TW child SA!! Name these people?

[Trulyme]

Trigger warning!!
Child sexual abuse/rape.

I have been reading the following news article and it’s absolutely vile!

Any peadophilia is awful but it makes it feel somehow worse when a parent, who is meant to protect their child, is the one abusing them/facilitating it.

Fortunately, it sounds as though this little girl wasn’t physically harmed and they were caught before any physical contact took place.

But AIBU to think that the mum and her lover should be named and shamed?

I understand that the child’s identity needs protecting but these people are horrific and not being named is protecting them.

Why should they get to have an easy life and pretend to have been sent to prison for something else, when they are the awful human beings.

What to you think?
Should they be named and shamed or is it right that their names aren’t given to protect the child?

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/mum-planned-drug-daughter-aged-9282295?utm_source=cornwall_live_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Cornwall+Live+-+Truro+Live+Newsletter_newsletter&utm_content=&utm_term=&ruid=805772e0-79b8-496a-abb0-3f10b9b8f07c

Spelt incorrectly!

I don’t care about being politically correct to people like that, especially when I’m not at work.
I’m not sure why you would either.

It's not about being politically correct. You talked about your job, when you do that you should be professional. If it's a personal issue, don't mention your employment.

'Peado' means referring to children. It's meaningless to call sex offenders this linguistically and is probably only in circulation now because the tabloids needed to compress headlines.

And no, you don't 'shame' offenders at the expense of the child's privacy and welfare.

You have absolutely no need to know these people’s names, and I cannot believe you have worked in a prison.

You don't seem to be accepting that the child needs protecting.

I agree with PP that if you are a prison officer I would be quite concerned

True @VestibuleVirgin

I also know that 'worked in...' typically means '...as an admin/cleaner/plumber' thank goodness.

I think you should calm down and stop with all the ! It trivialises something very serious.

Perpetrators are not named if it means the victims are named. End of. So you're contradicting yourself there.

This post is just very concerning. I wonder what your true motivation and experience is.

So what would be the benefit of outing this child to the general public? How would that be better than only people close to the family knowing?

Firstly, I’m dyslexic and do get spellings wrong and my predictive text doesn’t recognise your way of spelling - my apologies.

Secondly, I think the fact that you think grown adults who rape children can be rehabilitated is pretty sick tbh.

I have worked with many men who have done some very bad things, many of which can be rehabilitated and not reoffend if the proper support is put in place.

Paedophiles are not these men.

The reoffending rate for them is massive, because simply put they don’t care because they don’t see what they’ve done is wrong and many will continue to still actively find children, even when serving sentences.

I worry what type of poster you are if you are defending the actions of a paedophile and feeling sorry for them because I’m apparently not treating them with enough respect.

At work, I was always professional and I always tried not to think about what they may or may not have done.

But if you worked with child killers, rapists and most importantly paedos who have absolutely no remorse for their crimes and still get off on it with the other paedos on the wings, then you would be sat right next to me whilst the guillotine fell.

You are wrong. It is spelt paedophile

This has made me so angry reading that story. Vile cunts. My blood is boiling. I Couldn't imagine growing up knowing you was "lucky" you didn't get abused as a child that your own mum arranged, rather than it happening. Either way that little girls life is ruined. That's life altering information to know one day.
Nasty bastards.

@Trulyme you have a remarkable gift of digging the hole deeper each time you post. It’s quite something.

Huh??

I only used 1 ! lol

Apart from in the title and first sentence where I used 2 because it was a TW and I didn’t want anyone reading it who may be upset over it.

I’m not sure why that is being over the top or trivialising it, as every thread I’ve seen with a TW uses !! so I did the same.

But my main text only uses 1 exclamation mark.

There are five ! In the title and OP. None are necessary.

I agree!

Thank you for being so outraged.
It seems some posters are more concerned with the feelings of the man who planned to rape a child, than the poor child herself.

Its one thing to be abused, but knowing your mum facilitated it and that she was getting off on it too is beyond comprehension.

I also judge paedophiles quite harshly. I’ll try to think more kindly about them in future.

But if you worked with child killers, rapists and most importantly paedos who have absolutely no remorse for their crimes and still get off on it with the other paedos on the wings, then you would be sat right next to me whilst the guillotine fell.

I have worked with rapists, murderers and others.

The only thing that mattered to me was reducing offending and reoffending. You're right that the recidivism rate for sex offences is high. You're right that rehabilitation is not possible in many cases. You're completely wrong that 'name and shame' helps in any way. The offenders just go off the grid and they become more dangerous to more vulnerable children.

If you want blood more than you want to address reoffending, that's your problem.

Nobody is defending them - you asked if they should be named and categorically every reply has told you how damaging that would be to the child.

The fact that you have worked in prisons and don't realise this of your own accord is baffling

My apologies.

Whenever I have read a TW thread they use exclamation marks.

I think if you’ve read the OP and know what this thread is about, then you wouldn’t give a shit how many exclamation marks I used.

It’s quite shocking how I’ve been pulled up on my use of exclamation marks, my spelling and the fact I wasn’t being politically correct about a paedo, when discussing child rape.

It’s quite sickening actually.

You are totally missing the point of your own initial post.

The issue with posters like OP is that their only defence against proper, thought out, data-driven measures is to say, "LOOK YOU LOVE PEADOS". Then we spend all out time telling people the obvious, that of course we believe sex offending is bad, rather than talking about the actual issues: male violence, poverty, lack of treatment for survivors of CSA, lack of resources for parents and children, policing and the Courts.

Thankfully the UK is one of the safest places to be a child.

No I’m not.

The point of my initial post was a discussion on whether these people staying anonymous is fair, knowing they’d have an easier life/sentence.

Some posters have given their opinion about my initial post, of which I’m grateful for because that’s what a discussion is meant to be about.

Yet some posters care more about my spelling, grammar or the fact I’m not being politically correct, which I’m absolutely floored by.

It's all about child rape. Your over use of ! and spelling etc just trivialises it and it is because I do care about the seriousness that I am pointing out your trivialisation.

I’ve worked in prisons where many peados say they’re in for something completely different and hardly anyone on the inside or outside knows and it really frustrates me that they get the protection like that.

I also work in prisons and find this attitude aplenty
I'm a healthcare provider and I think you'll find OP we call them VP's and yes believe it or not they are vulnerable

When people advocate for trampling roughshod over the rights and safety of victims, it's hard to believe that their "anti paedophilia" stance really comes from a place of caring about children.