Sex offender alerts plan launched

[Urchin]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7612315.stm

Parents will be able to ask if someone close to their family is a sex offender under new pilot schemes in England.

Under the measures, police will be able to tell families if someone with access to a child has convictions or has been previously suspected of abuse.

Its about bloody time! I just hope they do it properly.

 

[widowwadman]

I personally don't believe that this will help preventing a single crime, and actually be detrimental to children's safety.

Not only people with prior convictions are possible attackers.

The majority of attacks are committed by people out of close family.

If anything, these rules will give people a false sense of security when they should be always careful.

 

[ShineyHappyPeople]

Previously suspected of abuse?? What good is that going to do?

 

[Flame]

I think there are better ways of dealing with it than what they are doing. I also have other worries about it all to. A lot of Paedophiles get away with what they do cause they are sneaky about it so the majority of them will probably still be out there with no conviction to their name and still dangerous so i dont think it is going to make our children any safer.

Plus who is going to check every member of their family or a no boyfriend or whatever? They wont until it is to late and surely if you suspect that they may do something like that you wouldnt think of letting them near your kids anyway let alone going out with them.

 

[Urchin]

I know what you mean.

I believe they need to do something, but I've been thinking about it and I'm not sure if this is the best idea or not.

Thats why I said I hope they do it properly, I think that might be expecting a bit much though

 

[lfc_sarah]

I agree


But im not sure what would be the best thing to do

 

[CH0C0H0LIC]

They are piloting that in my area, it's initially for 12months.

Don't know how effective it's going to be as they just said on the news that over 250,000 pervs are out there without any suspicions or convictions. Apparently you have to sign a confidentiality agreement to say that if you do find out through a police check that someone is a paedophile you are not allowed to disclose this info to anyone else (sod that i'd tell my friends if they had kids otherwise why bother doing it)

I know my OH is clean as he's already had a police check cus he does voluntary work at the hospital! I wouldn't have hesitated though if I didn't know and he was a new b/f.

As a survivor I wouldn't hesitate to do whatever it took to protect my kids (or any kid for that matter)

Sarah xxx

 

[mummykay]

i think its a gd idea, sod not tellin people who they are if I found out tho

there is no place for paedophiles in society imo

 

[beanie]

IMO these type of measures just create false senses of security. For example

parents with concerns about a neighbour who plays with their children

and if it comes back clear...... then he must be harmless

Personally I think parents need to be realistic in knowing that there will be convicted and unconvicted paedophiles in their area and that the majority of attacks are by people the child knows. This measure is merely a show, the posts above shows that confidentuality will be breached which could result in less offenders complying with the Sex Offender register.

 

[trixipaws]

im not gonna go into detail, but myself, my lttle sister and my mum have unfortunately all had unwanted sexual attention faaaaaaaaaar too young (aged 4 or 5 for me) i think ANY measures to stop stuff like this must be a good thing. still, as previously said, all paedo's must have a first offence- so u still can never be too sure

 

[widowwadman]

i think its a gd idea, sod not tellin people who they are if I found out tho

That's another reason why I'm so against it, as there is too much danger of vigilantism.

 

[mummykay]

so if a paedophile abused my kid, got caught and had some measly prison sentence or poxy community service order (which lets face it, this shitty government would prob give) and I found out where the perv lived, ur tellin me I would have to keep it to myself and not let a lynch mob after him?!

cos people like jamie bulgars killers and sarah paynes killer are really allowed to breath the same air as us after the shit they have done

widowwadman im not havin a go at u or bein aggressive but topics like this bring up peoples opinions and everyone is allowed one!

 

[beanie]

so if a paedophile abused my kid, got caught and had some measly prison sentence or poxy community service order (which lets face it, this sh*tty government would prob give) and I found out where the perv lived, ur tellin me I would have to keep it to myself and not let a lynch mob after him?!

cos people like jamie bulgars killers and sarah paynes killer are really allowed to breath the same air as us after the sh*t they have done

widowwadman im not havin a go at u or bein aggressive but topics like this bring up peoples opinions and everyone is allowed one!

vigilantism scares me a whole lot more then the idea of sex offenders in the community who are registered on the SO register. There are way too many idots out there as history has shown. Last time this info was given out there were a few innocent victims of attacks, icluding children. Is that right or fair either?

I didn't read WWW sayig you weren't allowed your opinion, just responding to what you had wrote

 

[widowwadman]

Well, I'm not saying you're not allowed an opinion, and I didn't mean to be aggressive either (sorry, feel pretty rotten at the moment), but in my opinion a lynch mob is as wrong as the original crime. I know this is a pretty emotive subject, but that's why it should be handled by a court, not by the obviously emotionally afflicted victims.

Personally, I believe in rehabilitation and abhorr revenge. Punishment is neccessary, but this should be done in a civilised manner and in the end allowing - if possible - a convict to become a functioning part of society again, because by lynching him you don't win anything either. By allowing lynchmobs and vigilantism all you do is drive people underground.

A lynchmob is just about revenge and wouldn't make streets any safer, either. In the case of Jamie Bulger's murderers, btw, they were 10 year old children. If anything they were victims themselves, too.

 

[DebbieM]

Heard this on the local news yesterday. Peterborough, where I live is in the pilot scheme

 

[CH0C0H0LIC]

I wouldn't say that if I found out a neighbour had a suspicion/conviction I would make a big thing and tell newspapers or form a lynch mob but if I knew something about someone and they were becoming close to a friend with kids I would share the information with them in order to protect the child. I agree there is a difference with children being the abusers and that should be handled differently from the start but if it is an adult who commited the crime they have to accept that their are consequences to their actions. As an adult they would have been aware of that BEFORE abusing the child.

I don't agree with vigilante mobs but children must be protected. I wasn't and my abuser was never revealed by me til I was 34. Nothing ever happened to him and now as an adult I truly regret not telling anyone not just because it still affects my relationships but every day I think about it and wonder if because I didn't tell then how many other children has he done it to? On a low day that makes me feel I'm as bad as him.

I understand and respect that everyone has an opinion that is just as valid as the next persons, but unfortunately I just can't find anything nice in someone that has done something so evil.

Sarah xxx

 

[beanie]

Just because I don't agree with vigilantism doesn't mean I find anything nice in anyone who has chosen to abuse children.

 

[Misslarue]

In the case of Jamie Bulger's murderers, btw, they were 10 year old children. If anything they were victims themselves, too.

Anyone who has read the case in great detail, such as myself, would fail to see how they were victims
There was also aspects of a sexual nature to their crime.



I welcome any kind of scheme to protcet my child. I do have reservations of vigilante groups..............but there needs to be a line drawn between the safety of the offender and the safety of our children.
Call me a cycnic, but how long before the government starts charging for these checks?

 

[CH0C0H0LIC]

Beanie I hope you don't think that was what I meant in my post as I feel the same as you: I don't agree with vigilante mobs etc but I wrote about people's different opinions and although I do read and respect their views I was writing about not finding anything nice in evil as my post/views are obviously (due to my personal experiences) going to be more negative. That's why it was in a different paragraph, was just worried that maybe it had come across wrong!

Sarah xxx

 

[widowwadman]

Chocoholic, you come across as very rational and level-headed. It's absolutely understandable that you can't find anything nice in an offender. I'm glad to see that you with this personal history are against vigilantism.
I know you're not the only one. Thankfully I never had the experience myself, but several friends who did, and the opinions are evenly spread between them, some agreeing with me, others the opposite.

@Mislarue: I've read the case in detail myself and made up my mind. What has happened to the child is terrible, and there's nothing which can undo this. The kids who committed the crime were children themselves, though. And that is too easily forgotten. Nobody is born evil.