Ah, Amos! This is exactly the type of information a prosecutor will consider when drafting an indictment.

Charge 1: Assault GBH, First Alternative: Cruelty to a child, and so on. Make a book of charges.

Even the sexual aspect is not difficult, technically speaking – it would be much easier to prove than a case where there is no physical evidence.

The special category was created as a political sop to voters, Michael. This will ALWAYS be GBH. By definition, it is GBH.

The voters complain about something? OK. Let’s pass a law. That’ll keep the voters quiet for a while. They are too stupid to see that we have done nothing under the current, quite adequate law, so let’s make a piece of legislation with fancy words and lots of sub-paragraphs and difficult jurisdictional thresholds. Let’s deflect their gaze from our miserable failure up to now to do anything about this.

We had a parliamentarian who, the other day, told a group of rural women that she will request Parliament to make the sentence for murder life imprisonment and they cheered her! Facepalm! Murder already carries a sentence of life imprisonment, you dishonest shyster!

Bah! The only article in the legislation that is remotely useful is the piece that criminalises taking the child out of the country for the procedure.

As to VrijVlinder’s suggestion that “guidance” refers to tact. Again, I do not think so. There are guidance notes for child abuse already. Why should this barbaric practise be seen as anything but child abuse? It IS child abuse. Why does it merit special treatment? What is the difference between these parents and other parents who abuse children? They are all scum.

Sorry for my rant. When it comes to the harming of children, I tend to shout.