Controversial yes, but it would solve a problem instantly

I am talking about the ongoing child abduction/trafficking throughout the world, such as the mystery girl found in a Roma camp recently.

The answer albeit controversial, and I guess the POE members will make their thoughts known via this forum thread is, in my opinion to.....microchip!

Yes microchip the children at birth, with it set to fail/disolve, or be removed at 18/21 years when they are comparatively safe, or at least considered able to make up their own mind.

So what are your views POE members, and once again you heard it here first!

But doesn't the State or States/Government/Interpol departments already get involved in looking for the kids John?

Further, it wouldn't be any different to you carrying a National Insurance card that contains a whole lot more information, except that you officially 'lose it' when you are of age.

The information carried in a chip need only be:

Born City/Town:

Country Of Birth: 

Parents: Mr & Mrs, Mr/Miss:

Blood Group:

Job done, noe more kids stolen, trafficked, abused without a real chance of being found.

I expected this to be controversial, but maybe POE members are not even interested in voicing an opinion?

I can't see how this would prevent a crime occurring or help with finding the missing child. I agree that a chip could provide evidence of the child's identity once the child is found, but there are other ways of confirming the child's origin e.g. DNA profiling.

Unfortunately, it seems that no amount of modern technology (CCTV, Mobile Phone Trackers etc) can prevent a crime being committed.

The point is Edward it would soon prove who they were when found and it might also make the perpetrators think twice if they knew that the odds were stacked against them. DNA would only work if we all were to agree to give a sample.

Now that could be called State/Government intrusion

I think the point is that technology has been shown to be of little use in preventing crime, although it can be of value in convicting the perpetrator after the event.  For example, this country has more CCTV cameras per head of population than anywhere else on earth but it does not stop the mindless violence, vandalism and thuggery which goes on in every town and city. The CCTV evidence might be useful in court, but it doesn't stop the original event happening.

You assume that the perpetrators would be deterred by the presence of a microchip. The sort of people who might abduct a child would not reckon on being caught. There is also the huge cost of administering such a scheme.

Remember the State Identity Card, introduced under Labour and scrapped by the Coalition. This scheme was unpopular and a financial disaster, with only 15,000 cards issued at a cost to the taxpayer of around £17,000 per card ! See This Link (Daily Mail)