Should child pornography be a concern in child custody hearings?
- Thread starter Bells
- Start date
You mean that you didn't know that pornography is worse than George Bush waving his weapon of mass destruction?
well duh....
Bells
Staff member
You don't think there is anything wrong with a grown man feeling sexually aroused and wanting to have sex with a 3 year old girl when he sees her "wee wee"?
We aren't just talking about "seeing" a child's "wee wee". We are talking about a person finding said child's "wee wee" to be sexually arousing. Lets imagine you have a small child and take this child to the beach. She's a cute chubby little thing and she's running around on the sand and into the water naked, as toddlers are want to do at the beach. You don't see anything wrong with it. It's just a toddler doing what toddlers do. Enjoying the freedom of being naked while playing in sand and water. And then you notice a guy up the beach who is staring intently at your daughter while his hand works frantically under the towel that he has discreetly placed over his lap. As the proud father of this little girl, do you feel (a) enraged that this man finds your naked toddler sexually arousing?.. or (b) feel proud that he does and don't find anything wrong with it?
How about if one day you find out the child care centre you have been leaving your child at has been performing sexual acts with your child, as well as the other children there, and posting the images on the internet for the sexual pleasure of other people who are into that kind of thing. Would you react the same as you have in your post with:
"SO...gays are ok...trans sex is ok....your son/daughter killing humans under military is ok...but o my have you see the wee wee of that 3 year old girl? well if you have you are do for execution!..."
Sounds nasty and dirty doesn't it? But that is what child pornography is. Someone getting off at looking at that 3 year old girl's "wee wee" and wanting to have sex with it or imagining the grown man having sex with said 3 year old was them or wishing it were so.
Is it ok for someone to masturbate while looking at that 3 year old girl's "wee wee" in your opinion? And should that same person then be given leave by a court to come into regular contact with other children, so long as those other children are little boys and not little girls? In the end, this is what it comes down to. Should the court take the above behaviours into consideration when deciding on a child's custody.
Or research could be done into what causes this kind of behaviour and then prevent it/fix it.
I've read that several times ...and taken some time to think about it. The word "might" keeps coming up in my thoughts. I wonder what life would be like if people were all "convicted" for what they MIGHT do? Is just the possibility of something happening enough to take the child away from the parent?
Again ..."convicted" by what MIGHT happen? Is that the way you'd like society and the courts to act, Bells? And what about things like drinking too much occasionally in public bars or with his buddies? What MIGHT they do at home? Drugs, maybe? ...take the kids away because they MIGHT drive with the kid under the influence of booze or drugs? Or perhaps get the kids hooked on booze or drugs or both?
Let's just say that we, as a society, take the "endangered" kids into protective custody. What do we do with them? And please don't cite adoption, because there's already so many kids up for adoption that there's not enough people to care for them or adopt them or state money to care for them. If we add in all of the kids you want protected, ....?
And so based on just your admitted doubt, you'd take the kid into state-protective custody? And is so, what of all those others that you've mentioned above?
And I can't help but wonder if you know or are aware of the conditions of state-sponsored childcare facilities and adoption agencies, etc? Perhaps out of the frying pan into the fire?
Baron Max
dont bring me into this toilet business. Added to the fact that I havent kissed or had any sort of sx relationship...goody I suppress my emotions I have towards the opposite sex...of course the thing pops up anyways. But yeah sexually attracted to 3 year olds...problem there for sure....9 year old?...hmmm...depends....14 year old? well that age is when many at their puberty stage and such. ok gtg.
Bells
Staff member
The child was already away from the parent. He was living with his grandparents. The reason this custody hearing came about was because the mother wished to move to Perth to be closer to her new boyfriend.
The research states he has a 70% chance of committing child abuse if he has not already done so. Should a child be placed in such a situation knowing the risks?
Yes. To be honest, yes in some situations, it is best to take preventative measures. How many times have parents who have previously been suspected of child abuse been given custody of their children, only to have the child wind up dead or severely abused? Lets say a parent has been convicted of sexually abusing a child and has served their sentence and attempts to get custody of their child upon release. Should the court grant them custody because he "might" not abuse another child again? The answer would be no. Past and previous behaviour can be an indication of what is to come in the future.
We aren't talking about booze and drugs. Parents have lost custody for such offences as well Baron. But this case is different. This case is about a mother, who's child was living with her ex-inlaws, who wished to take said child back (from a safe environment where he was enrolled in a good school, had made friends and was well cared for by the grandparents), move him from what he knows and loves to take him to Perth so she can be closer to her child pornography obsessed boyfriend, where she will also be working nightshift with no one to care for the child. Justice Carmody has ordered she not leave the boy with the boyfriend, but there is no way to monitor that she does not. Child care being as expensive as it is, and especially for night time child care, who is to say she won't take the easy way out and leave him with the boyfriend, without supervision? Do you honestly think someone obsessed with child pornography won't get back into it again, considering his level of obsession? Come on Baron, don't be so naive for argument's sake.
You still don't get it. This particular child had been living with his grandparents for a year before his mother wished to have custody of him again. As to removing children from dangerous households, we already do that. The children, in Australia at least, are placed in foster care where they go and live with other families.
Don't you think children should be protected Baron?
Who said anything about state sponsored child care? His grandparents had been caring for him and were fighting to keep on doing so. Hence the custody hearing. Did you not even read the articles or the extracts posted?
This child wasn't going to go into state sponsored care, he would have continued to live with his grandparents, who had already been taking care of him. What the court has done in this instance is to take him from a stable and loving environment, where he was going to a good school, had friends and family who cared for him, loving grandparents and force him to move to his mother who was moving Western Australia so she could be closer to her new boyfriend.
I'd guess the father isn't exactly a model citizen, but then putting a kid into that situation - stripper mum and kiddy porn stepdad. That's totally wrong.
If I was the natural father and I'd lost my kid like that I'd go postal. Poor grandparents.
If I was the natural father and I'd lost my kid like that I'd go postal. Poor grandparents.
Well, that's her right, ain't it? Or do you now wish to limit the woman's mvement in the land of Oz?
Now how in the world would they ever be able to do that kind of "research"??? Please explain that to me.
But even so ....according to your cited "research", there's still a 30% chance that he won't commit child abuse. I wonder what other such "research" we could come up with that would prevent anyone from having any contact with any child?
Most assuredly! But, Bells, if we did it my way, you wouldn't even be permitted to have children! And neither would a lot of the women ...so you wouldn't be alone.
So from now on I should just agree with you? You're right, and if I don't agree with you, then I'm wrong? ...along with anyone else who doesn't fully agree with you? Is that the way your court cases always go for you?
Baron Max
Ain't many people are, ya' know? And that includes women, too, not just the fathers.
Ain't that a similar argument that some people have for not allowing children in homes with gay couples?
I wonder what other similar human characteristics we could come up with to prevent people from having or raising children? Boozers? Druggies? Gays? Lesbians? Gamblers? Gun advocates? ...the list is probably endless, ain't it?
Baron Max
I'd agree there. I'm thinking if he was an upstanding member of the community it would have been an easy choice to make. The kid stays with the father. So, I wonder..
Boozers, druggies... yeah, depending on their habits.
I'm not getting into the other ones.
The point is that the guy looks at pictures of children being abused. He gets off on it in fact. He enjoys looking at children being abused. Most people with kids can't stand the thought of children being abused. Most people believe children should be protected.
If this guy enjoys it when children are being abused, how likely do you reckon it is that he'll protect this kid and care about it being abused?
Judges aren't always right, baron.. You might stick to your shitty "Well, if a judge decided. Well, it's the law, right? Well, they should have read code 9, section 47b before they did that, ya know?" answers, but it doesn't cut sometimes.
Imagine, the kid had been in the house with stripper mum and kiddy porn boyfriend for a week. Mum goes to work and leaves the kid with kiddy porn man. Kiddy porn man rapes the little boy. Everyone would say they saw it coming, but you'd still stand by the decision to put the kid in that situation?
I'm not saying it'd happen, but there's a chance isn't there? And it's a reasonable chance, higher than John Doe on the street I'd imagine.
Did the 3 year old consent to being used as a sexual object?
look here...i already said its wrong. read above.
to sum it up in two words:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mental defect
er maybe mental disease, this was explained quite succinctly at my university but i forgot it. the judge should have googled.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mental defect
er maybe mental disease, this was explained quite succinctly at my university but i forgot it. the judge should have googled.
Bells
Staff member
Has happened before in cases where one parent has custody and wishes to move away.
Ah but there is also a 70% chance that he will or already has and has not been caught.
Tell me Baron, do you think someone obsessed with child pornography should have regular and open access to a small child? Do you think this child will be safe in such an environment? Should a child even be placed in a situation that is so risky?
And what about my parenting style or myself would have you prevent me from being a parent?
On the contrary. I am just curious as to how naive you can actually be. After all, we all know you love playing the devil's advocate in everything.
As to the cases I used to try, heh.. they were usually cases of people who abused children and rape cases. So yes, this case holds a special interest for me. I have seen the worst of what someone can do to a child and I am sure there is worst stuff out there.
Do I think this child should have been forced to live with his mother? Under the circumstances no. I don't think a child should be removed from a loving and stable home to move in with a mother who wished to take him away from all he knows and loves and put him in direct contact with someone who gets off sexually by watching little children engage in sexual acts. Call me strange, but that's how I see it. The safety of the child should always be paramount. The rights of the parents frankly come second to a child's safety. Having carried a child and given birth to it does not mean that you can do anything with it. Children have been removed from a parent's custody for far less than what this woman has done and won the right to do in court.
You're kidding right?MetaKron said:
You don't think 'abuse' of a child is bad enough? It needs to be broken down?
I think the research points to sexual abuse of a child, which falls under the general banner of child abuse.
Bells, the "70 percent" figure may not be valid at all, or it may consist of acts that barely fit under the definition. I realize that the average human has no hope of understanding such things, but how about we at least go through the motions of trying?
I would like to know how they come up with those figures. A person who is identified as a sexual deviant is going to be accused of abusive behavior if someone slaps his face. The "very nature of the offense" causes people to think that it is OK to take great liberties with the truth, which changes "the very nature" but which they just see as verifying it.
I would like to know how they come up with those figures. A person who is identified as a sexual deviant is going to be accused of abusive behavior if someone slaps his face. The "very nature of the offense" causes people to think that it is OK to take great liberties with the truth, which changes "the very nature" but which they just see as verifying it.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
Well you can look it up if you wish.
The figures actually range from 10 - 70%. One research in the US has put it at approximately 35% (refer to the first link). However as it is difficult to really investigate as the only pool they have to get their information from in regards to child pornography and paedophilia is from those who have been caught and are in the criminal justice system. The figures could be much worse in reality.
Gives some of the figures from page 17
Gives some detail of how they conduct their research into child pornography and offenders