We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

School sex offenders: what’s your view?

David Aaronovitch says that there may be a distinction between paedophiles and some of those who appear on the sex offenders register. ‘People should be prosecuted for paying for child porn. But that does not mean they are paedophiles’, he says. Do you agree? Should the system change? Or does everyone on the list deserve to be branded a paedophile? Read his article and send us your view using the form below



Who is the more evil, the man who rapes a girl in her 18th birthday or the one who rapes her the day before? According to current legislation it is the latter, because the law would automatically ban the second man from working with children. I am sure you would agree both are equally vile. Few things in life are black and white; there are grey areas everywhere. Blanket bans don’t work. There will always be “the exception”, people you don’t think should be banned but are, and more worryingly people who you think should be banned but can’t be! The present system of obtaining a CRB Disclosure is far from perfect, but if followed, and not side-stepped, which is what is currently happening, there should be no one working in our schools or elsewhere who is known not to be safe to work with children. The fault lies with the recruitment practices of schools and agencies, which allow teachers to take up their posts after checking only one of the four databases that a CRB Disclosure reports on. They are putting children at risk, not the DfES. Don’t change the law. Wait for the Disclosure. Alan Pitchford, Leeds

Whilst it may be true that not every child porn-watcher turns into a paedophile, it is equally true that every paedophile has watched child porn in their sad and hopefully short career. As a parent, I cannot condone a system which takes a chance, however flimsy, that children might be hurt by a person in loco parentis. Neither do I accept the argument that natural justice is ill-served by preventing anyone who has ever been convicted of a child-related offence from becoming a teacher. These individuals knew the rules and chose to break them. The risk to children is simply too great to pander to political correctness. Lydia Bessiron, Newbury, Berkshire

Persons committing offences against children should not be allowed to work with children. There is no need for hysteria, and frantic witchhunts by the media. However, Mr Aaronovitch, I am sorry but people who pay for child porn clearly want child porn. You cannot pretend that some day those same people will not act on their vile fantasies and harm a child, because they quite obviously will. The concept that by purchasing porn they are somehow removed from the execution of abuse against the child is ludicrous. What is needed is logical and considered action, no person convicted of child abuse should be in a position to abuse again, therefore if you have been convicted of such an offence, you should not be able to get another teaching post. Sarah Marquis, London



Please complete the form below and your contribution will be considered for publication. It may be necessary to edit your comments. Please include your name, town/county/state of residence and e-mail.

Advertisement