irelands sex register........

maryjane1

............ or lack of.

considering ireland doesnt really have a sex register as such. in relation to paedophiles specificly, would you as parents like to see a system in place like the one in the states? for those who arent familiar with the system in the states, you can check to see where sex offenders live, work, what they drive and photos of them. the system vary from state to state with some even sending out flyers and notifying schools when an offender moves to an area.

of course the negatives of this can be disasterous with mistaken identities, vigilanteism, driving them under ground etc.

but do the positives outweigh the negatives when it comes to protecting your children? to be able to show our children a photo of someone they should avoid?

i personaly know that there are paedophiles in my area (as there are in many), thanks to a nudge and a wink, but i dont know who they are. i do actually know of one, whos photo appeared in the paper, who used to work in local fast food restruant where children and teens go after school and the local disco.

are we entitled to know to ensure that we as parents can do our jobs fully to protect our children?

The Hill Billy

Ireland does have a Sex Offenders Register - it is just that it is not open to the general public.
(If it was just a Sex Register sure we'd all be on it. )

What you are talking about is implementing something akin to Megan's Law.

I'm not 100% sure that making this information available to the general public would be the best thing to do. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that in the majority of abuse cases the paedophile is (a) a relative, (b) a close family friend or (c) someone in a position of trust, e.g. scout leader, priest, swimming coach.

In relation to (a) & (b) - chances are they would not have come to the attention of the authorities & it would be up to you as a parent to ensure that they behaved appropriately with their child. In relation to (c) I would imagine that proper vetting by the authorities & the implementation of a strict code of practice & ongoing monitoring of same would eliminate most of the dodgy characters in this area. Of course it is impossible to have 100% assurance that your child is safe with anyone.

Outside of (a), (b) & (c) you are left with the small number of paedophiles who may or may not be on the Sex Offenders Register. If they are on the register, they shouldn't be allowed hold a position where they may come into contact with a child in risky circumstances. If they aren't - then the register is feck all use in protecting your child from them.

At the end of the day - you & me as parents should be vigilant & mindful of our childrens' safety & wellbeing. We should not have to rely on a third party to update a list of paedophiles in our local area to be assured that our children will not come to any harm. A list updated (or even worse - not updated) by a civil servant isn't going to stop someone pulling up in a Hiace & dragging your kid into the back of it & ...

D Bronc

I definitely think the sex offenders register should be available to the public. There is so many that get away though and dont be found until they re-offend again:mad: which is disgraceful. I know there can be downsides to knowing but the pros for me outweigh the cons. There was a well known convicted paedophile living in our area recently for five months and gardai or schools didnt know about it. Thankfully hes gone now but you never know anymore whos living beside you. Other Countries can manage ok with the register available to the public and so could we if we were given the chance.

Zombrex

D Bronc wrote:

I definitely think the sex offenders register should be available to the public.

What exactly would the public do with this information, apart from form a mob and go burn the house down?

I mean its not like people go to their kids "Ok, you can get into cars with that stranger, that stranger and that stranger, but stay away from that stranger"

Public sex offender lists simply give parents the illusion (false illusion) that they can actually do something proactive to protect their kids from this. Which is nonsense, only 1 in 10 paedophiles are ever in the system and that vast majority attack children they know already. Knowing that the man 3 streets over is a padeophile is rather pointless when uncle Larry is sneaking into your daughters room up stairs.

Fratton Fred

Before someone mentions it, the story of the mob attacking the home of a Peadiatrician is an urban myth.

The Sun or some other such enlightened rag published a list of names and addresses once for the good of it's readers. It resulted in a lot of mobs attacking innocent people becuase they had the same name as an offender. There was even one guym dragged out of his house and beaten senseless in the street. The mob that did it did not bother to check (nor did the Sun) the fact that the guy only moved in three days before.

As it says in teh film you want the truth? you can't handle the truth.

simu

As others said, making this info public could lead to vigilante attaks and could also lull parents into a false sense of security.

Imho, parents should read up about and watch out for the signs that a child is being abused and teach children how to deal with dodgy situations.

Sleepy

Not a good idea at all imho.

While child abuse is an awful, awful thing and I say this as someone who volunteers with an organisation dedicated to protecting children's rights, it's always been around and quite probably always will. As others have posted above, most abuse is carried out by family members or adults trusted by the child's parents. We're far more aware of it (and more prepared to discuss it) than previous generations but it's no more prevalent now that it was in the past (possibly less so).

simu makes an excellent point about this kind of thing lulling parents into a false sense of security. I'd quite liken this to the Patriot act, something that infringes upon some people's civil liberties while protecting no-one.

As a society we hold that when someone finishes a jail term they have paid their due. Should we sentence someone further by setting them up to be the victim of vigilante 'justice' when they've already paid their debt to society? ('The Woodsman' with Kevin Bacon was an interesting take on this btw.) This won't be a popular thing to say but it should be remembered that a paedophile isn't the same thing as child abuser. It's quite possible for someone to have that sexual attraction without acting upon it. In this case it's the state's responsibility to provide that person with the psychiatric help they need rather than to legislate in a fashion that could prevent them from seeking this help.

Personally, I'd see the parents as having the primary role to protect their child; to teach that child to stay away from strangers, to understand that no-one has the right to touch them in that way etc.

maryjane1

its all very well to teach your child 'stranger danger' but dont some paedophiles groom children? they are obviously not strangers and must trusted to get the oppurtuinity to do this. take ian huntley for example had he been on a public register parents would be aware and could warn their children to stay away.

if a person has these urges going to prison is not going to change this. most of them reoffend. this in itself is a good enough reason for me.

what about when uncle larry gets out of prison moves next door to you. comes over the odd saturday night for a drink gets to know your kids. gains your trust after you know him for years, sure by then he may have children of his own. why wouldnt you let your child go for a sleep over? this does happen. should we not have to right to protect our children against these situations? i understand that not all paedphiles would be on the register as they may not have been caught but have we not the right to protect our children against those who are.

Ickle Magoo

The majority of offences are carried out by someone the parents invited into the house. I think there is far too much jumping up & down about paedophiles you don't know - I don't think there is quite so much to worry about there, the cases like that in Sohem are few & far between thankfully.

As parents all we can do is educate ourselves & our children on the more likely dangers much, much closer to home & minimise the risks as best we can. I'm not sure how knowing such-and-such is on the sex offenders register is really helpful when he might have been caught with images of children but it's the other guy you're not watching & who isn't on the register who will physically abuse any child he can get in contact with - the register is just the tip of the ice-berg, let's face it.

I prefer to be wary of everyone & keep a very, very close eye on my kids. It's a no win situation, I feel sick whenever I think of paedophelia but I don't think even tattooing the sicko's accross the forehead will do a damn thing to stop it. :mad::(

johnnyskeleton

Fratton Fred wrote:

Before someone mentions it, the story of the mob attacking the home of a Peadiatrician is an urban myth.

The BBC reported it, so there is a good chance it's true. At the very least, there is a person in wales who claims that happened to her, and I have no reason to disbelieve her.

I agree with Hill Billy and Wicknight. Apart from anything else not all people entered on the sex offenders register are paedophiles (or child sex abusers). I think it's unrealistic to tell your kids to avoid contact with hundreds of people across the country.

There are many problems with making the register public, and absolutely no benefits to doing so (except to assuage the angry mob). The proposals that John Reid is considering in the UK are whether to allow certain bodies access to the register - schools, creches etc - for a search on a specific person (i.e. vetting).

I suspect

dave2pvd

I'm not really sure what the public offenders' lists achieve. Sure, having a SOL database is an effective tool for local authorities and law enforcement, if it is administered and updated properly. However I sometimes suspect that public SOLs are the result of populist legislation proposed by short-sighted politicians.

There is no US system. There are individual states that operate their own systems. There are some state and federal rulings that influence individual states' legislation. Contrary to opinion, the US is not one big homogenous country. Think of it more like the EU (only a bit more homogenous )

The state that I live in recently started up an SOL. Unfortunately, it is not updated regularly. Worse still, there are people on the list who are there because of 'offences' committed as teenagers. For example, consensual sex amongst minors was an offence that committed one to a lifetime on the SOL; lumped in with dangerous sexual predators. Little did they know back then that a future set of draconian laws would prevent them living within a mile radius of bus-stops, schools, day-care ctrs, libraries, playgrounds, churches,....basically sell up and move folks, take your kids with you; you've got 30 days. Yeah, sorry we have to enforce this on you and your family - blame it on your elected officials.

The net result? Increased paranoia. Offenders going underground. Law enforcement in a total panic because they can no longer keep track of the local SOL members - they no longer check into the local precinct every month like they used to....they have vanished into thin air.

Not a solution.

dave2pvd

Having said all of the above, I am in favour of strict laws to help protect children from sexual predators. Such laws may lead to less freedom and less liberty for these people. That has to be a consequence. The re-offence rates are very high for predators - it is difficult to argue that they 'deserve' to have their place back in our society.

Ickle Magoo

dave2pvd wrote:

Having said all of the above, I am in favour of strict laws to help protect children from sexual predators. Such laws may lead to less freedom and less liberty for these people. That has to be a consequence. The re-offence rates are very high for predators - it is difficult to argue that they 'deserve' to have their place back in our society.

I agree with that, we are talking about people who want to have sex with children, they fancy children, are sexually drawn to children - they are not going to leave jail after 10yrs & somehow miraculously be attracted to the over 18's. I don't think people who are drawn to commit serious sex crimes or paedophilia can possibly be trusted not to re-offend in the same manner as a drug-dealer or drunk-driver.