The Case of Child pornographer at Cambridge University - Essay Example

The Case of Child pornographer at Cambridge UniversityThe case of child pornographer at Cambridge University, as discussed in “Child pornographer sparks debate” by Will Johnson, Kim Magi, and the Martlet, offers an imperative case of moral debate in the modern context. In a reflective analysis of the case provided, I would argue that Cambridge University’s Vice Chancellor Alison Richard cannot be justified for his decision to allow Dr. Nicholas Hammond to return to his job after he admitted to possessing, making, and distributing child pornography.

Significantly, it is a case of violence against children and an internationally recognized university as Cambridge University cannot offer a wrong message to the international community with such a decision. By the implementation of Alison Richard’s decision, the Cambridge University seems to be indicating that they are not taking his charge seriously, and that it is acceptable to produce, distribute, and possess child pornography. A trustworthy and recognized institution like the Cambridge University cannot send a wrong message to the international community by such irresponsible actions.

Instead, the university should adopt measures which will send a significant message to the wrongdoers in child abuse. I totally agree with Kim Magi’s argument that Cambridge is disrespecting all families that have suffered due to child abuse. It is also important to note that police discovered over 1,500 images of child pornography at his Cambridge University-owned home and the Vice Chancellor seems to suggest that child pornography made at the University-owned home can be overlooked as a silly crime.

The total credibility of the institution is brought under question by the Vice Chancellor’s decision and I strongly disagree with this attempt. A profound analysis of the case of child pornographer at Cambridge University confirms that University Vice Chancellor’s decision to allow Dr. Nicholas Hammond to return to his job raises an important question of human morality as well as the credibility of an internationally recognized institution. As Kim Magi suggests, child molesters like Hammond are mass murderers and criminals against humanity.

It is also important to recognize that a university professor is someone trustworthy and respectable. Therefore, Nicholas Hammond is a person who has done crime against children as well as his profession. In short, Vice Chancellor’s decision to allow Dr. Nicholas Hammond to return to his job is highly condemnable and must be protested.