Sarah's Law Scheme
 

AOL Sunday, 17 February 2008

'Sarah's Law' scheme to be piloted-

Parents are to be given new powers to check with police whether people given regular unsupervised access to their children have convictions for paedophile offences, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has said.

The scheme will initially be trialled in four police areas - Cambridgeshire, Hampshire, Cleveland and Warwickshire - and if successful could be rolled out across England and Wales.

It will allow single mothers to ask police whether potential boyfriends have child sex convictions before they start a relationship. And family members or neighbours who regularly look after children could also be checked.

Police and probation services will have discretion on what information is revealed in each case and disclosure will be carefully controlled. But it is understood that if children are thought to be at risk, parents and carers will be told.

Announcing the scheme in an article for the News of the World, Ms Smith said: "I am announcing that this summer, four police forces will start schemes that allow a child's parents or guardians to be informed if someone they are having a personal relationship with has previous convictions for child sex offences.

"We are working with the four selected forces across the country - in Cambridgeshire, Hampshire, Cleveland and Warwickshire - as well as with leading children's charities to develop these pilot schemes."

The campaign was named after eight-year-old Sarah Payne, murdered in 2000 by Roy Whiting, who had previously spent time in prison for the indecent assault of a girl.

Sarah's mother Sara Payne told the newspaper: "When we first launched the campaign for Sarah's Law, I was appalled by the complete apathy of authorities in bringing about change for the protection of children and targeting those who wished to hurt them. Now almost eight years on and five Home Secretaries later, it seems we have finally reached at a stage where the Government are putting the safety of our children first.

"These new trials are a major step forward, helping us to protect our children and making it harder for those that prey on them to hide under the veil of state-assisted secrecy. For that we applaud the Home Secretary and her team, but there is still much work to be done."


:notworthy:

Although one of the saddest cases has taken place recently when a baby's own father was the killer and the abuser.
However, Sarah's Law should help prevent many cases of child abuse.

The irony being of course, that this law would not have prevented the case it was named after.


M

<nods>

Still a revolutionary step forward IMO.

Is this the same as Megan's Law in the US ?

I wonder why asking that question is restricted to single mothers.

Les

Indeed.

I think it's a bit different than Megan's Law, Andy. Don't know the full details of it, but Megan's Law mentions about the offenders information disclosure by the authories for general public, not just "on request". While with Sarah's Law, police and probation services will have discretion on what information is revealed in each case and disclosure will be carefully controlled. But it is understood that if children are thought to be at risk, parents and carers will be told. Parents will have to make a formal request to the police to perform a kind of CRB check on someone, that I presume, will be kept anonymous. Nevertheless a proactive kickstart to sort a grave issue i.e. child abuse IMO.

The only problem I have with Megan's Law is the possibility of driving paedos underground, making it more difficult for the police to track the b'stards.

However, this scheme seems a pretty good idea. If it makes kids safer, it's worthwhile.

AndytJ

Because it's possible that the recorded data reflects single mothers (and their children) in the highest risk bracket. I don't think it would be restricted just to single mothers. If it is, there is an issue there to challenge the authorities :thumb:

Not going to do much for family unity or trust is it??

Dave

Whatever can you mean ?


Maybe you think its its good to keep secrets within a family

So before you ask your aunt/uncle/sister/brother/whoever to babysit you go to the police and ask if they have any *sex* convictions???? If you're that unsure then you probably wouldn't consider them in the first place and would have 'disowned' them as family.

I know most of these *attacks* take place with people known to the victim but this is a step too far. More government interference in the wrong way. Laudable intentions but flawed execution IMHO ....

Dave