The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Vigilantes versus pedophiles - our community shame > Comments

Vigilantes versus pedophiles - our community shame : Comments

By Barbara Biggs, published 15/2/2005

Barbara Biggs argues that we need education to prevent child sex abuse, not vigilantes.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
fergusson refused to take part in any treatment fo pedophilia whilst in gaol, that should have kept him in confinement until he agreed to undergo treatment. As regards stupid judges, change the law and take sentencing out of their jurisdiction, have a minimum penalty. Yes try to change them if they are agreeable, but I consider it much more vital to treat, counsel, and help the victims. A part of a child molesters sentence should be that he/she pays for their victims treatment how ever long it takes and pay large damages, even if it takes all their money and, if they have one, their homes and cars.
By the way vigilanties are totally evil and completely wrong and should be stamped on very hard.
Regards, numbat
Posted by numbat, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 3:12:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A strawman (actual of contrived) can always avoid monetary penalties.

Helping victims is vital. Helping them before they become victims is more vital. Addressing the social and personal drivers of offenders will go a long way to stopping it before it happens.

There is a serious problem today. It is the overt sexualisation of humanity from a very young age. Sex sells and there seems to be no restraint in how and to whom the message is targeted. When parents dress their kids (or allow them to dress) like a street walker dressed 20 years ago, that is evidence of a deep malaise pervading society. That is offered merely as an example of a possible cause that might be addressed .

Failing the validity of that direction we can just castrate them, jail them, then tag them for life on release. Or better still, do a Clockwork Orange type experiment to assess the susceptibility of all males and 'adjust' them accordingly. That should make for a pleasant world in which to live.
Posted by trade215, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 3:46:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is really hard to make an honest call about the actions of those who have chased Dennis Ferguson out of their streets.

Like it or not our legal system has released Ferguson from custody, he has to live somewhere. In that respect any interfence with lawful activity on his part is wrong.

I have a child and based on what I have seen of Ferguson's behaviour I would be very distressed if I discoved he was living in my neighbourhood.

The dilema can be expressed in the following two questions.
Who wants a world where people take the law into their own hands?
Who is willing to have their children play in a street where Ferguson is likely to be?

On a different aspect of the overall topic.
Can someone provide clarification on the statistics of Child Sexual abuse?

It is my understanding that child sexual abuse accounts for about 7% of Substantiated Abuse and Neglect in Queensland (http://www.abusedchildtrust.com.au/content/child_abuse_2.asp#) with the overall rate of substantiated abuse and neglect being between 13.6 and 25.1 per 1000 children.

Some commentators suggest that one in 6 children are sexually abused. Barbara Biggs refers to comments by Bill Glaser suggesting one in four girls and one in seven boys are sexually abused as children.

Are the measures of what constitutes child sexual abuse different for different commentators or am I misunderstanding the stats?

Also does anybody know the breakdown of perpetrator gender (and the type of abuse involved)? I have seen claims that about 30% of child sexual abuse is committed by females but debate in Australia rarely touches on that topic (other than different sentencing approach for male and female abusers). An example of the type of twist in the statistics which makes the whole issue difficult is - how do we compare the harm done by a group of people sharing photo's of children taken without the childs knowledge to a teacher having a sexual relationship with a student. One has more perpetrators, the other is likley to have a much greater impact on the victim. Both are wrong.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 5:10:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trade215 a bit harsh I think. I am not sure if I agree that there is a correlation between dress standards and sexual abuse. If that was the case the incidents of child sexual abuse would be higher in primitive societies (Highland Papua & New Guinea, the Amazon Jungle) where concealment of the flesh is minimal, and lower in societies where clothing is prevalent (Russia, North America). I note your reference to the close correlation between the animal world and the human one (2 Feb 05) but I am not aware of any epidemic of sexual abuse in the animal world notwithstanding their inherent 24/7 nakedness. Or am I missing the point here?
Posted by Bob B, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 7:28:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Robert,
I would agree that the term “abuse” can be so broadly used, as to include almost anything. However within substantiated cases of child abuse, sexual abuse is normally the least common in terms of incidence, as compared to physical abuse, neglect, and emotional abuse.

From various statistics I have seen, then the list of what constitutes the most dangerous environment for a child would be as follows:-

To be within the womb of a single female.
To be living in a single female parent family.
To be living in a family with a natural mother and stepfather.
To be living with a natural father and stepmother.
To be living in a family with both a natural father and natural mother.
Posted by Timkins, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 7:32:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Where does one start ???? There are some very important aspects to this problem which should be addressed. The most important one is the cause, not the symptom.

~~~

Around this country and in the UK sentences are routinely being suspended because judges say children are “willing” if they don’t resist their abusers. Such sentences show a chronic lack of understanding about the emotional manipulation of abusers and the subsequent long-term damage of that on victims’ lives. When the judicial system fails the community, are we surprised that the effect is to further inflame some people to take matters into their own hands?

~~~

One problem is that the 'long term damage' is arguable. By that, I mean NAMBLA is continually trying to lobby and show just such a position. The post testimonies on their web sites from people who HAVE had such experiences and who view them as positive helpful things. So, perhaps its time to appeal to principle rather than particular manifestations and outcomes. One wonders why the age of consent in Mexico is 13 as it is in Japan.It USED to be 12 in Australia during the early years.

and from Trade215...

"Helping victims is vital. Helping them before they become victims is more vital. Addressing the social and personal drivers of offenders will go a long way to stopping it before it happens."

Amen to that ! but now, look at the obstacles.

1/ Victorian and West Australian crimes act allows for the possibility of an older man being married to a girl down to the age of 10 ! (section 47)
2/ Groups like NAMBLA are gaining momentum and telling us all that concentual sexual conduct between older men and little boys can be a positive influence. !
3/ Gay groups are trying to lower the age of consent. (for homosexual behavior, where it differs from that for heterosexual, but I believe in time there will be pressure for all ages of consent to be lowered.)

The fundamental problem is cultural/spiritual. The moral relativity is manifesting itself in all manner of ways, from the point raised by Trade (The sexualization of our youth from a young age..sex sells) to those who try to persuade us that old/young sexual contact is not harmful. It seems to me, that the time is well past to have some reference to Biblical principle for our society. Without such a social/spritual anchor, we will just drift.. and drift.. subject to the forces with the most momentum.

Ask yourself this, what is the difference between sexual intercourse with a girl aged 15 yrs and 11 months and 25days, and one who is about one week older ? The age of consent in South Australia is 17.
Vic 16, is this based on any concept of 'damage' ? hardly. The point is, that the law itself is arbitrary and is the result of community pressure in either direction. So, today it is 16, tomorrow it could be 18 or 12. Hence, my urging to base such laws on Biblical principle rather than relativistic secular law. The idea that such secular laws are based on 'sound scientific research' is laughable. If they were, then the age of consent would all be the same.

There are those who would argue that 'abuse' is harmful, while consentual sexual involvement is not. (NAMBLA) This group is appealing more and more to findings of the APA (American psychological association) and to cultural/historical icons such as Walt Wittman to promote their man boy love agenda.

When our own laws seem to imply that consentual acts between adults and children (crimes act) are 'OK' as long as they have 'reasonable grounds for believing they are married'... and therefore not damaging to children, we face an uphill battle to change entrenched statutory and scientific barriers.

Throwing money at 'perpetrators' or at victims via a help line might seem like a good thing, but it reminds me more of knee jerk "we have to do SOMEthing.. 'gun control' being the answer to the heart condition which actually caused the violence in the first place. "If not a gun, then a baseball bat".

Without question, a culture which has a firm spiritual foundation will outlast one which does not. No civilization has outlived its own decadence, or spiritual waywardness, and that, we have plenty of today. I don't think I need to 'sugar coat' this probably bitter pill. The evidence is staring us in the face all around.
If John the Baptist were here now, his message would be the same 'Repent'. I'm sure Jesus would not modify his message just because it was not compatable to MTV
"If anyone leads one of these little ones who believe in me to go astray, it would be better for him to have a millstone around his neck and be caste into hades".

I find it hard to understand why Priests who KNOW this, would do what they did.

So, perhaps we need a visit from John, to wander through our parliament and our media outlets.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 7:46:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy