Re: sexual abuse and offenders

[Thomas Oellerich <oelleric@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Carole
	I agree that the term "hysteria" is not especially scientific.  But
neither is the term "sex abuse."  From the scientific perspective, the
stance should be that sex abuse is not to be assumed but is a matter to be
established as a conclusion.  Thus, it would be better to be studying
adult-nonadult sexual interactions which may involve contact/noncontact
experiences in familial/nonfamilial settings which may be wanted/unwanted
with the latter involving or not involving coercion.  I would argue the
only category that is abusive is the unwanted/coerced category regardless
of setting.

	My use of hysteria is unquestionably political in nature, but so has been
the use of the term "sex abuse" by the child advocates.  But the latter has
been far more detrimental to the public's perception.  I think of McMartin,
Buckey, Akiki, etc., and all the children who have been victimized by
professionals (not necessarily the scientifically oriented) who have
persuaded them to believe something happened that did not.  

	Further, I agree also with Costin, Karger, & Stoesz (1996) who point to
the exploitation of child abuse by "opportunistic psychotherapists and
aggressive attorneys" with  the result that a public "that is sympathetic
to the plight of abused and neglected children fails to understand that it
foots much of the bill for an out-of-control and demand-driven legal and
psychotherpay industry.  In the meantime, these businesses consume millions
of tax dollars (and, I would add, insurance dollars) even as resources for
abused children wither" (The Politics of Child Abuse, p. 7).  

	I think the scientific community should not be sustaining this
exploitation.  It should be using more neutral terminology and, as
suggested in The APSAC Handbook on Child Maltreatment by  Patricia
Crittenden (p. 166), viewing this behavior "more as a common variant of
human behavior than (as) abnormal behavior."

Tom 





  /99 -0500, you wrote:
>While I appreciate what Tom is saying and think it is important to dispel
>myths that all/most perpetrators are necessarily victims, it is equally
>important to not perpetuate terms like "sexual abuse hysteria of the last
>15 or 20 years".  That is both an imprecise term and an opinion certainly
>open to considerable debate amongst child abuse researchers.  Terms like
>that which are not based on scientific research can cause
>considerable damage and impact public
>perceptions in unfortunate ways.   
>
>On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Thomas Oellerich wrote:
>
>> Chris 
>> This is interesting.  Later (1996), Cathy Widom provided data to the
>> Government Accounting Office for its report on the cycle of sexual abuse
>> (1996, Sept.).  The data (Table 1) in the report indicates that "the
>> differences between the sexually abused group and the control group in the
>> offs of arrest for any sex crime or for rape or sodomy separately were not
>> statistically significant."  The sexually abused were, however,
>> significantly more likely to have been arrested for prostitution.  
>> 
>> 	In this report, a review of 23 retrospective studies, 2 prospective
>> studies, and 4 review articles, the conclusions included: most sex
>> offenders had not been sexually abused as a child; the majority of victims
>> of child sex abuse do not grow up to be sex offenders, and "the evidence
>> from these studies was insufficient to establish that being sexually abused
>> as a child is either a necessary or a sufficient condition for the victim's
>> becoming a sexual abuser as an adult." (p.5)
>> 
>> 	The concern about the abused becoming offenders seems to be a part of the
>> folklore surrounding the sex abuse hysteria of the last 15 to 20 years.
>> 
>> Tom Oellerich
>> Dept. of Social Work
>> Ohio University
>> Athens OH	
>> 
>> At 11:51 AM 3/1/99 -0600, you wrote:
>> >At 05:09 PM 2/25/99 EST, you wrote:
>> >>I have not read the CASA report and I am not familiar with their
>> >>findings, but regarding your question about the association of
>> >>childhood victimization and adult offending there is evidence
>> >>to consider.  Cathy Widom is well known for her prospective study
>> >>examining various forms of childhood victimization and later adult
>> >>offenses. I don't have the citations at the moment but I'm sure
>> >>you all have them or can find them.  Widom found a small effect
>> >>of physical abuse and neglect on later violent offending, but as
>> >>for sexual abuse...there was no relation to adult sexual offending.
>> >
>> >I'm not sure this is an appropriate characterization of Widom's findings.
>> >I'm referring specifically to "Criminal Consequences of Childhood Sexual
>> >Victimization" in Child Abuse & Neglect 18(4).  In this study, Widom found
>> >that sexual abuse victims were 4.7 times as likely to be arrested for "any
>> >sex crime" (including incest, child molestation, rape, sodomy, assault and
>> >battery with intent to gratify, among others) when compared with controls.
>> >Physical abuse and neglect were also associated with this outcome.
>> >Physical abuse, but not sexual abuse, was significantly associated with an
>> >adult arrest for "rape or sodomy."  From these findings she speculates
that
>> >"the criminogenic effect associated with sexual offending may not result
>> >from sexual abuse uniquely, but rather may be associated with the trauma
>> >and stress of these early childhood experiences or society's response to
>> >the event" (313).    
>> >
>> >The claim that there is no "sexual cycle of violence" should not be
>> >interpreted to mean that sexual abuse is not associated with adult sexual
>> >offending.  Rather, Widom's evidence suggests (to her) that the mechanism
>> >linking sexual abuse with adult sexual offending does not produce uniquely
>> >severe or distinct outcomes when compared with other forms of
maltreatment.
>> > This finding indicates that we may not need a specific theory of the
>> >effects of sexual abuse.  Sexual abuse, physical abuse, and neglect may be
>> >theoretically equivalent in terms of their impact, pointing to the
>> >possibility of developing a more powerful general theory of the effects of
>> >maltreatment.  
>> >
>> >I agree, however, that it is far too early to make any strong claims
>> >regarding the pattern of empirical association between maltreatment
>> >experiences and the subsequent likelihood of adult sexual offending.  
>> >
>> >Chris Browning
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>At a conference I asked Widom about this issue, to which she
>> >>responded that there appears to be no sexual cycle of violence.
>> >>A couple of years ago there was a GAO report examining the sexual
>> >>cycle of violence, which examined Widom's data, data from Linda Williams,
>> >>and some other data, and their conclusion as well was that there is
>> >>no support for the idea of a sexual cycle of violence.
>> >>
>> >>For clinicians, of course, it is possible to have a preponderance of
clients
>> >>who have experienced abuse and report abusing others.  However, the
>> >>clinician must remember that there are distinct selection biases at work
>> >>in determining which types of people come to you (or are brought to you)
>> >>for treatment.  For some individuals, childhood sexual abuse may be a
>> >>factor in later sexual offenses.  But for the general population,
>> >>this does not appear to be a risk factor.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Evan R. Harrington, Ph.D.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >*****************************************
>> >
>> >Christopher R. Browning
>> >NICHD Postdoctoral Fellow
>> >Population Research Center
>> >NORC and The University of Chicago
>> >1155 E. 60th Street
>> >Chicago, IL 60637
>> >
>> >Phone: 773/256-6299
>> >Email: cbrow@spc.uchicago.edu
>> >
>> >*****************************************
>> >
>> 
>
>