Are prison sentences for child abusers too lenient?

Following the news that Myles Bradbury had his sentence reduced from twenty two years to sixteen years, should harsher sentences be imposed on those found guilty of sexual abuse on children?

I realise that by writing this, I'm opening myself up to tweets from people with disturbing thought patterns. The last time I wrote about paedophiles I was tweeted by someone who seemed more concerned about the term I used to describe these people, rather than the obscene urges that most, if not all of them eventually succumb to.

Believe me when I say, there are much worse terms I could have used.

In this particular case Bradbury was found guilty of abusing children with illnesses such as leukaemia. It's bad enough that these children were already suffering and Bradbury made it worse by taking advantage of them at a time when they should have been cared for. In the case of those who died from their various conditions, they spent their final days suffering abuse at the hands of Bradbury.

If it's true that paedophilia is an illness, then I still have extremely limited sympathy for people who suffer from it. The majority of my sympathy lies with the children affected.

Therefore I believe those found guilty of abusing children in this way should receive the harshest possible sentence and one which shouldn't later be reduced. We must put children's safety first, above the needs of the abusers.

For Bradbury's surviving victims their sentence will last a lifetime along with their (wrongly) self-imposed guilt. Knowing that he's locked away, unable to harm others will provide some small comfort, but knowing he will be released sooner than expected will not. The reduced sentence sends out the message that the abuse is less serious than initially thought and deserves less punishment. However that should not be the message sent out to the victims who suffered through no fault of their own. The sentence should have stayed as it was, not only to punish Bradbury for his crimes, but to keep him locked away from the temptation to act upon his sick urges for as long as possible.