Child sex dolls and robots: challenging the boundaries of the child protection framework

B. Chatterjee
{"title":"Child sex dolls and robots: challenging the boundaries of the child protection framework","authors":"B. Chatterjee","doi":"10.1080/13600869.2019.1600870","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Foreign-made child sex dolls are now commercially available online, and recent cases indicate that their importation is a criminal offence. However, whilst there are growing calls for criminalisation, it is unclear as to where the law stands in relation to them and their robotic counterparts. This article seeks to initiate debate by asking; could and should child sex dolls and robots be caught by the child protection framework? Considering core offences, it explores whether and where such items might fit within the current law. The argument proposed is that that whilst there may be patchy coverage no single statute provides a convincing match. Drawing analogies to legal debates on child pornography, the article considers various justifications for criminalisation. Following a harm-based perspective, it proposes new crimes under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (‘SOA’) which address the creation, distribution and possession of child sex dolls and robots where a real child is involved in their creation. Where sex dolls and robots are fantasy creations, it is argued that different considerations arise and it is difficult to justify the same range of restrictions. Accordingly, separate SOA offences are suggested with exception made for self-made artefacts that are intended solely for private use.","PeriodicalId":53660,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2019.1600870","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

ABSTRACT Foreign-made child sex dolls are now commercially available online, and recent cases indicate that their importation is a criminal offence. However, whilst there are growing calls for criminalisation, it is unclear as to where the law stands in relation to them and their robotic counterparts. This article seeks to initiate debate by asking; could and should child sex dolls and robots be caught by the child protection framework? Considering core offences, it explores whether and where such items might fit within the current law. The argument proposed is that that whilst there may be patchy coverage no single statute provides a convincing match. Drawing analogies to legal debates on child pornography, the article considers various justifications for criminalisation. Following a harm-based perspective, it proposes new crimes under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (‘SOA’) which address the creation, distribution and possession of child sex dolls and robots where a real child is involved in their creation. Where sex dolls and robots are fantasy creations, it is argued that different considerations arise and it is difficult to justify the same range of restrictions. Accordingly, separate SOA offences are suggested with exception made for self-made artefacts that are intended solely for private use.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童充气娃娃和机器人:挑战儿童保护框架的边界
国外制造的儿童充气娃娃现在可以在网上买到,最近的案件表明,进口儿童充气娃娃是一种刑事犯罪。然而,尽管越来越多的人呼吁将其定为刑事犯罪,但目前尚不清楚法律对他们和他们的机器人同伴的立场。本文试图通过以下问题引发辩论:儿童充气娃娃和机器人是否应该被纳入儿童保护框架?考虑到核心犯罪,它探讨了这些项目是否适用于现行法律,以及在哪里适用。提出的论点是,虽然可能存在不完整的覆盖范围,但没有一个法规提供令人信服的匹配。这篇文章以儿童色情的法律辩论为例,考虑了刑事定罪的各种理由。根据基于伤害的观点,它提出了2003年《性犯罪法》(SOA)下的新罪行,该法案涉及儿童性玩偶和机器人的制作,分发和拥有,其中涉及一个真正的孩子。在性玩偶和机器人都是幻想的产物的地方,有人认为会出现不同的考虑,很难证明同样范围的限制是合理的。因此,建议单独的SOA违规行为,但仅供私人使用的自制工件除外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Certification as guidance for data protection by design Regulatory options for vehicle telematics devices: balancing driver safety, data privacy and data security Electronic justice as a mechanism for ensuring the right of access to justice in a pandemic: the experience of Ukraine and the EU Algorithms patrolling content: where’s the harm? Editorial for special issue. BILETA Conference 2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1