It is a reaction to a perceived threat unless you can prove that there is significant risk of abuse to a significantly large section of society. Otherwise it is pointless, needless and worthless overkill.
will prevalence rates of abuse suffice then?
look here then
http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/research/Briefings/prevalenceTable1_wdf49715.pdf
Agains surveys show that we are talking abiut 10 -20 % of the population. A figure so high that most people tend to just denounce it as b0llocks but hey you can all use Google and find the results out for yourself.
Knee jerk reaction a judical survey started dec 2003, published June 2004 and implemented in 2010.. the very definition of kneejerk reaction there.
It is interesting that no one in the field is objecting only those of you who dont work in the field.
Do you doubt this legislation will prevent inceidents of abuse?
Why is NOT filling in a form more important to you than protecting children and preventing abuse?
Porterclough
Surely the problem with all this type of thing is that the result will be that the only people still wanting to have contact with children will be the very people who should not have contact with them, as they will be the most motivated.
Honestly are you trying to say here only paedos will apply now there is a form involved? Why on earth would you think that? Surely the reverse is true ? The only people not motivated to apply will be paedos. See the otherjonv post for example (someone again with experience in this area) and please do try and explain why you think this to be the case.
Sandwich
The problem may be more with the CPS stopping cases that have a fair chance of success and thus preventing a proper record of abuse.
These kind of thing that would not appear on a current CRB test will appear on an ISA report..
Fill in a form and protect kids or go on about knee jerk reactions and dont protect children. It really is not a difficult choice for me.
I have never heard of Cohen or his work but [if wiki is to be believed] apparently
Cohen suggests the media overreact to an aspect of behaviour which may be seen as a challenge to existing social norms
I think child abuse does not actually challenge social norms it actually violates them. Anyone care to disagree?
) I just don't feel this legislation particularly is. Its not so bad in Children's mental health but when I worked with schizoprenia/drug addiction/offending the 'moral panic'/local press factor was frequently quite ludicrous. What people wanted there was really not what would really help overall. However cponversely, you wouldn't believe some of the morally 'wrong' decisions that did not get publicised in health and social care because of purely financial/logistical reasons. 
