Hypocrisy, or a dramatic epiphany from the NSPCC? You decide.
Plans to vet parents who take part in activities involving regular contact with children have been criticised by children's charity, the NSPCC.
Children's services director Wes Cuell told the Sunday Telegraph the move could stop people doing things that were "perfectly safe and normal".
Like some might say home education was safe and normal, perhaps.
Vijay Patel, policy adviser for the NSPCC children's charity, also sees the need for a review. "Some people use home education to hide. Look at the Victoria Climbié case. No one asked where she was at school."
So to clarify things. Parents teaching their own kids at home is suspect and all such arrangements should be treated as potential child abuse opportunities until proven otherwise. However, volunteers taking other people's kids to events is 'perfectly safe and normal'.
Great. Clear as mud.
It's good that the NSPCC have come out with condemnation of the government's latest daft plan, though. I mean, how on earth did our MPs become so paranoid? Who has been bending their ear with inaccurate and alarmist information?
How the NSPCC faked child abuse stories to generate cash
The Advertising Standards Authority slammed the NSPCC for its actions.
In a damning summary, it upheld the claims of three recipients who complained the letter looked like a genuine example taken from a case of a child who had been abused, which could cause distress to young children who might have picked them up.
Say, what?
In May, the NSPCC ran a newspaper ad campaign to coincide with the Baby Peter case telling all and sundry that ...The latest research reports that 1 in 6 children are sexually abused before they reach the age of 16.
Seems a tad alarmist, I'd say. That's because it is.
It's clear that the 1 in 6 figure is astonishingly over-stated as regards the dangers that parents fear from paedophilia. Saying that 1 in 6 kids are being 'sexually abused' is a sound-bite to strike the fear of Ian Huntley into any parent, and I venture to suggest that the NSPCC fully intended their figures to be taken that way.
Do you reckon the NSPCC might have conveyed this hysterical stuff to MPs at some point? Loudly? If so, it would explain a lot.
10 comments:
One suspects that "the 1 in 6 who are sexually abused" includes 15 year olds having various levels of sexual relations with 16 year olds, for example......
That and more, Anon. They can be victims of abuse by being looked at while asleep according to the NSPCC.
Seriously, it's all here, with links and stuff.
"1 in 6 children are sexually abused before they reach the age of 16."
Some 'official' statements can be unclear and send the wrong message. Although a person under the age of 16 is classed as a minor, an adult is not classed as a paedophile if the 'child' is over 13.
If a 14 or 15 year old has a sexual encounter with an adult, over 16, and a complaint is made, then it is classed as sexual abuse, or sexual assault.
I am just saying that a shocking statement like "1 in 6 children are sexually abused before they reach the age of 16" is unclear. Sexual abuse is horrific, something which makes the vast majority of us recoil with horror. That '1 in 6' statement however can draw a picture of hordes of paedophiles looking for an opportunity. Is it not like a lot of statistics lumped together though? Does it not include 14 or 15 years olds taking themselves into an adult situation for example, and being taken advatage of by an 18 or 19 year old?
Sorry Dick – I just feel like being spiteful.
Every politician for politically correct reasons, knows someone who is black, Asian, Muslim, disabled, or gay, actually when I was growing up gay used to mean happy and carefree – although I suppose you would happy and carefree if you had your log wedged up some poor twats shit-pipe!
Anyway my point is this. I just wonder how many of our filching MPs would admit to being sexually abused. Take all those horse loving MPs for instance – would anyone of them admit to being bulldozed from behind by some insensitive rampant horse?
Its surprising though isn’t it how many nicely greased mincy little toilet lurkers have ‘come out’ over the last few years now that it’s a popular pastime. Mark Oaten and his rent boys spring to mind, or perhaps spring to bare buttock clefts!
Do you remember a few years back when that bubble-permed twat and three quarters Gerry Hayes MP, used to be a regular on the James Whale late night television show? He used to strut and ponce forth in a deliciously purple coloured spangly thing.
He hasn’t been heard of since…more than likely he’s spending more time with his ludicrously tiny jock-strap – assuming of course no other bum-tickler strangled him with it first!
If you think this post will cause offence Dick I shall remove it and pop it into my orange, diamond studded jock….Oh dear…have I been rumbled…
Childhood sexual abuse, which includes exploitive and potentially damaging sexual experiences not covered by the more narrowly defined 'sexual assault,' is a huge problem and public health issue affecting millions of people and their families. Furthermore, research by scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and several universities suggests that about 1 in 6 men are sexually abused before age 16 (that's right, 1 in 6). For a brief summary of research supporting this 1 in 6 statistic, including references, see www.1in6.org/thestatistic.
Interesting to see that the hysterical bullshit is transatlantic, Steve.
My how the paedo scaremongers have crawled out of the woodwork in the past couple of days. Like this cocksocket at CQ's place.
This page about the NSPCC should interest you ...
http://tinyurl.com/nkjs4d
.
Best
I was repeatedly abused from the age of fourteen by a 17 year old girl.
Those were the days..
hahaha BTS is it confession time? I had the same experience, me 14 her 17. I can beat you though. WHen I was 14 a 33 year old waitress in my dads steakhouse used to show me what colour bra she was wearing and adjust her suspenders for me. I was irreperably damaged. I still like older women, trouble is, they are younger than me now.
Education is a wonderful thing Timbone. That's probably why I like college girls. I keep getting older but they stay the same age..
Post a Comment