Concerns about text-to-image (T2I) generative models infringing on privacy, copyright, and safety have led to the development of Concept Erasure Techniques (CETs). The goal of an effective CET is to prohibit the generation of undesired ``target'' concepts specified by the user, while preserving the ability to synthesize high-quality images of the remaining concepts. In this work, we demonstrate that CETs can be easily circumvented and present several side effects of concept erasure. For a comprehensive measurement of the robustness of CETs, we present Side Effect Evaluation (\see), an evaluation benchmark that consists of hierarchical and compositional prompts that describe objects and their attributes. This dataset and our automated evaluation pipeline quantify side effects of CETs across three aspects: impact on neighboring concepts, evasion of targets, and attribute leakage. Our experiments reveal that CETs can be circumvented by using superclass-subclass hierarchy and semantically similar prompts, such as compositional variants of the target. We show that CETs suffer from attribute leakage and counterintuitive phenomena of attention concentration or dispersal. We release our dataset, code, and evaluation tools to aid future work on robust concept erasure.