TW / Are convicted rapists allowed to keep their children?

[petitetiti]

A convicted rapist has served his time and is then released. He is on the Sex Offender's Register and has to register with the police etc. What happens if he is in a relationship and has a child with his partner? Does SS remove the child immediately?

Not a lived experience in any way, just curious about what the law says.

I imagine it's very common when men are released from prison that they quickly get a woman pregnant. It ensures they'll have somewhere to live.

Tbf in the case referred to, he was deported to the UK in 2010 after completing his sentence. It has been reported he was living locally to her in London, and working as a laborer when he met her in 2016.

I'm sorry for the dad and while I believe in 2nd chances I could not get with someone who has committed such a crime before.

However don't all parents fight to keep their kids? I somehow feel that society has led them to take the decisions they took, however stupid it was.

There are too many variables to say one way or the other. It would depend on the circumstances of the rape, when and where it happened etc, what country he was sentenced in, the age of the victim, whether it was his only offence, etc.

Also bear in mind that someone who has committed a violent or sexual crime towards an adult may have zero inclination to harm children. Plenty of people who have done jail time for things like GBH are allowed to keep their kids because their offending hasn’t ever been directed towards their children or partner. So it’s possible that someone who raped an adult woman might not be deemed a risk to their own child.

Obviously we all find rape an utterly abhorrent crime and I think most of us wouldn’t want a convicted rapist anywhere near our child, regardless of what the actual level of risk would be. But I think a court would just look at the actual, material risk to the child - which might actually be very low.

In the case I assume you’re talking about, I suspect that concerns about the risk to the child(ren) were probably related to other factors, rather than (or as well as?) the father’s conviction. There were a lot of clues in the initial media coverage when the couple went on the run. But obviously that kind of reporting quite rightly has to stop once someone has been charged, to avoid prejudicing the trial.

Not convicted rapist, but family court judge determined in a fact-find that the father raped the mother, but still granted unlimited access to DC as it was considered it doesn't pose a risk to them.