THE CASE of a convicted sex offender's family being, in effect, prevented by hostile neighbours from moving to an East Lancashire housing estate highlights a quandary for the authorities and the community over the return of such people to society.
For though the law says those who have served their sentences have been dealt with, the instinct of ordinary people towards these offenders is one of extreme caution as well as repugnance.
They fear that prison does not rehabilitate them.
And they ask: "What if he strikes again?"
It is an understandable concern, particularly among parents.
And instances of serial sex offenders being released into the community have led to calls for residents to be automatically informed of those who move into their neighbourhood.
Even the police in some areas have taken steps to warn to warn schools of their presence - though they have stopped short of actual identification.
And some newspapers, including this one, have, out of a sense of public duty, gone further and named such offenders and published their addresses, so that residents are alerted to the potential danger to themselves and their children.
It was in response to just such a perceived threat posed by this man's forthcoming release from prison that prompted residents of Darwen's Ellenshaw Estate to petition against his wife and children being allocated a house there.
The wife responded to these feelings by deciding not to move into the area.
But if that has proved satisfactory for the concerned residents, is it a fair outcome overall?
For in addition to the offender having served his punishment, there is the question of whether, on release, he should suffer more in the form of public ostracism. And, after all, these people have to live somewhere .
Many people would have little sympathy for any sex offender suffering this ordeal and would prefer to err on the side of caution by having their community made aware of his presence in their midst.
But is it way beyond that yardstick when the offender's wife and children are made outcasts - for a crime they did not commit?
The dilemma for the authorities and for individual consciences - now increased by the pressure for communities to be informed of convicted sex offenders coming to live in their area - is as acute as the concern is understandable.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article