To think paedophiles should be banned from "starting a family"?

(132 Posts)
SaggyNaggy Fri 07-Oct-16 13:01:07

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/paedophile-caught-137-000-indecent-083106459.html

Here's some info to save clicking:
Police found 400 videos in Category A, which is the most extreme, with another 255 films in Category B and 186 films and 851 images in Category C.
There were 1,692 movies and images ranging from Category A to C as well as the 4,336 videos and 137,000 images that remained uncategorised.

Sentence:
Sentencing Arrowsmith to 10 months in prison, suspended for two years, Recorder Martin Butterworth, said: “You are 41 years old, with no previous convictions and you pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
“There are three charges against you in relation to the possession of indecent images of children.
“I am taking into consideration your previous good character, you have a wife who supports you, a steady employment and your hopes to start a family in the near future.
“These are not victimless crimes, they encourage serious abuse of sometimes very young children.
“You were less than honest about the nature of the images.”
Digby Johnson, defending, told the court Arrowsmith and his wife, who was not present in court, were trying for children and wanted to start a family.
Arrowsmith, of Church Gresley, Derbyshire, was ordered to pay £250 costs and carry out 160 hours of unpaid work as well as being made the subject of a curfew restricting him from leaving his house between 7pm and 5am.
He is also banned from working with children and was ordered to sign the sexual offenders register.

Banned from working wowoith children but can quite happily have his own...

Im baffled, truly, truly baffled.

Aussiemum78 Fri 07-Oct-16 13:03:14

Must be the same train of thought that gives violent abusers access to children after separation, because they are "only" violent to their wives....so far.

fizzyapple1 Fri 07-Oct-16 13:07:00

I cannot imagine how his wife thinks.

EnthusiasmDisturbed Fri 07-Oct-16 13:09:08

yes in an ideal world

but then what do we do sterilize them against their wishes

I am not sure how you can ban people from procreating

we simply cant unless we want to be that sort of society that makes the choice who can be forcibly sterilized

though I find the judges summing up of the case concerning

ThymeLord Fri 07-Oct-16 13:09:19

I couldn't get my head around this when I read the story. I kept thinking, there must be more to it, there has to be more to it. It beggars belief and makes me extremely angry.

HarleyQuinzel Fri 07-Oct-16 13:09:59

banned from working wowoith children but can happily have his own...

Exactly what I was thinking. I would social services would be involved at the very least, surely they can see how ridiculous that is.

Oh, and a curfew. Great now he can only participate in the abuse of children during the day. hmm

HarleyQuinzel Fri 07-Oct-16 13:10:20

*would hope

JinkxMonsoon Fri 07-Oct-16 13:13:04

I think the story you've quoted is pretty commonplace OP.

I used to know someone convinced of possessing indecent images of children (a massive quantity in fact) who already had a child and went on to have more with his wife, who stuck by him. IIRC there was Social Services involvement for a number of years afterwards, but I doubt that's still the case. I suppose he must live his life hoping that the parents at his kids' school never find out, but other than that he got away with it.

NuffSaidSam Fri 07-Oct-16 13:14:29

That does seem completely ridiculous!

I don't think it is possible on a practical level to ban someone from starting a family.

I do think that he should not be allowed to live with or have unsupervised access to the children. I would hope social services will be heavily involved from day one.

You have to question the judgement of his wife as well....who wants to start a family with a convicted paedophile?!

VoldysGoneMouldy Fri 07-Oct-16 13:15:10

It's disgusting. Another example of how the legal system is screwed in the favour of the perpetrator.

MuseumOfCurry Fri 07-Oct-16 13:15:26

I'm not convinced this is much worse than convicted violent offenders having children. What are you going to do, realistically?

Aussiemum78 Fri 07-Oct-16 13:15:26

It's putting a normal persons perspective on an abnormal person in thinking that they will see the humanity in their own child and won't abuse them.

But an abuser is always an abuser, regardless of genetics.

JohnnyMcGrathSaysFuckOff Fri 07-Oct-16 13:16:42

So his wife gets pregnant. Will you force her to have an abortion? Or just to sever all ties?

Do you believe people can never change? If someone who has possessed indecent images is never allowed to have a family, then what about someone who murdered a child but who has served their term? What about other violent criminals?

SS involvement and close monitoring, yes. But no, I do not believe that people have no right to redemption and to moving on.

MypocketsarelikeNarnia Fri 07-Oct-16 13:20:47

Ss will be involved. If the system is working well - which it doesn't always - she'll be given the choice of staying with him and having her child removed or leaving him. It's the same with dv etc.

So there is a system in place for dealing with this sort of thing - but as I say whether it is working or not is another question.

DixieWishbone Fri 07-Oct-16 13:21:47

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Idratherbeaunicorn Fri 07-Oct-16 13:24:46

Please excuse this rather poor comparison, but if a person mis-treats an animal, they can be banned from keeping animals.... why is it not the same for having children if you have been convicted for child related offences?!
I suppose, as per PPs, how could it be enforced / monitored etc?

DixieNormas Fri 07-Oct-16 13:26:51

It seems crazy to me, here you go, have less time in prison because you want to start a family hmm

What sort of fucking idiot would want to start a family with someone like that

SaggyNaggy Fri 07-Oct-16 13:28:51

Do you believe people can never change?
This is an interesting point.

But, from my view, no, I think that if someone finds spcertain things sexually appealing, they can't ever change them. I do t care whether its women with big breasts, men with a six pack, albinos dressed as Hitler, its not seomething you have an active and conscious choice over.

I believe that if this piece of human detritus finds the sickest images of children being abused to be sexually appealing, he will always find the sexually appealing.

In an ideal world, there would be no need for forced sterilization or such methods, in an ideal world these sick fuckers wouldn't exist and those that did would be shunned as the filth and scum that they are.

ayeokthen Fri 07-Oct-16 13:29:08

But no, I do not believe that people have no right to redemption and to moving on
Generally I'd agree with you, but the risks of a paedophile being given free access to vulnerable children is just way too high a risk. What the hell is his wife thinking?

RedHelenB Fri 07-Oct-16 13:29:40

Given that most paedophiles have also been abused as children I think there should be more work done with them as children to hopefully avoid this spiral of abuse.

Certainly SS should be involved when they do have children amd I think often are.

MaryTheCanary Fri 07-Oct-16 13:33:18

If a woman chose to have children with a known pedophile, continuing to live with him and have contact, surely there would be a case for social services intervening?

Re previous poster: my understanding is that pedophilia cannot be cured. I don't think pedophiles are the devil incarnate--I think they have a condition they cannot control. But they are still a threat to children.

viques Fri 07-Oct-16 13:33:38

I wonder how old the wife is. Maybe she is the one desperate for a child (though how sad that she has set her sights so low). If it was him desperate to start a family then frankly I see no reason why he should not have served a prison sentence before he kindly donated his dna to the human race's legacy.

Sparklesilverglitter Fri 07-Oct-16 13:33:49

do you believe people can never change? I believe that you can never change the way a paedophile thinks, they are sexually attracted to child ffs nothing is going to change that.

I would also question the sanity of any women that wanted to have a child with somebody that views children as a sexual object.

It's NOT right people like him have the "right" to have children but that's the fucked up world we live in

MaryTheCanary Fri 07-Oct-16 13:34:13

Sorry, I meant JohnnyMcGrathSaysFuckOff , not the poster before me.

DixieNormas Fri 07-Oct-16 13:35:58

I know someone who had their dc removed because they refused to leave a man like this.

The same man went on to have a child with someone I was at school with didn't know at the time she had ss turn up on the door step and the choice of giving up him or the child, she had no idea until that point that he was on the sex offenders register.

I also know someone else who didn't know her new bf was on the sor, she had a young dd. He murdered the women one night when she was trying to leave him.

No I don't think they should ever have access to children or to have a normal family life. I don't care how many times they say they are cured

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now