Australian sex offender should not have children, victim says

Sydney - One of the victims of a convicted child sex offender in Australia who recently fathered twins by a Thai surrogate said Saturday he should not be allowed to have custody of children.

David Farnell’s past came to light after the surrogate accused the 56-year-old electrician and his wife of abandoning one of the children- a boy called Gammy who has Down’s Syndrome.

"We need to stop putting the perpetrators first and allowing different laws only at different times, because there are so many innocent babies and children that are abused day in day out. Its disgusting," the West Australian newspaper quoted the woman identified only as Sarah.

In 1997, Farnell was convicted of sexually abusing Sarah and her sister when they were aged 7 and 10. His three-year prison term was extended by 18 months when he was found guilty of sexually assaulting an 11-year-old girl.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Australian-sex-offender-should-not-have-children-v-30241613.html

-- The Nation 2014-08-23

I couldn't agree more - no way should it be allowed.

And only 4 1/2 years for his previous convictions is way too lenient IMHO.

Well from now on people involved in surrogacy in Thailand could be looking at 10 yrs imprisonment. Paedophilles locked in a Thai prison.

The junta has vowed to introduce a new law that could result in 10 years' imprisonment for anyone found guilty of involvement in the trade.

Dozens, possibly hundreds, of foreign couples are thought to have been left in limbo after entering into surrogacy arrangements through clinics in the kingdom.

Read more at http://www.9news.com...006GJZU6tzf0.99

The problem is that in many of these cases, one of them is the biological parent. The gov't is going to decide who is allowed to be a parent? We also need to remember that the surrogate mother is voluntarily relinquishing the child.

If a couple has used fertilized eggs for the surrogacy, the surrogate mother isn't even the biological mother.

Well from now on people involved in surrogacy in Thailand could be looking at 10 yrs imprisonment. Paedophilles locked in a Thai prison.

The junta has vowed to introduce a new law that could result in 10 years' imprisonment for anyone found guilty of involvement in the trade.

Dozens, possibly hundreds, of foreign couples are thought to have been left in limbo after entering into surrogacy arrangements through clinics in the kingdom.

Read more at http://www.9news.com...006GJZU6tzf0.99

Well ,,, boohooh for them

It was illigal then and it still is,.

i believe these people should get life as it seems they will cintinue to offend once relesed from jail . i learnt first hand as my son was molested by my then wifes brother and was severley punished and was not allowed access to my son but once i seperated from and then got dicorced he started again and continued for many more years . i asked my son all the time if everything was ok to which he said yes and only told me after his 21st birthday . drove straight to the police but was told i cannot do anything because he was to old but they took all his details and i read in a newspaper that he had received a severe beating (not saying the police did this). my son was way to embarresed to report his abuse but as soon as he turned 16 he left his mother and lived with me .if your children have been abused by a family member never trust them again and make sure they are never left alone under any circumstances .

Edited August 23, 201412 yr by keith101

The problem is that in many of these cases, one of them is the biological parent. The gov't is going to decide who is allowed to be a parent? We also need to remember that the surrogate mother is voluntarily relinquishing the child.

If a couple has used fertilized eggs for the surrogacy, the surrogate mother isn't even the biological mother.

Agreed, Scott. However I don't think they are necessarily proposing the children stay with the surrogate mother. If a child is seriously at risk (and I cannot help but feel a parent with three convictions puts them in that position) the children are taken into care at birth. Care is far from an ideal situation in itself, but is infinitely better than leaving a child in the clutches of a paedophile.

The problem is that in many of these cases, one of them is the biological parent. The gov't is going to decide who is allowed to be a parent? We also need to remember that the surrogate mother is voluntarily relinquishing the child.

If a couple has used fertilized eggs for the surrogacy, the surrogate mother isn't even the biological mother.

This is correct and very significant. It puts the law-keepers in a quandary; The child in each case is already conceived, the crime of soliciting surrogacy is hardly serious enough to withhold the child from the biological parents. What happens next? A hefty fine would be interpreted as, and is essentially the same as, the state taxing surrogacy.

A prison sentence...for who? The foreign parent? Which one? Both?

The simple solution, for babies not yet conceived, is to ensure no paperwork can legitimise the surrogacy.No paperwork means the baby can not be taken out of the country, so people seeking surrogates will stop coming.

The work-around of course is to adopt the child who was conceived with the foreign father's sperm....nobody but the parents, the artificial inseminator, and the surrogate mother need ever know who the biological parents are.

Many sex offences go unreported so I would imagine the police in Australia have already received many new complaints which may lead to a lot more police investigations but unfortunately I suspect many will be false.

I would have thought that even that he is the natural farther the baby girl would have been removed from his care by welfare workers for obvious reasons.

what better way for paedophiles to gain access to minors than to buy them and have them living in their household

This whole thing needs serious regulation both in Thailand and in the country of the purchaser

There should now be a full investigation to identify all those that have already completed transaction both in Thailand and their home countries

Thailand is still a big magnet for undesirables. Only a matter of time before all foreigners will have to obtain a police clearance, in their country of origin, before obtaining any sought of visa thanks to characters like Farnell.

Edited August 23, 201412 yr by MK1

GAMMY SCANDAL
Australian sex offender's victim says he should not have children
The Sunday Nation

Sydney: -- One of the victims of a convicted child-sex offender in Australia, who recently fathered twins by a Thai surrogate, said yesterday that he should not be allowed to have custody of children.

David Farnell's past came to light after the surrogate accused the 56-year-old electrician and his wife of abandoning one of the children - a boy called Gammy who has Down's Syndrome. "We need to stop putting the perpetrators first and allowing different laws only at different times, because there are so many innocent babies and children that are abused day in day out. It's disgusting," the West Australian newspaper quoted the woman identified only as Sarah.

In 1997, Farnell was convicted of sexually abusing Sarah and her sister when they were aged 7 and 10. His three-year prison term was extended by 18 months when he was found guilty of sexually assaulting an 11-year-old girl.

"It is my belief he should not have any children - not just him, all paedophiles," Sarah said.

The baby Gammy case prompted a public outcry and put the spotlight on Thailand where thousands of foreigners seek the services of surrogate mothers each year. The Farnells are raising his sister Pipah in Australia.

In Thailand, two surrogate mothers yesterday provided additional testimonies to Bangkok's Lumpini Police, affirming that Dr Pisit Tantiwattanakul of All IVF clinic was the one who had carried out the surrogate pregnancy procedure on them.

Case investigator Pol Colonel Decha Phronsuwan said Ae (not her real name) aged 38, and Bee (not her real name), aged 33, had given birth to a girl and a pair of boy-girl twins respectively. The three babies, later discovered along with six other babies at a Lat Phrao condominium, were now under the care of the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security. Tomorrow morning, police would meet with some 4-5 remaining surrogate mothers for information, Decha added.

A source reported that the two women had testified they were hired to be surrogate mothers and had undergone the medical procedure at Pisit's Phloenchit clinic until they gave births.

The source quoted Ae as claiming that she underwent the surrogate pregnancy since November 2013 and Pisit was her doctor when she gave birth to a baby girl last September at a private hospital in Bangkok. Ae claimed she was paid Bt300,000 in instalments via her bank account. Bee, who also underwent the same procedure from last May until she gave birth this January, was reportedly paid Bt300,000, the source said. The two women told police that they didn't know each other before and didn't know that the Japanese man, who fathered the babies, had hired other women to do the same.

Pisit, who would be facing two charges according to the Medical Facilities Act, has not yet shown up to meet with the police despite the summons deadline on Friday. Decha said Pisit had asked to meet the police on September 6. Police had asked him for an earlier appointment and warned they would seek an arrest arrant.

Meanwhile, police are reportedly contacting their counterparts in other countries to help locate Mitsutoki Shigeta, the Japanese man at the centre of the surrogacy scandal.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Australian-sex-offenders-victim-says-he-should-not-30241623.html

-- The Nation 2014-08-24

Thailand is still a big magnet for undesirables. Only a matter of time before all foreigners will have to obtain a police clearance, in their country of origin, before obtaining any sought of visa thanks to characters like Farnell.

Damn good idea. Thailand and SEA is a haven for sexpests and perverts not to mention other crims on the run.

I couldn't agree more - no way should it be allowed.

And only 4 1/2 years for his previous convictions is way too lenient IMHO.

There is the dilemma.

It seems this bloke has married a Chinese lady who, presumably, can't have kids naturally. Do you want to deny her having children of her own?

If no...then what is the answer?

If yes ...then what is the answer to all the other people who can't have kids?

tricky one - unless the answer is bad luck - nature made you the way are...no kids for you..

Japanese man wanted to father 1,000 kids

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Japanese-man-wanted-to-father-1000-kids-30241087.html

Should human fertility be allowed to become a business ?

I say NO.

Edited August 24, 201412 yr by RandomSand

Yes the victim should hand back all the money she received from the surrogacy agency and given to the child in questions trust fund he should be put into care be it in Thailand or Australia where ever is more beneficial for the child and both the parents can contribute to his upbringing via a trust fund I am sure they are both just thinking of the best welfare for the child and nothing to do with money or publicity, and up to the Thai Junta to bring in laws to stop selling children baby farming should be banned in every country money should never change hands for a child.

It is a no-brainer to me that a convicted pedophile should lose all access to children, including his own as long as they are minors. We've seen time and time again that there is no rehabilitation for these people...they never change. This fellow had multiple convictions and I would assume there were other incidents that were not reported or were dropped for lack of evidence so the convictions were surely the tip of the iceberg. He's a serial offender; He's shown he cannot be trusted around children...so, how in the hell is he even allowed to have children in Australia? I'm sorry but the welfare of the child comes before any rights of the pedo; so the way it should be is, if he wants to be free then he must stay away from all children, no compromise...if he doesn't like it then he can go back to jail. How is there even a debate about this? The family services department should be ashamed of themselves. Their job is to protect the children 1st as they are the most vulnerable members of society. If the law isn't correct then correct it for chrissakes. Stop wasting time.