Its "for the children".
You should see what happens if someone actually gets caught with 'possible' child porn in their browser's cache from possibly coming across it in google image search somehow as a thumbnail with no intention of collecting that kind of information. Hell the current 2257 record keeping regulation (which was ruled unconstitiontional in 9th district, but isn't out of the woods yet) was created "for the protection of children". The revision they wanted would require the same record keeping for even clothed shots, and anything that could be remotely perceived as sexually suggestive (all it takes is a closet pedo judge to find an image suggestive to make that ruling work).
But yea anything dealing with minors or offenses against minors often get it much harsher, when all she did was turn the kid into a lil motherfucker, and far as he's concerned, he never knew her, he basically just got laid possibly before all his friends and to a "woman".