info about paedophiles living in an area to become available

[zippitippitoes]

...local pilot in somerset

not specific info but general

here

I just hope it is accurate.

I don't get the crb type check for a partner for single parents either

just can't see these things in practice

I fail to understand how this new legislation will save children. If I knew there was a sex offender living on the street I would not look after my children any differently I would just be more paranoid and worried that it would attract mindless vigilantism - especially as the offender isn't specifically named so innocent people could be targeted mistakenly. Children are more in danger from people they know family members etc. than strangers and this law will not protect them from this - in fact people could be distracted by the 'bogeyman' down the street instead of looking closer to home.

It is far from a black and white issue - but I would much prefer a proper supervision of sex offenders in the community by the police and probation service.

I want my children to be safe but I don't want them to live in a paranoid world where every stranger is a potential threat.

I'm with Barnados, though the motives of the NSPCC are suspect.
A basic axiom of security is that obscurity doesn't work. But scrutiny of a system will illuminate it's defects.
As littlelapin points out, this information won't help avoid them directly but will highlight the way the council policies concentrate paedos in areas with lots of kids in them It will draw people's attention to just how many of these people are let loose in our communities.

But the scandal is not where exactly where they live, it is that they are in the community at all. Thus I agree that the same principle applies to other crimes. These people are let off then sentences because it is cheaper and more convenient to do so. When they re-offend the people who let them out don't even got told about it, much less blamed.

It won't work.
Some government or council officials will make hideous mistakes, and innocent people will end up having their houses attacked by screaming hoardes.

I dimly recall some limitation about living near schools but I can't for the life of me see why that matters.
They aren't monitored and since 95% of homes in Britain are within a couple of miles of a school, they can simply walk, or if you have a lazy paedo, drive.
Only a tiny % of offences are associated with school journeys.

No solution based upon distance is remotely useful, it's just a fake "concession" by those who are happy to let known sex offenders out to do it again. That's a big group, no doubt some of them will be along shortly to tell us how "inhumane" it is to keep them locked up permanently.
The government's position is even worse than fake liberlas. They don't want to annoy the prison officers association the last old style union, and of course it looks cheaper to have them reoffend than to keep them locked up.

Won't work in our culture. Too many pitchforks and ignorant people shouting "hang the nonce!"

Isn't most abuse carried out by people known to or within families already?

Anyone see the statistic that 53% of children in India are abused by family members?

I don't think this is a good idea because of the risks posed by so-called "vigilantes". It would also put the children of sex offenders at risk.

"Some government or council officials will make hideous mistakes"

They don't need to, the media will do it for tghem. Remember the paediatrician who had her front door kicked in by a mob of News of the World readers?

wondered if there would be a thread about this. it is a stupid idea imho, for all the reasons listed above, but most of all because people who abuse kids are usually known and trusted family/friends and are never confronted, let alone convicted (apologies if this point has already been discussed - i skimmed)

Oh god... I know people who would be absolutely slavering if they had information saying that a paedophile was living anywhere near them.

All single men would be suspect. All men who "looked funny" would be suspect. God forbid you were a man who'd just moved into the area - license to get your house burnt down.

So if you find out that a paedophile lives on your child's route to school, what will you do?

The risk of a child being abused under these circumstances is virtually nil.

It is tens of thousands times more likely that a child will be abused by someone in their family.

Abuse from within the family is not only much more likely it is also much more damaging as the abuser has a relationship of trust with the child.

Just saw this on Channel 4 News. What a load of crap! So, they will tell you if there is a paedophile on your street, but not who, whether there are any on your child's school route, but not where and whether there are any living around school playgrounds. More of the usual ill-thought, tokenism that this government goes in for. It makes my blood boil!

A large proportion of men in probation hostels are paedophiles and sex offenders. In all major cities there are several such hostels yet they're never mentioned. One I used to work in was between a church and a primary school.

If a report showed that your next door neighbour was a peadophile what would you do? never let your kid out the house? move? make his life so misereable he moved?

then you found out that a few doors along was another, and another....there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of peadophiles in this country.

some are managing their illness very well and pose no danger to any of our children, if they were exposed to the ignorant vigilante aspect of our communities they would be driven underground and could fall outside of treatment centres and therefore pose a greater risk to your children.

such a scheme has no plus side, knowing where a peadophile lives will not prevent him from having thoughts about children.

I agree with Hunker and a few years ago I would have been up there with the pitchfork to be honest.

Now I actually have children I think it is far more important to teach them things like, the only person who is allowed to touch your willy is you when you wash it. No one else, just you. Not mummy or daddy, just you. If your willy is sore, you might have to show the doctor blah blah.

Also never to leave my childen in a situation where it could potentially occur. I have been out twice with DH since first was born 3.5 years ago and both times, my female friend babysat, alone. I could leave them with quite a few people, but since learning that many people who I know have been abused within families/friends, I chose not to.

However, I would hate to have a known peadophile living next to me because of the 'pitchfork people'

Not sure it's a good idea to give the paranoid and stupid anything else to worry about but... there are female paedophiles, too.
Not many, but then there aren't that many paedophiles AT ALL. There aren't enough paedophiles for one to be living next to you, or you, or you....
Most people are sexually attracted to other adults, not children. And many people who are sexually attracted to children are capable of controllling their urges and, while they might write lurid fantasies, would never actually touch a child.

But UCM is right, the best way to protect your DCs is to teach them respect for their own bodies and their own boundaries. Just like you teach them road sense.

it's been scrapped..since yesterday morning? that was quick?

without even doing the pilot scheme what changed their minds?

found a reference to it

here

hopefully it won't happen then

Has it been scrapped?
i hope so it was totally unworkable.
It would have led to innocetn peopel being suspected becaue they lived in a certain street.
Bloody crazy idea.
Typical knee jerk reaction form the govt, another ill thought out policy designed to win votes from middle england.
If sex offenders are in the community sore money should be invested in their monitoring.
A monthly home visit isn't really going to stop them.

I think premature rather than scrapped, apparently who knows

this general thing of the news being more about speculation rather than facts irritating

I'm so glad this was scrapped. Totally ill-thought out and knee-jerk imo.

Did anyone see the comment from one of the MPs who has pushed it? He said something like 'nobody is better able to look out for children than their parents and grandparents' as a reason for giving out the information - well yes, but that's totally ignoring the fact that nobody is more likely to abuse children either than their family and friends .