I want to use Sarah's Law on my neighbour, despite never having spoken to him... AIBU?

[Throwaway1980]

Hi there,

Throwaway account.

I was sexually assaulted as a child (I use 'assault' rather than 'abuse' as it happened once). I've sought appropriate therapy, and live my life quite 'normally'.

I do, however, have really good instincts for when I meet a potential child abuser. There have been a couple of times I've got a bad feeling about someone, for it to be proved right at a later stage.

I get this feeling VERY infrequently, probably six times in total over the course of 35 years (three times the person was later shown to be a sexual predator, the other three were people I only met in passing).

I'm not saying I'm some kind of psychic, or have any special skills, just that I have a heightened awareness of the way some adults look at children.

We got new neighbours last week, and I got that feeling about the guy moving-in.

I have two DDs (5 years and 2.5 years) and live with them and my husband.

The new neighbours are at the front of the house, so do not overlook our garden, they are directly opposite so have full view into our living room.

This guy has done literally nothing to make me suspect him, other than the way he inspected my children on our way into the house.

I don't know the logistics of invoking Sarah's Law, whether as a near-neighbour my request would be considered valid. And I don't know if I'm being unduly harsh.

AIBU? Maybe. I really don't know.

How likely are you to send your child into his house unaccompanied given you feel uneasy about him? Or allow him to babysit? You wouldn't would you. So no danger.

The police would laugh at you. Sarah’s law is to run a check on a partner or family member or someone who has contact with your children .I’m sure the police can not run a check on someone who has no contact with your children at all. I think you are just being paranoid.

What could/would happen if you were given information about previous convictions (which I don't think you would be)? All you could do would to be cautious about his contact with your children, not give him too much information about your children, not let him into the house unless for a specific purpose, and not leave him alone with your children, ever. All things that I hope you would do any way, and boundaries that we should have with any new person in our community.

I don't think you are wrong to trust your instincts, and to be guided by them, but I cannot think of an occasion where I would give any new neighbour (male or female) access to my children. Of course if you have evidence of him watching them for any length of time, recording them in any way etc, that would be entirely different.

Things like this always reminds me of the people who confused the word paediatrician with paedophile and pretty much ruined someone's life

www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society

Not saying I wouldn't feel the same but people need to be so cautious with these things - pointing an inaccurate finger could destroy someone's life. As said above, if you and your children are following safety guidelines, your child wouldn't be alone with any individual whom you don't trust and therefore would not be at risk.

If the police did a check and confirmed that the man had a history of abusing children, what then?

Do you stop your children leaving the house so he can't look at them? Do do put bars up at all your doors and windows? Do you move? Doesn't help because you have no way of knowing if any of your new neighbours are paedophiles. Ask him to move? That would obviously be ridiculous. So what would you do, given this info?

I agree with Lovemusic33

@AudTheDeepMinded not what I said

My understanding of Sarah’s Law is that it can only be used where the adult in question has contact with or access to a child. I don’t know if being a neighbour counts as ‘having access to’ or ‘having contact with’ a child.

Seems odd though, because the existence of this right wouldn’t have prevented Sarah Payne’s murder (given that Roy Whiting didn’t have ‘access’ to her, he just lived in the area).

Genuine question - what would you do differently with the information?
You have a bad feeling / gut reaction to this person and would therefore be unlikely to spend any time with them nor leave your children unsupervised.

If your suspicions were proven true what additional steps would you take? Move house etc?
I don’t think you’re entitled to the information but realistically even if you were, you’re going to use the same precautions.
If the results came back clear, you’re still not going to send your kids off to his house for visits, so what is the difference in knowing or not knowing?

spidey senses

Really?

Sometimes we just don't like somebody. It definitely happened to me. I really took against a doctor I used to see and would grumble about how she'd spoken to me/treated me all the way home after an appointment.
Eventually DP, who had up until then listened to my moans, saw her when she called me in for an appointment.
Afterwards he said, "You do realise she looks a bit like X, don't you?". X being someone I'd worked with and loathed (for good reason).
Thinking back, she hadn't been unreasonable but my hackles were raised due to the resemblance.

I think it's far more likely that our brains make these sort of connections and that "spidey senses" are something from a film that is fiction. Ffs.

I was trying not to say "Ffs".

But really. "spidey senses". Ffs.

Don't let NDN man babysit. Keep an eye on your children. They'll probably be ok.
Y might be being a bit U to use Sarah's Law.

@Buddytheelf85 it’s not really odd. Sarah’s law was rejected in the form that her mother requested. Disclosures are given if children are in close contact with paedophiles. The reason being was it would just lead to vigilantism as mentioned by pp- the case of the paediatrician

You don't always need to use Sarah's law to find that out. There are websites that have databases that you can look through.

i don't know the specifics of the law but i don't think it is unreasonable for the OP to wonder about it, even if it turns out she can't use it. i work in an area dealing with safeguarding of children and it has lead me to believe that as a society and as individuals we err too much towards not being suspicious enough. we make it difficult (and indeed sometimes even shameful) for the person raising suspicions.

sure, take sensible precautions about curtains and not using him as a babysitter. but what is not being taken into account here is how trusting young children can be and how the sheer fact that they see a neighbour's face frequently can be enough to make them think they know this person and that they would be safe with them. predators that groom parents and their children often start by having an "in" that makes them familiar.

Lovemusic33 that's a bit harsh, I don't think the police would laugh at someone who has been abused as a child and it naturally wanting to protect her own children from that horror. She might be paranoid but she also might be right and instincts are there for a reason. I think Sarah's Law won't apply but let's please be kind to someone who's suffered trauma eh?

Not laugh at the fact she was abused, I’m sure I didn’t say that. I’m sure they get a lot of people coming in and asking to run checks on random people.

Yes there are sex offenders living all over the place, there are also a lot that have never been caught. The ones that are on the register have served their time and have been allowed to live in the community. What would happen if OP did find out he was an offender? Probably tell everyone and he would be moved on to another community for someone else to worry about? If he doesn’t have any contact with children then why worry? Just don’t let your kids go over to his house (which I’m sure you wouldn’t anyway).

He doesn't have any contact with your children, definitely not unsupervised so I don't think you'd be entitled to a disclosure op. Not saying you're wrong but you're unlikely to be told anything by the police.

Christ, the 'Spidey Senses' trope again. It's just this kind of crap that ended with men being lynched in the US because of rumours, or they 'looked funny' (ie black).

'Spidey Senses' = prejudice

I don’t think this is ever a waste of police time. I’d much rather their focus was on protecting our children than policing Twitter.

I was sexually assaulted in my early twenties by a Pakistani man. For many years I did not feel particularly affected by it. Had no issues around men. Felt fine.

Then one day I was at work and given a new male supervisor. Everytime this guy stood near me I felt physically sick and really anxious. I spent the entire time moving away as soon as he close. I was extremely uncomfortable. I told myself that it was because he was constantly leering over all the women in the gig we were managing. But then I often find myself in male dominated environments and am quite used to that sort of laddish pub behaviour, plus my other colleagues were being dicks and doing the same.

In the end I was asked to work with someone else. And the sick feeling vanished.

For days afterwards I questioned was he just a creep and I got weirdo vibes?

Then I realised, somehow since the assault, I had never had worked in close proximity with a man of Pakistani/Asian origin, especially in a role where they had supervisory 'power' and authority over me.

I realised I was literally projecting my past experience onto the guy. After that day I realised I did still have issues and actually did get therapy.

I would say you are suffering from hyper-vigilence, which is very understandable. The sympathetic nervous system literally reacts to these things that the unconscious brain lists as 'threats'. There are things about your assault that you consciously remember, and things you don't but your brain does. It could be a smell, type of shirt the person wears, the way they smile, their hair cut.

Not saying you're wrong to be mindful of the risks, and im not saying ignore your instincts entirely, but you are reinforcing the messages of alarm you're getting from yourself instead of challenging them and trying to put them in perspective.

Personally I say, if I know or suspect someone I feel safer. My assailant was Mr Wonderful. It's the ones you don't know you ought to be wary of.

What's so creepy/dangerous about OP wanting to know if there are predators around?

I didn't say that was creepy.

What's creepy is casting someone as a child abuser based on a few glances. Imagine if your son or husband was subjected to someone's "spidey senses", imagine the potential damage that could be caused to an innocent man and his family, even by the suspicion. Imagine if the suspicion was picked up by the wrong person who might take it the wrong way - all hell could break loose. Imagine the tension and distrust that might exist between neighbours for no reason other than one person's neurotic paranoia.

Why can't people just have some common human decency and wait til they've actually talked to people and seen evidence of something before suggesting they might be capable of committing some of the worst crimes imaginable?

No-one has spidey senses about sexual predators and it's utterly puerile and dangerous to suggest they do. Some of the posts backing the OP in this thread are abhorrent.

There is no point making an application. It will not change anything. You have a 'bad feeling' about this person, and you are not planning on allowing them access to your children.

The police wouldn't disclose anything under these circumstances, quite rightly.

What would you hope to gain from making an application?

OP YABU. You know nothing about this man and as much has it is awful that you are a sexual assault victim, it may be making you quite paranoid. Please leave your NDN alone and do not waste police resources on a paranoid feeling. He doesn't have access to your DC so you have no reason to be suspicious.

YABU.
Maybe the guy has a 'creepy' feeling about you? It's ridiculous. He doesn't even have access to your children.

I don’t think you should do anything more than keep an eye on him. What harm can he do your children? They’re too young to be playing alone outside. Be open minded - he might be a totally nice guy - but listen to your instincts, there’s nothing more you can do.

They googling their names and doing a bit of online research and you may turn up something

Sorry to hear what happened to you, I completely understand why you’d be over cautious. This man could just be interested in your family set up wondering who he will be neighbours to, perhaps your children looked like a relative/friends child, there are many reasons he looked at them and not necessarily malicious. The best thing you can do is make it impossible for them to look into your house and keep your distance. It’s unlikely police would provide you any information and it wouldn’t be fair to label him without facts. Your instinct could be right in this case too but without proof I’d drop it and not let it play on your mind, he has no access to your children they’re safe.