Biological determinism as explanation for abuse by step-parents

["JIM CHRISTOPHERSON" <Jim.Christopherson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Does anyone have any references for the idea that step-fathers (or 
mothers) abuse step-children more than natural parents because they 
do not have the biological or genetic investment in them? Or even 
that step-children may take resources away from the biological child. 
This happens frequently in the animal world, to the extent that the 
offspring of former mates may be killed.

In the sexual abuse context, there is a school of thought which 
suggests that men would wish to spread their genes as wide as 
possible, and a step-daughter of child bearing age would be fair 
game. Social or moral imperatives control this behaviour in most 
cases, but the biological imperative remains.

Any sources putting forwaard these ideas would be welcome. Thanks in 
advance.

Jim Christopherson
Jim Christopherson
School of Social Studies,
University of Nottingham,
University Park,
Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK
E-mail lqzjc@lzn2.lass.nottingham.ac.uk