Maybe the "compromise" is that such things should only be prescribed by professionals who believe it will help reduce offences? I'm trying to look at through a utilitarian lens, tbh, rather than bickering about whether it's liberal or conservative.
I would imagine most people don't want to be in a system that tracks this for obvious reasons that could risk wrongful accusation and public embarrassment. It's similar to an outright refusal to seek professional psychiatric assistance due to the prospect of increased life insurance premiums but much grander. But you would have to be operating from the assumption that this is beneficial - which I believe it would be - to agree with the logic of refusing the "compromise"
Poll
