to think steralisation should be enforced

[claw3]

on anyone who abuses children?

As i said earlier intended as i dont want to fight totally appropriate as it seems a few people seem to consider their opinion and intelligence superior and do want to fight.

Lets leave it there, shall we ladies, everyone is entitled to their opinion, whether you feel right or wrong

i was hoping you would answer my question ...

i think also when you post on an open forum, you have to be preapred to take a bit of flak, especially on such an emotive subject, when you post a potentially divisive thread title

as I said
Passive aggressive

It doesn't temper what you are saying to put a smiley face on the end does it?

In fact it's a bit cowardly. Have the courage of your convictions. Don't try and dilute what you are saying with wet little smiley faces.

I think perpetrators should have their benefits removed for life at the very least if they are on benefits..they should lose the luxury of being cared for by the state..unless it's on HMS

Lulumama - sorry missed your question, pages not refreshing quickly enough!

(will not bother with in future, so as not to offend sensitive types)

The fact of the matter is that the mother of Baby P, and any other woman who abused her children (and convicted) would have any future children taken away from her at birth.

So, any children would be protected.

Then it's just a vengence issue.

and then rebel, they have to steal and break the law further to live..

claw3, this was my question

By lulumama on Mon 17-Nov-08 12:20:47
but claw, what would society would we be if we could forcibly aneasthatise and sterilise people? where does it end? do you want to live in a fascist state? that would have huge implications for us all, law abiding or not

Oh Countess, stop being so petty, grow up

"Actually I think what I really would like to see would be an extensive advertising/awareness campaign aimed at men."

couldn't agree more. because if recent cases have thought us anything it's that only men abuse children and women are always victims.

That's better
SO much more impact said without a smiley at the end
You actually sound like you mean it

Lula - We arrest people and imprision them against their will all the time and we are hardly becoming a fascist state because of it.

If you harm a pet, you can be imprisioned and banned from owneing another. But yet you can abuse a child and then go on to have another.

can i correct to owneing to owning before the spell check brigade turn up and point out the all so important mistake!

I don't agree with cumpulsory sterilisation but I do think that sex offenders should be chemicslly castrated.

Excuse my spelling.

Non sexual abusers should have any children taken away from them I do agree and they should be heavily monitored when they get involved of a new family with children etc.

I also think that Mark's Law should be brought into force and we should find out if there any sex offenders in the area.

But if you do go on to have another child, and have a histort of harming children, then SS will be watching you very carefully. In some cases, newborns are taken straight from their mother into foster homes because SS have decided the risk is too great. That protects them.

But I don't think that protecting children is really what you're after "i dont believe a prison sentence is enough" - enough for what? I think this is about making them suffer, not about making them less likely to re-offend, or protecting children.

You want them to be hurt for what they have done.

Claw you actually make a very good point about the animals.

You can be sentenced for abusing an animal and can't get another yet you can abuse a child and have another?

Amum I think they need longer prison sentences and they need to make prison tougher IE no games, luxuries, or isolation to protect the 'vulnerable'.

I also believe that for any other childrens sakes they do need to be watched for the rest of their lives, we should be informed of those near us and I say that because I truly believe that would protect our children.

mamadiva you really seem overly obsessed about this, doesn't it make you feel a bit depressed? (genuine question not being nasty)

Muminscot - enough as in to stop re-offending. How many chances are these people entitled to?

We all know how unefficient SS can be.

So, mamadiva, you'd like them to be beaten up by other prisoners while they're inside then? How will that protect children?

Amuminscot - I would love to hear that baby p's dad for example, got a good beating!

Violence doesnt solve anything, wouldnt help to protect children or anything else etc, etc

Just to give him a taste of his own medicine

I'm not obsessed by it I just find it interesting how people react when it comes to something like this.

It did make me depressed but now I realise all we can do is talk through it and try and prevent another case like it.

Why dwell on it at the end of the day?

Of course it's sad but it needs to be spoken about.

Wouldn't bother me if they were to get beaten but to be honest even the ones in isolation get it... its innevitable nowt to do with me.

It wouldn't stop them reoffending but it would make them hurt and I think they need to know what it's like to feel that pain and terror, whilst they are inside I just dont see why they should be p[rotected if someone wants to kill them well thats none of my business.

Claw what did Baby P's dad do to deserve a beating?

Sorry should have added step

they could just scavenge ..

I honestly do not believe that forcible sterilisation would protect children from abusers. If someone is deliberately abusing children, they will seek them out. If they are abusing because of drink or drugs, or because they can't control their anger, they will still find themselves in situations where they are with children, and there will still be a risk.

The things which will reduce this kind of behaviour are proper rehabilitation, psychiatric help, drink and drugs programs. Our prisons are already at bursting point, keeping more people locked up for longer is not improving things. Instead we should be investing in programs which actually make a difference to peoples behaviour.

If someone is sent to prison for child abuse, they should be given as much help as possible to sort out whatever their issues are which make them behave that way. When they get out, yes they should be supervised if they are in contact with children, but they should also be helped to develop better parenting and relationship skills. If they are seen to be at risk of reoffending then they need to be given more help, with the threat of being separated from the family or sent back to prison to give them an incentive.