Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
what do u think?
59 Answers
I know someone (male) who when they were 13 was caught on cctv pleasuring themselves while touching a younger boy of about 8. This person now has a new son. How much of a risk to the baby would you think this person would be.
Would you say they were a paeodophile in the making or something else?
Would you say they were a paeodophile in the making or something else?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by red_dragon. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You 'family related member' sounds like a young man who has had a nightmare childhood...............and I'm not sure that it is your place to broadcast the fact.........
Hopefully, the 'authorities' will get it right in this case and help him move forward to a better, brighter future.
The circumstances surrounding his youthful indiscretions are perhaps plainer to see, but still in no way indicate that he will have a propensity for similar behaviour now.
The Court will have made their decision based on a range of advice and information not avaiable to you........
No-one on this forum is able to second-guess the reasons for this decision.........
Hopefully, the 'authorities' will get it right in this case and help him move forward to a better, brighter future.
The circumstances surrounding his youthful indiscretions are perhaps plainer to see, but still in no way indicate that he will have a propensity for similar behaviour now.
The Court will have made their decision based on a range of advice and information not avaiable to you........
No-one on this forum is able to second-guess the reasons for this decision.........
it might be that the child is on a 'at risk ' register.
I say that term because thats what it is called.
The child is 'at risk' of certain behaviour such as sexual,physical or mental abuse and sometimes chindren will go on this register because of something thats happened in the past or present that MIGHT lead to inappropiate behaviour.
If the man has been abused before,he might have some issues he needs to deal with..........but in no way does this make him a paedophile in my opinion
I say that term because thats what it is called.
The child is 'at risk' of certain behaviour such as sexual,physical or mental abuse and sometimes chindren will go on this register because of something thats happened in the past or present that MIGHT lead to inappropiate behaviour.
If the man has been abused before,he might have some issues he needs to deal with..........but in no way does this make him a paedophile in my opinion
Supervised contact is where contact takes place in a safe, controlled situation, overseen by someone such as a relative or an organisation that provides supervised contact services. It is most often used when one parent has been violent, either towards the other parent or towards the children.
Often the supervising person will observe and monitor the interaction to see whether a specific risk remains and will (we ope) always act in the best interest of the child.
Every 3 weeks might sound harsh, but it is better than not at all.
Often the supervising person will observe and monitor the interaction to see whether a specific risk remains and will (we ope) always act in the best interest of the child.
Every 3 weeks might sound harsh, but it is better than not at all.
I don't think much of social services if they are discussing this with a 'sort of non-family' member.
As none of us here know the facts, the man concerned or the family, it is totally pointless you asking our opinions - you are in a far better position to discuss it with the child's mother and other family member. Or even the Social Services!
On the face of it, a 13 year old boy doing that with an 8 year old boy is not abnormal behaviour and nothing to be worried about at all.
What is of greater concern is the abuse this man has suffered and how it has affected his judgement and his ability to form proper relationships. We can't possibly guess at that.
As none of us here know the facts, the man concerned or the family, it is totally pointless you asking our opinions - you are in a far better position to discuss it with the child's mother and other family member. Or even the Social Services!
On the face of it, a 13 year old boy doing that with an 8 year old boy is not abnormal behaviour and nothing to be worried about at all.
What is of greater concern is the abuse this man has suffered and how it has affected his judgement and his ability to form proper relationships. We can't possibly guess at that.
You clearly dont understand. I said I AM a family member, the child is a VERY close family member of mine and as I have said I wont go into details mainly because I cant. I just wanted people's opinions which as I suspected all vary really.
One thing Ethel I agree with that I think you are right on - it is totally pointless asking you for your opinion.
If, on the face of it, what this boy did as you say is "not abnormal behaviour and nothing to be worried about" why would social services restrict his access to his own son?
I can understand why I don't come on this site very often because when someone asks a serious question they don't always get taken seriously. Maybe I should have asked a question like "what is your favourite colour" or "what are you having for lunch"
One thing Ethel I agree with that I think you are right on - it is totally pointless asking you for your opinion.
If, on the face of it, what this boy did as you say is "not abnormal behaviour and nothing to be worried about" why would social services restrict his access to his own son?
I can understand why I don't come on this site very often because when someone asks a serious question they don't always get taken seriously. Maybe I should have asked a question like "what is your favourite colour" or "what are you having for lunch"
Would you like us to ring Social Services and find out ?
I really don't understand quite why you thought we could fill in the gaps in a situation you are far closer to.
What exactly would you like us to say ?
He's a potential kiddy-fiddler and that's why he can only see his child once every three weeks ?
Do any of the adults have jobs ? Have to travel to the centre ? Is the supervisory adult the same one all the time ? Are there many other families using this centre ?
In other words, are there logistical reasons why this access visit can only take place once every three weeks ?
I really don't understand quite why you thought we could fill in the gaps in a situation you are far closer to.
What exactly would you like us to say ?
He's a potential kiddy-fiddler and that's why he can only see his child once every three weeks ?
Do any of the adults have jobs ? Have to travel to the centre ? Is the supervisory adult the same one all the time ? Are there many other families using this centre ?
In other words, are there logistical reasons why this access visit can only take place once every three weeks ?
The incident that accured when he was 13 may not have anything to do with the social services being involved now - like you said he has a bad childhood - and as someone else pointed out - if he is on the ast risk register because of his own childhood social services may keep in contact with him for that reason.
I know you said you closely involved with this situation but you may not know EVERTHING about him - there could be a number of reasons for restricted access i'm sure.
Your actual question of 'is he is a paedophile in the making'... no one can answer that question. I do agree that children do experiment when they are younger but it is not done with intent to harm or hurt anyone i'm sure, although i know it can effect people deeply. If he has an sexually abusive childhood he may have not been able to see what he was doing was wrong. But it should give you peace of mind that he is under supervised visits - no harm will come to that baby.... It does seem a bit harsh that this is only every 3 weeks - a father needs to bond with a baby as well....
I know you said you closely involved with this situation but you may not know EVERTHING about him - there could be a number of reasons for restricted access i'm sure.
Your actual question of 'is he is a paedophile in the making'... no one can answer that question. I do agree that children do experiment when they are younger but it is not done with intent to harm or hurt anyone i'm sure, although i know it can effect people deeply. If he has an sexually abusive childhood he may have not been able to see what he was doing was wrong. But it should give you peace of mind that he is under supervised visits - no harm will come to that baby.... It does seem a bit harsh that this is only every 3 weeks - a father needs to bond with a baby as well....
red_dragon
I can not answer your question properly as there isn�t sufficient information.
However as a dreaded social worker I can tell you this.
The information you originally provide is a bit like a piece of string and how long it is. It could mean sexual experimentation to early sexual abuse. But, without considerably more background detail you can not possibly determine, nor can anyone else.
Social services would not be involved with him as a parent on just this, there has to be considerably more reasons. What you have said wouldn�t even result in him being on social services radar. But I don�t know what the other reasons are, and it doesn�t appear you do. It will be known by him, the mother and the professionals involved. Other than that it�s confidential.
As for 1 every 3 week contact. That is truly exceptional; it would normally be 3/4 times a week to daily. Haven�t got a clue why it is so reduced but there would have to be very serious reasons not because of his behaviour when he was 13, or because he himself was abused.
Without knowing the full details all you will get is speculation, only you can decide if that helps you or not.
I can not answer your question properly as there isn�t sufficient information.
However as a dreaded social worker I can tell you this.
The information you originally provide is a bit like a piece of string and how long it is. It could mean sexual experimentation to early sexual abuse. But, without considerably more background detail you can not possibly determine, nor can anyone else.
Social services would not be involved with him as a parent on just this, there has to be considerably more reasons. What you have said wouldn�t even result in him being on social services radar. But I don�t know what the other reasons are, and it doesn�t appear you do. It will be known by him, the mother and the professionals involved. Other than that it�s confidential.
As for 1 every 3 week contact. That is truly exceptional; it would normally be 3/4 times a week to daily. Haven�t got a clue why it is so reduced but there would have to be very serious reasons not because of his behaviour when he was 13, or because he himself was abused.
Without knowing the full details all you will get is speculation, only you can decide if that helps you or not.
Thank you for your answers nannon and lotdot. They are both v informative.
I agree that it does seem strange that considering this one thing, his access is minimal. I am very involved - but as a social worker you can see I can't see how as I shouldn't discuss this kind of thing I guess. Surely if there was anything else about him they would have told me.
Again, thanks for your replies, there is a meeting happening today which maybe I can get more information from.
p.s. there are no logistical reasons why access is only 3 weeks. It is what social services have allowed.
I agree that it does seem strange that considering this one thing, his access is minimal. I am very involved - but as a social worker you can see I can't see how as I shouldn't discuss this kind of thing I guess. Surely if there was anything else about him they would have told me.
Again, thanks for your replies, there is a meeting happening today which maybe I can get more information from.
p.s. there are no logistical reasons why access is only 3 weeks. It is what social services have allowed.
This is a direct quote from YOUR post, red_dragon:
"I am kind of family related although not by blood. "
That does not make the child a 'very close family member'. Why should the Social Services be telling you anything?
And as you are anonymous on this site, it doesn't matter a hoot what you say as your kind of family member but not by blood cannot be identified by us. So you can give all the facts here.
I doubt very much the incident when he was 13 is the reason for Social Services involvement.
As Social Services are involved and you are not the child's mother, then there is nothing you can do.
"I am kind of family related although not by blood. "
That does not make the child a 'very close family member'. Why should the Social Services be telling you anything?
And as you are anonymous on this site, it doesn't matter a hoot what you say as your kind of family member but not by blood cannot be identified by us. So you can give all the facts here.
I doubt very much the incident when he was 13 is the reason for Social Services involvement.
As Social Services are involved and you are not the child's mother, then there is nothing you can do.
The frequency of the access could be due to a number of reasons, ranging from availability to personal requests and the courts insistence based upon known facts such as:
- Protect children from risk of physical harm
- Non-custodial parent has previously sexually abused child or children
- The law requires supervised access
- Protect custodial parent from further violence
- Protect children from exposure to violence
- Protect children from risk of abduction
- Risk that non-custodial parent will fail to care for the child
- Risk of emotional harm to child or children
As said above, we could never know, it is the decision of the court and social services.
- Protect children from risk of physical harm
- Non-custodial parent has previously sexually abused child or children
- The law requires supervised access
- Protect custodial parent from further violence
- Protect children from exposure to violence
- Protect children from risk of abduction
- Risk that non-custodial parent will fail to care for the child
- Risk of emotional harm to child or children
As said above, we could never know, it is the decision of the court and social services.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles22 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Crosswords29 mins ago
