impulses. Finally, we dis- covered that such othering relies heavily on medical expertise, even though some medical practitioners may disagree with, or be hesitant in, their roles in this medico-legal collaboration.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

This project describes tactics used by state actors to deny the freedom of individuals on grounds of medical "diagnoses," implicating important public concerns. How should we evaluate medical claims in these cases? How should we assess the collaboration of the state and medical practitioners? We also show how the individuals subject to these proceedings resist, how they fight back rhetorically.

Perspectives