[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: sibling incest and consent
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2712.300" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=552102407-31122001><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>Indeed, it may be
wise to take the "victim's" word for it in "sexual abuse" cases other than just
sibling incest. Victim advocates typically and rightfully urge us to
"listen to victims." I agree, even when it disturbs our own view of
things. For example:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=552102407-31122001><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=552102407-31122001>Rind, Bruce<STRONG> Gay and bisexual
adolescent boys' sexual experiences with men: An empirical examination of
psychological correlates in a nonclinical sample. .</STRONG> Archives of Sexual
Behavior. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers: US, 2001 Aug. 30 (4): p. 345-368
Language: English. Pub type: Empirical Study<BR><BR><STRONG>Abstract:
</STRONG>Over the last quarter century the incest model, with its image of
helpless victims exploited and traumatized by powerful perpetrators, has come to
dominate perceptions of virtually all forms of adult-minor sex. Thus, even
willing sexual relations between gay or bisexual adolescent boys and adult men,
which differ from father-daughter incest in many important ways, are generally
seen by the lay public and professionals as traumatizing and psychologically
injurious. This study assessed this common perception by examining a
nonclinical, mostly college sample of gay and bisexual men. Of the 129 men (aged
17-25 yrs) in the study, 26 were identified as having had age-discrepant sexual
relations (ADSRs) as adolescents between 12 and 17 yrs of age with adult males.
Men with ADSR experiences were as well adjusted as controls in terms of
self-esteem and having achieved a positive sexual identity. Reactions to the
ADSRs were predominantly positive, and most ADSRs were willingly engaged in.
Younger adolescents were just as willing and reacted at least as positively as
older adolescents. Data on sexual identity development indicated that ADSRs
played no role in creating same-sex sexual interests, contrary to the
"seduction" hypothesis. Findings were inconsistent with the incest
model.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<P><FONT
size=2>***************************************************************************<BR> Ron
Kokish at Delson-Kokish Associates, P.O. Box 476, Trinidad, CA
95570<BR> Clinical and Forensic
Evaluations, Consultation &
Training<BR>
(707)677-3181-voice
(707)677-0187-fax<BR>
ron@delko.net-email
www.northcoast.com/~dka<BR>***************************************************************************<BR></FONT></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
[mailto:owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu]<B>On Behalf Of
</B>Tom Oellerich<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, December 29, 2001 2:11
PM<BR><B>To:</B> Child Maltreatment Researchers<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: sibling
incest and consent<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>For legal purposes perhaps. But
otherwise why - why can we not take the person's word that it was
voluntary? Age differences are irrelevant - see Kilpatrick, A. 1992)
Long-range effects of child and adolescent sexual experiences: Myths, mores
and menaces.<BR><BR>At 05:49 PM 12/27/2001 -0700, you wrote:<BR><BR><FONT
size=2>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite">I would never consider small age differences
the only criteria for deciding if an act was consensual. Given the way you
report this girl described the encounters they were clearly not consensual.
But I do think that with children very close in age whether it was
consensual or not needs to be specifically considered whereas when there is
a large age difference, even if the victim-child states it was voluntary we
return to the issue of whether children can give 'informed consent' to
sexual encounters.<BR></FONT><BR>Christina Risley-Curtiss, MSSW, PhD
<BR><FONT size=2>Associate Professor & Co-Director, Child Welfare
Training Project</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>Arizona State University</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>School of Social Work</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>Tempe, AZ
85287-1802</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>480-965-6076</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>Fax:
480-965-5986</FONT> <BR><BR><BR><FONT size=2>-----Original
Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>From: lisa fontes [<A
href="mailto:lfontes@javanet.com";>mailto:lfontes@javanet.com</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 5:12 PM</FONT> <BR><FONT
size=2>To: Child Maltreatment Researchers</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>Subject:
Re: sibling incest and consent</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT size=2>Even the
seemingly "neat" categories supplied by Jennifer Guimond below are</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>messy. I remember a student disclosing to me tearfully
after a university</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>class on child sexual abuse that
her brother--who was less than 2 years</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>older--had
dragged her off to his room IN FRONT OF THEIR PARENTS "for a good</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>tickling" repeatedly over the years. She had tried to
disclose to her</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>parents who hadn't believed her. he
was (and remains) the preferred son--on</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>his way to
medical school, while she was (and remains) the troubled younger</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>sister. She was quite distressed to learn that their
relations would be</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>considered "consensual" because
of their relatively small age difference.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>She did
not feel they were consensual at all. I guess there are many ways in</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>which a sibling can have power over another--and many would
not be</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>discovered in a typical quantiative research
study.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT size=2>Jennifer Guimond wrote:</FONT>
<BR><BR><FONT size=2>> The consent issue in sibling incest can be pretty
fuzzy when the</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> siblings in question are close
in age and no obvious coercion is</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>>
present. My reading of the literature suggests that sexual
contact</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> between siblings can be classified in
three ways:</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>></FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>>
1. age-appropriate sexual play and exploration by children of
similar</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> age.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>>
2. sexual abuse in which one child clearly has more power than
the</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> other due to age, status in the family,
physical strength, etc.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> 3. consensual
age-inappropriate sexual contact such as an 11-year-old</FONT> <BR><FONT
size=2>> and 12-year-old having consensual sexual intercourse.</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>></FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> The first two scenarios
have been studied, but the third scenario is</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>>
less understood. The third scenario involves sexual contact that is
not</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> age-appropriate exploration but is also not
coercive. When researchers</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> study sexual
abuse, they use a 5 year age difference between the victim</FONT> <BR><FONT
size=2>> and the perpetrator as a criteria for sexual abuse. Thus,
many cases of</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> sibling incest (as well as incest
with cousins) may be overlooked.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>></FONT>
<BR><FONT size=2>> I find the topic fascinating and I would love to
exchange e-mail and</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>> share references with
anyone else on the list.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=2>></FONT> <BR><FONT
size=2>> Jennifer Guimond</FONT> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 07 11:02:46 2002
Status: U
Return-Path: <owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
Received: from elist01.mail.cornell.edu (elist01.mail.cornell.edu [132.236.56.28])
by postoffice.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA08187;
Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:59:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by elist01.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA26442;
Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:59:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from elist01.mail.cornell.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by elist01.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA26293;
Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:54:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailhub2.mail.cornell.edu (mailhub2.mail.cornell.edu [132.236.56.26])
by elist01.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA25335
for <CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@elist01.mail.cornell.edu>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:09:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by mailhub2.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA08851
for CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@elist01.mail.cornell.edu; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:09:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from um-msxproto2.um.umsystem.edu ([207.160.156.178])
by mailhub2.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA08847
for <CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 11:09:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from um-mailnode1.um.umsystem.edu ([207.160.156.154]) by um-msxproto2.um.umsystem.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779);
Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:09:04 -0600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4712.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: sibling incest and consent
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:09:03 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <DED9C2BCA57FC544ABF93CD5EE01F28C16B773@um-mailnode1.um.umsystem.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: sibling incest and consent
Thread-Index: AcGQqhKmz4c9DHjvQWy7lStxcNuwhABaRh+Q
X-PH: V4.1@mailhub2 (Cornell Modified)
X-PH: V4.1@elist01.mail.cornell.edu (Cornell Modified)
From: "Nelson, Sherry F." <NelsonS@missouri.edu>
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers <CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Dec 2001 16:09:04.0277 (UTC) FILETIME=[77AB5450:01C19215]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by elist01.mail.cornell.edu id LAA25336
Message-Tag: 3860
Reply-To: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
Sender: owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.2.09.cu01/000107/15:22 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN
John,
I understand the premise of contacting the other person(s) involved for
their point of view, however I think this begs the question of how we
guard the original informant's confidentiality and avoid putting them,
original informant, at risk for potential retaliation by the person they
identify as their "consentual partner"? It seems to me that once you
begin asking questions of the second party they could put two and two
together or if you ask the original informant for permission to
interview the second party and the second party is agreeable doesn't
that also skew your population much as self-selected volunteers for
studies?
Sherry F. Nelson, LCSW
Human Development Specialist
Marion County Courthouse, Rm. 201
Palmyra, MO 63461
573-769-2177 FAX 573-769-2178
NelsonS@missouri.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: John M Price PhD [mailto:jmprice@calweb.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 9:13 PM
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: Re: sibling incest and consent
On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Jennifer Guimond wrote:
> The consent issue in sibling incest can be pretty fuzzy when the
> siblings in question are close in age and no obvious coercion is
> present. My reading of the literature suggests that sexual contact
> between siblings can be classified in three ways:
Without coercion, why would anyone classify it as abuse? Abberant,
aybe,
but abuse? Again, the law is not the be all and end all. In fact, it
is
science that should inform the law, not the law restricting what is
studied.
Thinking out loud, one question that has not ben stated, or I have
forgotten, in this research project (I am assuming a quasi-experimental
design), is what is your DV? Also, what N are you seeking to work with?
How are you intending on demonstrate any causality between the IVs and
your DV(s)?
As to the classification issue, why do that? It is a hoard of problems,
a
myriad of laws standing in the way of any usable generalizability, and
up
front a seeming insult to the subjects' ability to report on their life
events honestly and with insight. Who are we to say it was an evil deed
when they don't?
Perhaps the way out of this is to gather, and report, whether or not
such
things as coercion was present? Operationally, coercion can be defined
as
the inability to easliy say yes or no without fear of any consequence.
Was there berter? Was violence present or threatened? Did you initiate
the interaction? Did you assent to this interaction? and so forth.
Once it is clear that coercion was present or not, you have a 1/0 value
for it. Maybe add violence as a sepaate IV. In other words, simply ask
about aspects of the experience. There will be some up front time on
this
to nail down the questions, of course, but a good survey/interview
requires that.
Other IVs of interest might be the age difference (for one). You
expressed an interest in the degree of relatedness (for a second), here
there would be a set of nominative variables for a nice crosstab
analysis.
Age at the event for both parties might be of interest (possibly a
third).
Was your subject the person initiating the encounter (possibly the
fourth)?
I do hope you are also intending on contacting the other person(s)
involved. Once your questions are fleshed out, asking both parties
would
be likely to reveal some interesting data.
--
John M. Price, PhD
jmprice@calweb.com
Life: Chemistry, but with feeling! | PGP Key on request or
FTP!
Comoderator: sci.psychology.psychotherapy.moderated Atheist#
683