Significant variations in the sentences handed out by the Irish courts to individuals convicted of offences such as taking a child for sexual exploitation and allowing a child to be used for pornography have been highlighted in new research.
The authors of a forthcoming book on the issue also argue that the increasing perception of childhood as a particularly dangerous time has adversely led even routine dealings with children to be viewed with suspicion, or what they call the "paedophile gaze".
Research contained in Child Pornography: Crime, Computers and Society, reveals that individuals who take a child for sexual exploitation or allow them to be used for pornography received a sentence of up to six years imprisonment in some cases, but just two to two-and-a-half years in other cases.
Similarly, those involved in the production of and/or distribution of child pornography received sentences ranging from three years to two years suspended.
The vast majority of the cases studied related to simple possession of child pornography material, with sentences ranging from five years imprisonment with the last two years suspended, to a €600 fine.
Judges interviewed by the authors said they attach particular weight to the seriousness of the crime when determining punishment, but felt that a set of sentencing guidelines similar to those available in the UK would be of benefit to Irish judges.
Among the other considerations for judges when determining sentences were the nature of the images and whether a guilty plea was entered.
The book also finds that there is no evidence that "sex tourist" legislation introduced here in 1996 has been used to charge any Irish citizen or resident who committed a sexual offence against a child outside the State.
The authors analysed sentences in 47 cases covered by newspapers here between 2000 and 2004, 13 cases identified in confidential interviews with judges, and 36 cases outlined to the authors by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The latter interviews did not identify defendants, meaning many of the cases overlapped.
The authors, Prof Ian O'Donnell and Claire Milner of UCD's Institute of Criminology, note the relationship between child pornography and the use of childhood sexuality as a marketing tool.
They point to a marketing niche known as "KGOY (Kids getting older younger)", which is exploited by companies to promote sexualised material to young children.
But they argue the criminal justice response to child pornography actually exacerbates the problem.
"[ It] causes an overestimation of the risks faced by children with all the attendant anxiety for parents and carers.
"It would be to our collective advantage to shape a society where the threat to children's sexual integrity is acknowledged as real but manageable rather than as a cause of crippling anxiety," it states.