While a case can be made it is unfair to inflict the ongoing stigma of registration on past offenders, as this constitutes a retrospective punishment in addition to that already prescribed at the time of the offence, anyone who commits such a crime now that registration is a likely and forseeable consequence, has nothing to complain about other than to argue it's too harsh - which is a completely different issue.

Even given the above, why on Earth would we want to risk our innocent childrens rights so fundamentally, for the sake of giving evil people a second chance. Such thinking is popular with those who don't have children.

If an adult man ever thought it was ok to play with himself in front of school children, then 10 years on the register is a soft outcome in my book. The statistical chance of him being a repeat or a later more serious offender may be low, but it would never be low enough for me to be happy to have him move into my neighbourhood anonomously.

People who think puting these people back on the streets unmonitered is such a good idea should demonstrate their faith by having them babysit their children. What, no takers?

The registry isn't about making people pay their debt to our society, it is about protecting our society, and especially the most innocent and defenseless in our society, our children. I have no time for anyone who would compromise that to uphold the rights of child molesters and rapists. This writer should get his priorities straight.

Personally I believe that not only should these monsters be registered, but should have a chip implanted in the body so their movements can be monitored by GPS. This may seem extreme, however the survivors of these inhuman beings are frightened for life.

Yes they have done their time, if they don't re-offend they have nothing to fear. The chip should be placed into the body where the offender is unable to reach it. Enough is enough too many lives have been ruined by these people to take the view that "they have served their time."

I have to disagree in the strongest possible terms with the author of this article.

As the old adage goes 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure'.

One only has to experience the trauma - both psychological and physical, that the victims of this most horrible crime have to endure for the rest of their lives to realise that society cannot do enough to ensure the safety of our most vulnerable.

Research and the grand theories are all well and good till reality arrives. Besides, try telling that to a victim and watch the reaction.

These animals have shown neither mercy nor compassion for their victims, so no argument in their defense should be even entertained.

With the highlight on current Government action in the Northern Territory I don't think now is a good time to put before the public a proposal such as this.

This is a highly emotive question that I think even the most liberal of people would find it difficult to reach consensus on. Calls are coming in from a public forced to confront the issue of sex offences to show that we, as a nation, will not tolerate sexual crimes any more. Not great timing, mate.

Like Kalin, I did a doubletake over the chummy-matey approach to the young bloke who committed a "relatively mild" offence. Relatively mild in relation to multiple rape, perhaps? However the physical trauma of rape, however brutal, is healed quite quickly - in some cases there is very little. It is the psychological trauma that causes the scars. And how can one possibly assess the psychological trauma to a child on being forced to witness something they are not ready to see?

As a small child I had a similar experience. And though in later years I endured far worse, the picture of that initial experience stays with me more vividly than anything else. In a few seconds my safe childhood world of kind, jolly male figures became a vision of this engorged, purple monstrosity; feral, rictus grin, and an unknown, unsafe dimension which entered my world, forever changing it. "Relatively mild"? From an adult who connects the naked body with pleasurable activity and who knowingly seeks titillation, maybe. From a kids point of view? Horrific.

Don't think this kite is going to fly for you just yet, mate.I am only one of many who really mean it when we say we need a society who will no longer downplay, ignore or accept sex crimes. Divide them up into "serious" and "relatively mild" for purposes of less discriminatory consequences? Nah, I'll pass on that one. Its ALL serious.

The safety of children is the issue of primary importance here. The obvious way to avoid the penalty is not to commit the crime in the first place. I know that may sound facile but the potential harm to a child is too great.
The courts have awarded millions of dollars in compensation to victims of sex abuse. It is an extremely expensive offence for many innocent people, the immediate victim who can suffer severe psychological and emotional damage and those who, as a group, end up paying psychologically, emotionally and financially.
In general double punishment is to be deplored but where there is any chance at all that we put children at risk they have to come first.

Curious though, isn't it? A stepfather in a defacto relationship can beat his son/daughter to a bloody pulp (a pretty severe form of child abuse), and although he'll go to gaol for it, he won't be chipped and hounded for the rest of his life, nor put on a register. What is so sacrosanct about physical abuse compared with sexual abuse? Or is it about projection of our own unconscious sexuality (in the Jungian sense of the "shadow") that drives this almost hysterical reponse to so-called sexual abuse. Come off it guys, a teenager masturbating in a car in front of a couple of girls just doesn't bear comparison to some of the cases that I read about daily in the newspapers, of children being bearen to near death or actual death by their so-called "carers".

Doug, All child abuse is serious, however sexual abuse creates mental illness in the survivors, whereas a beating will create van attitude problem. Both are serious crimes, and the perpertrators should recieve the harshest penalty for their crimes. The difference being a "basher" will eventually be bashed in return by his survivor, whereas a sexual assault survivor has no recourse.

Yeah, but Doug - the article isn't concerned with physical abuse. If a referendum were held tomorrow about whether the perpetrators of the crimes you mention should receive the same punishment I would be one of the first to register a "Bloody oath".

The article isn't about "so-called" sexual abuse, either. Its about sexual abuse. And those of have been tried and found guilty of such abuse.

Both physical and sexual abuse are heinous crimes - and people get "almost hysterical" over physical abuse as well.

If you sincerely question whether the reasons for this kind of response to sexual abuse are Jungian it would seem to suggest your involvement in such matters comes also simply from reading the papers.

In which case, a sincere answer to your question could be found if you were to involve yourself in any organisation that deals with the task of trying to make survivors - of any kind of abuse - into whole people again.

I feel that all sexual abuse has to be part of the human condition, how else can we explain the predatory nature of the perpetrators who wish to dominate and satisfy their own urges without any reasonable sense of purpose.
I feel that these people are sociopaths, as obviously they have no conscience. "Psychopath" would be not be appropriate terminology, as this would excuse them as having a legitimate mental condition, which they do not have.
I feel that sociopaths are part of the human condition, as they present in all areas of society, not just applying to sexual offenders, there are many types, the main common feature is their predatory nature.
To find answers and solutions to prevent or stop this curse, would just about be impossible.
I also feel that punishment should be the same for all offenders, regardless of their status, income or position in society.
These types of offenders are isolated from other prisoners, for their personal safety, this results in many of them thinking of themselves as victims, they need to be placed in their own special prison, so self confrontation maybe possible, without props being supplied by the penal system.

The responses tend to indicate that people are pretty uniform in their support for the registration of sexual predators, particularly of children.

But Doug does make a good point, and one that is worthy of more discussion. Why do we have a system which (through privacy rules/laws/government policies) grants anonymity to murderers, armed robbers, non-sexual child abusers, and general criminal scum.

Think about it. The law puts the protection of criminals ahead of the protecting the public.

Isn't that just plain backwards?

Would the world really end if everyone's criminal past, particularly any serious criminal past, were publically recorded.

People with form would find it harder to re-offend and victims (and their friends/families) would not feel betrayed by the government every time they discover the perpetrator was known to authorities.

Sure such criminals would find it harder to simply 'slip' back into regular civil life, but there is a very significant social price to be paid for offering criminals an artificial unblemished past after incarceration. I, for one, don't think it, or they, are worth it. The onus should be on such criminals to prove to society they deserve a second chance.

Greg Barns says that the chance of sex offenders reoffending is low, and assuming that this study's results are reliable, we nevertheless still have a problem.

The problem is that even psychiaters lack enough knowledge about sex offenders to unreliably predict the probability of reoffence.

Although not all sex offenders may reoffend, obviously, all repeat sex offenders were once first-time offenders while some of them would have been classified as 'low-risk'.

If there was a way we could reliably predict which of the sex offenders is likely to reoffend, then I wouldn’t hesitate to agree with Barns. But until then, it’s better to be safe than sorry.

If sex offenders don’t like the idea of being placed on a register, then perhaps they should think twice before they prey on innocent children; not until there are tests that reliably separate the high risk from the very low risk reoffenders, children should be protected at all costs.

Pedophiles and rapists who have already reoffended should be chemically castrated as an alternative to lifelong imprisonment, depending on each individual case's situation.

Doug has a good point that we need to look at the severity of (sex) crimes as well.

Astounding that suddenly many who deny absolutes now find a conscience and insist on their own absolutes. Maybe those caught up in the porn industry should also be liable to a degree as this industry continues to feed the corrupt minds of man which results in rape, child sexual abuse and every other perverted thing a person could think of.

The author is right to point out that a Community Register is pointless. I suspect most sexual abuse goes on in the homes unreported. I also suspect that step parents are far more likely to abuse than the natural parents although their always will be exceptions. The raptist/murderer who was executed (Ted Bundy) said of the numerous sex offenders he met everyone of them was into porn. It's not the locked up ones our kids and women need to be concerned with. No doubt the ones who want to selfishly indulge in porn at the expense of society will continie to defend their right to do so and then scream the loudest when children are abused.

Runner, is there even any evidence that there is a link between pornography and sex crimes? I don’t think that this link has been proven by legitimate studies. If you look at countries where porn is unavailable, there is much violence against women.
99% of people who watch porn never commit sex crimes, just as the vast majority of people who look at car magazines never go for joy rides.

I dare say that countries without obscenity laws don’t have higher rates of sex crimes than countries that have banned pornography.

It would be very undemocratic to ban porn without any valid evidence that it significantly increases sex crimes.

Runner,

Contrary to what you assert, there is no hypocrisy in supporting the rights of adults to view smut and supporting the rights of children to go unmolested.

Fundamentally, the reason sexual crimes (and virtually all crimes) are offensive, is because they involve one person interferring with another.

You, by advocating prohibitions on what consenting adults are permitted to do or look at in the privacy of their own home, are doing your own interfering.

Liberal Democracy forever!

There are already cases in the US where teenage boys who have had sex with consenual teenage girls being put on a sex offenders list.

Some have committed suicide.

Here in Australia there was a case where a 19yr old who touched the breast of a 15 yr old with her consent, was convicted of child sex abuse. Subsequently he was put on the sex offenders register and has lost his job.

Whilst it an admirable intention of protecting children from sexual abusers, sometimes thing like this develope a life of their own and goes far beyond the original intention.

For example sources inform me that there is a concerted effort to have fathers who change babies nappies charged with sexual abuse. It has already been tried in the Family court, where the mother alleged that the father sexually abuse because he cleaned the babies bottom whilst changing the nappy.

Hysteria is not rational.

Keeping the pressure on ex-cons and not offering them an equal opportunity to heal is the reason why recidivism is damn near 80% of the incarcerated. Registration lists don't actually accomplish any meaningful recourse for victims of crime or criminals. It does keep the various neighbourhoods in a constant state of disquiet. The average city dweller can't name their immediate neighbour but want to know every criminal by name that leaves prison. At the rate we send people to prison it's going to be a long list to keep track of.
Man or woman does a crime and completes their time it should be the end of the story. Constantly reminding them of their past behavior doesn't create a healing atmosphere. Picking at scabs is only fun for a select few out there who feel their better than anyone else and would never f' up.

"If you sincerely question whether the reasons for this kind of response to sexual abuse are Jungian it would seem to suggest your involvement in such matters comes also simply from reading the papers".

My involvement is not from simply reading the papers. In a previous incarnation, until Centrelink stopped using doctors for medical assessments for DSP last year, I was a medico who saw more than the average of adult women whose lives had been ruined at 3, 4, 5, or 6 years of age and more, who had suffered violent penile/digital penetration at tender ages, and who then carried in to their adult lives, consequent permanent disruption of bladder/bowel function (vesico-vaginal-rectal fistulae etc.) My involvement then, is not from an armchair or a compter desk. All that wanted to address was a seeming disparity of community reaction to sexual as opposed to non-sexual child abuse.

I don't know where Greg barns gets his stats from.Most paedophiles do re-offend.The really scary phenominem in our society is for offeners of many persuasions in our society,whether they be sex offenders,murderers or drug pushers is to feel no shame or remorse.They are not connected to mainstream values or empathy.

The continuous stream of soft option articles by the likes of Greg Barns just echoes the decay happening in our society today.If there are no standards or discipline,how can we aspire to a higher state of consciousness?

consequent permanent disruption of bladder/bowel function (vesico-vaginal-rectal fistulae etc.)

Well Doug as a medico you will also know that this sort of injury can also be a result of child birth.

In a previous position the first time I actually heard of a women digitally penetrating a child, I didn't want to beleive it. It conflicted with everything I had been taught.

Since that time it nolonger surprises me to hear about women digitally penetrating children.

That is the sad side effect of being exposed to things on a regular basis that the public get to hear very little about.

As a constitutionalist, I view the Federal Government has nothing to do with child abuse issues, as they are a State/Territorian issue.
Neither should it have a register.

Now, lets see. My ex-wife attacked me with a long knife and pleaded GUILTY in Court. She got 6 months probation.
My ex-wife (past the six months period) had been found to have bashed some of the children for up to ten years with cricket bat (it broke), branches, pipes, etc and even tried to strangle one of the boys (this resulted the Children Court then placed the children in my care) and she was charged and pleaded GUILTY and got 6 months probation, despite that even in the police station she attacked one of the boys (who was asleep.
And other violent incidents were ongoing, being hit throwing hot water in the face of a train station staff member, etc.
No she is not on any register, regardless of nearly killing a child (medical reports indicated the child was nearly strangled to death).

Ok, now we have my daughter (not for this marriage) at age 7 being sexual abused. I report this. As a male I am the first to be suspected! So much reporting to try to get assistance! Sure, in the end it was clear I had nothing to do with it, but what was done about the culprit you wonder, well the Family Court made sure that my daughter would continue to go on access, and… well read the story on my blog at http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH and you may just discover that many are slipping through the cracks unpunished, and so would never end up in any event on any register and then what will happen to those who’s names are tarnished and afterwards are found to be innocent? By that time their names will be on numerous data bases and impossible to really ever become cleared.

I know from personal experiences what it is to have a child sexual abused (see my blog) and I for one see absolutely no benefit in having a register...

continued

as to sex offenders, rather it might mean Governments will be less inclined to do their job and parents may have false sense of security to not guard their children if no one is listed in their area.

And, if the attempt to kill a child is not worthy to a punishment, let alone on a register then what else could be worse? Mind you, my ex-wife was the school councils president and was already banned from going on excursion because of having violently attacked a pupil then! Still, she was the school councils president.
Once, I did make known to her she better get immediately rid of the gun she was looking after f for her boyfriend (as I was advised by one of my sons).
Then again she never had a conviction and so would never be on a register as she is not dangerous to children? Come on!

Being it sex offender, murderers or otherwise, I do view we have a legal system where a Court of law is to determine the punishment of the offender, and as with my ex-wife I wasn’t pleased at all that she got of twice, but I had to accept this was the decision of the court. Albeit I do suspect that if I had done the same I would have been long ago been imprisoned for it, as males generally are not getting this kind of “soft” treatment.
And, don’t forget plenty of women are sexual abusing children but that is something not very known to the community.
Also, many a father is accused (in particularly in custody disputes) of sexual abuse, regardless it never did occur!

Just consider, that one of your family members is perhaps wrongly listed on the register or was convicted only to have the conviction overturned as the court found he was innocent, only then for this family members for years to come having everywhere his name listed on numerous downloaded databases, that in effect can destroy his future, etc.

Remember, probation is not a conviction and no conviction no listing either.