The New York Times has a good article about a topic we've been covering here: Should people who possess child porn be required to pay monetary damages to the victims? (This is just for possession, not creating the images themselves.) Most people probably don't have a problem with that, though some are concerned about the amount. A few offenders have been ordered to pay over $100K, which legal experts claim is excessive punishment.
The article tells the story of a woman named Amy, whose uncle went to prison for taking pornographic pictures of her as a girl. They've turned up in over 800 federal investigations -- since 2005. Economists actually examined her case and calculated that, with the cost of counseling, lost wages, etc., she deserves $3.4 million in damages.
(Missouri is considering something similar. State Sen. Matt Bartle has proposed a bill that would let child-porn victims sue for a minimum of $150K from those who own or distribute the images.)
Hat Tip: Many thanks, cripjak!