Quote: Ferocious Aardvark " I actually prevented anything. The best I can do is point to statistics.
Why would you want to introduce straw men, and how is this relevant?
If you really believe that grooming can be "nipped in the bud" then you're naive. I would say the opposite. I would say that, in grooming just as in other forms of child sexual abuse, all we will ever do is spend a lot of money in prosecuting a small percentage of offenders, but the problem was, and will remain, endemic. I would say that child sexual abuse whilst not as prevalent as drug abuse is a problem of a similar type, it is too widespread and takes too many forms for anything else other than some sort of a lid being kept on it, and making life more difficult for the perpetrators. You talk as if you think Rotherham was some sort of isolated island of abuse that popped up out of a crime-free sea, and because nobody bothered to catch it, it grew. It wasn't.'"
We must as always agree to disagree - I think you are sticking your head in the sand by saying we cannot provide preventative cures we must wait until the problem is so widespread that actually we have to let it continue (in your words its endemic!!) Given that the majority of child abuse is family related stopping it is possible, the problem is the emotional complexities of the aftermath. I take it you have no children if you had you would not take such a casual attitude. Your last paragraph is just plain wrong.
To say you cannot prove you prevented anything again is just wrong. If we could never prove anything why would we take preventative measures against anything - let's just have a free-for-all. In Bradford we have significant issues of infant problems from those children born out of parents who are cousins. If we banned it and we saw a drop off of these issues that would prove beyond all reasonable doubt that it worked.
