So, Alice Miles endorses the view that it is acceptable for small children to be let loose in the fields of Sussex where the grass is as high as the proverbial elephant's eye, and there aren't even any pavements along the main road, with the eldest (ten year old?) child in loco parentis, because no adult can be bothered to "hover" in the vicinity to ensure the children are safe. Excellent. Whatever happened to parental responsibility? Sarah Payne was, in relative terms, a baby who stil believed in fairy princesses. A watchful adult eye could have preserved both her innocence and her life, but the truth is that no one could be bothered. It is easier to blame the law, the government and society as a whole. Parents should take responsibility for their children, not abdicate it.

SJ, Birmingham,

Yes of course JC paedophiles, rapists, murderers or any of the other filth that are behind bars (thankfully) should be allowed to walk free and start a new life. Why don't you be the one to accomodate theses poor hard done by criminals until they can find a nice cushy place to live payed for entirely by the welfare system. Just a suggestion since you obviously seem to think that these people can't help what they've done, maybe they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Jon, Newport,

Why are people so concerned about the rights of paedophiles? It doesn't make sense, these sick people have ruined an innocent childs life. Megan's Law in the form of Sarah's Law should be brought to the UK immediately, the rights of paedophiles should not override the rights of a child. In my opinion paedophiles should be in prison for life and I don't mean life in a New Labour type prison where prisoners live in a lap of luxury.

Jon, Newport,

I don't quite understand the purpose of stating there are sex offenders in your neighborhood, but not revealing who they are. Under Meagan's Law (USA NJ) a sex offender is tiered upon release: A tier I (low risk) is required to register once a year with the local police and there is no public release of information. A tier II (moderate risk) follows tier I but, the offenders photograph, name, address, and vehicles owned are posted on the Megan's Law site. A tier III (high risk) follows tier II, but a door to door notification is made by the police in the radius (determined by a judge) of the offenders new residence.

The purpose of the tier I is to provide police with quick access to photos, fingerprints, DNA, and vehicle information, to be used in an investigation. As well as alert the offender he/she will be an immediate suspect for any offenses. The tier II and III allows citizens to determine if neighbors are sex offenders and yes, warn your children to stay away.

Steve, Stanhope, USA NJ

When I was young and wanted to play in the park my mum told me to ask my uncle to take me. He invited me to play in his house where he did things to me which I did not know were wrong until it was too late and I suffered a severe breakdown. I was riddled with guilt and many unanswerable questions one of which was "why did my mother not warn me about my uncle" and blamed her as much as him. I therefore know it is vital that children know about the presence of paedophiles whoever and wherever they are so they can avoid having their lives ruined. It is far better that everybody knows where a paedophile lives as, instead of them "going underground", they must realise they have got to change their ways or go to prison.

Sylvia Macpherson, Wickford, England

Suffice to say that any crime should not go unpunished. When it comes to child sex offences, it appears that both the media and victims families want to have their cake and eat it. By attempting to introduce "NEW LAWS" in stealth mode is slowly disintegrating the already existing laws simply to pamper to both media hype and sensitivity of personal grief. Whilst doing so, have we forgotten The DATA PROTECTION ACT and THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT? The so called "SARAH's LAW" brigade, including the present Government it would seem, want justice, but at what cost? The cost of ignoring existing laws just to pamper to hype. Sarah Payne was, and still is, a tragedy. Paedophilia is a medical term, not a legal one. Child Sex Offenders are charged and convicted under, in the main, The Sexual Offences Act, which does not include PAEDOPHILIA as an offence. Media hype, ignorance and prejudice is alive and well as fear takes grip in name calling. Yes, shame, shame, shame on them when ignorance reigns.

steven downer, Liverpool,

"It does make sense for them to be located outside family areas" - where are there such areas, pray? I should love to know. Even the gated communities for retired people are situated in suburbs where families live, and are visitted by younger relatives of the inhabitants. Perhaps we should build areas where families with children are forced to live so we can put an armed guard (carefully vetted of course) round the perimeter. We'll still get problems - most abuse is caused by family members.

Children get everywhere. Neither children nor paedophiles remain in one place for long, and such measures as these laws can only serve to create two things - a false sense of security on one hand and persecution of suspected but probably innocent individuals on the other.

Remember that the Moors Murderers and Ian Huntley were not on any registers and would not have been stopped by such laws.

alexandria, Sheffield, UK

A few years ago I was disturbed by a mob at my door. They were loud, aggressive and wanted me to sign a petition to stop a known child sex offender being placed about a mile away from where I lived. I signed it but only because I didn't feel like arguing with them. When I told my wife (a duty social worker at the time), she replied "They should be more worried about the three others [child sex offenders] living between here and there."
The offender being petitioned against had committed the offences with teenage girls whose parents (in the mob) were quite happy to have them wandering the streets at all hours. I would have loved to have argued the case against them when they visited my door, but it was a genuinely threatening mob of, I believe about 16 people.
To me, everything about that situation was wrong. Mostly though, it was the implied threat of the mob that was worst.
Anything that hints at mob action should be avoided strenuously. Mobs are far more dangerous than paedophiles.

Pablo Miguelito, Nottingham,

I cannot see the point of a 'sarah's law', surely it would not make a difference to how we treat our children anyway. Are we saying that without this law we let our children do what they want without supervision? Do we really need a law like this to 'look after' children? No, it is merely an excuse for people to go round and target abusers subjecting them to harassment and worse. I think this says more about how society feels about the justice and rehabilitation system. And would it stop there? Would a register soon be introduced so we can check up how many ex drug dealers, robbers etc. Surely people should be allowed to move on from their past? We all learn from our mistakes and should be allowed a fresh start.

JC, London,

The government's treatment of the question of how to deal with paedophiles is so typical of it. The US law gives names & addresses, which mean small communities have at least some idea who to watch out for, and maybe (just maybe) prevent an attack. How it works in cities I can't imagine. Paedophiles don't have to reach out of their front doors and snatch a passing child, they can walk a few streets, or hop on a bus.
Labour's amateurish, watered-down version is just another useless gesture among many, like its ASBO idea.
Either way, there is no solution to this or a thousand other problems resulting from a sick , dying society created & run by 'politically correct' lunatics, except : radically change via the polling booth.

L Stewart, Spalding, England

The basic issue that most people are studiously avoiding, due to political correctness, is whether or not a paedophile is an ongoing risk to society. If he is then he should not be released. If he is then society has to trust him. If you can't trust him not to be dangerous then you keep him locked up, pure and simple.

The unspeakable part is that this means life imprisonment without parole for some offenders - a social death sentence to which the only humane answer is an actual death sentence or else you are as bad as the paedophile that you are locking up to suffer a life of torture as a child abuser in prison.

It's up to you, society. You either trust them to serve a sentence and re-integrate like any other criminal or dub them a perpetual and irremovable danger and execute them. There isn't really a third, humane way.

KR, Stockport,

I presume that most ex-offender paedophiles are re-housed by the probation services (ie the Home Office). They are unlikely to be spread evenly across the country, so there will tend to be paedophile 'hot spots'. These may not be in and around council estates, as the residents are now highly vigilant to this possibility. The temptation must be to house these ex-offenders in the locations that residents would least expect! And, having found a suitably discrete location, to house more ex-offenders at the same spot. Perhaps this is why the Home Office have suddenly realised that making these details available could be political dynamite. Do you think they might even has got as far as compiling 'heat maps' (as used by Patricia Hewitt when considering hospital closures)?

Charles, London, England

When a woman enquires of the bona fides about her putative partner, is the man not marked for the rest of his life on government databases by the request to have his details pored over in secret? I should imagine that many innocent men would be incensed to discover that they had been subjected to such intrusion. Possibly, many budding relationships would come to an abrupt halt as a result of accidental exposure.

Mike Mitchell, Spalding, England

I think Nick Williams of London has got it about right.

In the Bristol area over the last few years a number of people with convictions for child abuse have been identified as they try to live within communities.

The result has been that the community then hounds them until they are removed and relocated under police protection.

It seems to me that such a law would simply encourage nimbyism.

Jon Dawkins, Bristol, UK

Herein lies the problem.

Can a policy of re-integration of offenders into the community ever be reconciled with then effectively excluding them from that same community by indentifying their previous offences?

JC, London,

Actually there is no statistical or research evidence - a point acknowledged even from its advocates and supporters - that 'Megans Law' has worked in the USA in its primary aim of preventing sex offences. Neither rate of primary offences nor reoffences appears to be affected apart from minor local variations. Its main outcome is in terms of retributional justice, it is a 'surcharge' punishment.
That may be completely valid - it explains much of the US polical consensus on the issue, but should not be confused with child protection.

Alistair Stuart, London , UK

This paedophile caper is a comparatively recent phenomenon which, in general, does nothing for the reputation of those governing the country. I can’t see any mother leaving a small child alone at any time except in the home, so this ‘law’ would seem to be wholly scurrilous. For children who are old enough to walk around on their own, the attitude should be the same wherever you are - appropriate caution.

Henry Percy, London, UK

The only leverage we have over paedophiles is their desire for anonymity. By leaving the monitoring to the probation service and others and allowing them normal anonymous but heavily monitored lives lives they are less likely to offend. In return for this anonymity we would impose many appropriate restrictions on their activities. Sarah's Law would do nothing to stop the majority of abuse which happens within the family, it would just provide sales for the News Of The World.

Nick Williams, London, UK

Look up operation ore on US google you can find sites showing you exactly who in your area has paid for child porn over the internet - can be bit of a shock how many there are though - Maidstone in kent is riddled with them !

Sean, London,

Why on earth are we worried about the paedophiles? Megans Law is transparent and effective in the US and should be brought in here without delay. Dithering allows paedophiles to think they might get away with it - Megans Law means they know they cannot...ever

Jon, London, UK

Kids are now more at risk from other kids than even the worst paedophiles is the sorry reality. Look at the death toll in the last month.
Even adults are as the latest gun robbery in Swindon demonstrates.

David Cage, Highworth, UK

To Emma, Ottawa

If you re-read the article it says up to 90% of paedophiles operate within the family unit. So, your suggestion to locate them outside of family areas would be virtually impossible.

It's a very difficult situation, but I believe all relevant information should be held only by the authorities and not handed out to the public. Too many people have been mistakenly identified as paedophiles and subjected to mob rule.

Alan, Brighton, UK

What confuses me is the argument that we can't drive sex abusers underground, that we need to 'monitor' them. What does that mean? Paedophiles don't go around wearing a sign - therefore parents are none the wiser whether someone is underground or not. And what does monitoring mean? I don't know of any sophisticated programs for abusers trying to integrate back into society. Maybe it means a visit to parole officer? (Assuming that they have been to prison in the past which on the statistics is not likley).

Kate, London, UK

I think children would be better protected by having ankle bracelets on released paedophiles and then offering them close supervision and support so that they do not break down and reoffend. It does make sense for them to be located outside of family areas, and some address dissemination information might help protect communities.

Emma Hawthorne, Ottawa, Canada