By CRFR associate researcher Dr Sarah Nelson
Several points about the absolute discharge given in Scotland last week by Lady Scott to Daniel Cieslak, who was convicted of raping a 12 year old girl, will greatly concern child protection campaigners for their potentially far-reaching implications.
First, the sentence and the judge’s remarks could be seen as in effect lowering the age of consent. The reason Mr Cieslak was convicted of rape, rather than of an under-age sexual offence, was that consent (which must be informed consent) is legally impossible under any circumstances for children under 13.
However, despite this legal impossibility the judge, who accepted that the accused genuinely believed the girl was over 16, was reported to say "Here the victim willingly participated in the sexual intercourse and there was, in fact, consent.” So there could not be consent: and yet there was. That contradiction surely needs urgent clarification. Otherwise both the absolute discharge and the judge’s remarks risk giving a “green light” to anyone wishing to have sex with a child under 13, by saying that they looked over 16. The current law is also undermined.
Secondly, while mitigating factors may well exist in an accused’s individual case – which can be reflected in length of sentence – sentencing is always also a statement of how seriously a society takes particular acts. It also deters others. So for instance the increased sentences for domestic abuse, for drink driving or dangerous driving, and other offences now taken more seriously by modern society. The absolute discharge and the remarks made a very different form of public statement.
Thirdly, there are strongly suggestive indications that the victim may have already been a vulnerable child in need of extra protection. Two girls of 12 and 13 were wandering alone in Edinburgh city centre in the small hours of the morning. One of them, it was reported in some media, quickly showed sexualised behaviour with a stranger, Mr Cieslak, whom she had met in a taxi queue, then later had sex with him. These behaviours are very common reactions in some children and young people who have already been sexually abused or exploited, and would be recognised as such by anyone working with survivors of these crimes.
Was an investigation made before the trial into their circumstances, and were the girls already known to anyone who should have been protecting them? There had been more than time enough to find out between the incident in 2015 and the court case. If so, was this information passed to the court?
The reason those questions are especially important is twofold. It has now emerged that countless vulnerable girls of similar ages and behaviours to this girl were carefully groomed into agreeing to sex, then raped and brutalised by gangs in the child sexual exploitation scandals of Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford, Derby and elsewhere. The reason most were left unprotected for years by police and social services was because they were dismissed as willing partners, as “little slags”, or as “child prostitutes” by the authorities themselves. Many had been vulnerable children, already previously abused or neglected.
This knowledge, which we all possess now, makes it especially important for authorities and courts to protect children showing early sexualisation or “difficult” behaviours, not simply to accept as Lady Scott did of the girl in the case that she had “no concerns, and there was no suggestion of her being distressed". If we allow them to be dismissed as “willing” or “active” participants”, we surely contradict both Scotland’s child protection policies and its National Plan to counter child sexual exploitation.
Even where a young person is between 13 and 16 - and may indeed have limited consent, Scotland’s “National Guidance on Under-age Sexual Activity: Meeting the Needs of Children and Young People and Identifying Child Protection Concerns” recommends factors which must be considered in judging risk and the need for protection. They include informed choice, the circumstances of the sexual activity, a history of being in care, and a history of previous abuse.
In the (English) Neil Wilson case in 2013, appeal judges and Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) strongly criticised a judge who leniently treated the abuser of a vulnerable 13 year old, and said the girl was a predator and “egging you on”. Appeal judges made the highly important statement: “An under-age person who encourages sexual relations with her needs more protection, not less. The Attorney General is therefore right to say that the victim's vulnerability was an aggravating, rather than a mitigating feature”.
Is it time for such unequivocal statements – and for a Crown appeal against this sentence – north of the Border?
Student who admitted sex with 12-year-old cleared as judge calls girl ‘active participant’, Daily Record, 17-3-17. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/student-who-admitted-rape-12-10045698
Full details of English child sexual exploitation scandals in: Nelson, S (2016). Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Radical approaches to prevention, protection and support, Policy Press, Chapter 4.
Scottish Government (2010) National Guidance. Under-age sexual activity: Meeting the Needs of Children and Young People and Identifying Child Protection Concerns” [para 47]. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/333495/0108880.pdf
Barrister suspended from sex cases after court comments BBC News (online), 07/08/13; Attorney General's Reference (No 53 of 2013) [2013] EWCA Crim 2544 (para.20). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23605577
Showing posts with label Sarah Nelson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sarah Nelson. Show all posts
Wednesday, 22 March 2017
Thursday, 8 December 2016
Sexual Abuse: A Crisis for Football?
Following her CRFR seminar series on childhood sexual abuse, CRFR Associate Researcher Dr Sarah Nelson reflects on the recent disclosures of abuse in football.
In the space of a mere three weeks, since several former professional footballers spoke publicly about their sexual abuse as young players, more than 850 people have called a special NSPCC helpline. More than 55 professional and amateur clubs have been linked to allegations; in excess of 20 police forces are investigating; and helplines receive more calls daily.
Does this mean that football is somehow more prone to childhood sexual abuse than other sports? The answer to that anxious, understandable question is likely to be “no”.
Football is played more widely than any other sport among 11-15 year old boys, and thus the sheer number vulnerable to abuse is bound to be greater. In addition, it is not a particular sport, a particular religion, profession, or group within society which is most likely to have perpetrators of child sexual abuse (CSA) within it. It is the way in which particular values and other factors come together, encouraging abuse to continue in that particular setting.
Especially with respect to abuse from outside the family – as in this case - they include:
Football coaches are not somehow more dangerous than people elsewhere. It is not that most coaches are abusers, but that youth football is one ideal setting to which the minority of abusers against boys will gravitate. This is precisely why no-one involved in coaching should take personal offence at the need for clubs and schools to be extremely vigilant about their recruitment and monitoring.
Nor should men involved in coaching the sport now protest that they are not trusted any more, that children or parents will think they are unsafe, and that they are put off volunteering at all. There can be a defensive self-indulgence about this, though it may sound harsh to say so. Adults working in professions where there have been scandals can be assured that children and young people sense when the ways in which adults talk, behave and touch are safe or unsafe. Survivors of sexual abuse will confirm this. If you are a safe person, and with no sexual interest in young people, they will sense it.
It is still very understandable that parents will feel more anxious than before. They can find at least considerable reassurance in the children’s safeguarding initiatives, in football and other sports, which are now in place. They can take an active interest in what these are, and how they might be improved, in their own children’s clubs.
One of the greatest of safeguards lies in parents telling their children repeatedly to let them know straight away if anyone makes them feel uncomfortable in a sexual way, and that they will not be angry with them, will not dismiss nor blame them -whoever that person is - even a family friend, relative or respected member of the community.
When parents say this, they need to mean it too. So they should talk through with each other, or with a support organisation, any understandable difficulties they would have in taking on board difficult information about somebody they trust.
Amongst the genuinely disturbing scale of current revelations about football there are some very encouraging aspects. In a “macho” sport notable for silencing any issues of sexuality which do not involve boasting about women, numerous men continue to come forward publicly with courage and strength, to talk openly and angrily about an abuse which still fills many men with deep shame and humiliation.
They have set a striking example to others who remain silenced. They have spurred on inquiries about past, unacknowledged crimes – and a greater alertness to current ones.
Sarah Nelson is author of Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Radical approaches to prevention, protection and support (Policy Press, 2016). Several chapters in this book describe research carried out at CRFR, including research with male survivors.
http://www.children1st.org.uk/what-we-do/how-we-help/safeguarding-in-sport/
https://sportscotland.org.uk/about-us/our-publications/archive/child-protection
The Scottish Football Association urges anyone with any information relating to abuse or inappropriate behaviour – whether current or historic – to get in touch via the NSPCC’s helpline 0800 023 2642, or email childrenswellbeing@scottishfa.co.uk
In the space of a mere three weeks, since several former professional footballers spoke publicly about their sexual abuse as young players, more than 850 people have called a special NSPCC helpline. More than 55 professional and amateur clubs have been linked to allegations; in excess of 20 police forces are investigating; and helplines receive more calls daily.
Does this mean that football is somehow more prone to childhood sexual abuse than other sports? The answer to that anxious, understandable question is likely to be “no”.
Football is played more widely than any other sport among 11-15 year old boys, and thus the sheer number vulnerable to abuse is bound to be greater. In addition, it is not a particular sport, a particular religion, profession, or group within society which is most likely to have perpetrators of child sexual abuse (CSA) within it. It is the way in which particular values and other factors come together, encouraging abuse to continue in that particular setting.
Especially with respect to abuse from outside the family – as in this case - they include:
- The extent of power the adult has over children (in football, control over the boy in achieving his longed-for, dream career);
- The importance of children’s obedience to adults (in children’s sports, the coach’s role; in many other settings, strongly patriarchal values towards women and children);
- The extent to which parents and community trust, or defer to, the abusive adult (in children’s sports the selfless, helpful coach; with clergy, supposed men of God);
- The social stigma and low credibility faced by some children and teenagers (only relevant to some children in this case, but very relevant to abuse in care and child sexual exploitation);
- The culture of the particular setting, in silencing, dismissing and/or disbelieving victims (“macho” male values and bravado in football, rugby, boxing or snooker; in some ethnic and religious groups, the power of shame).
Football coaches are not somehow more dangerous than people elsewhere. It is not that most coaches are abusers, but that youth football is one ideal setting to which the minority of abusers against boys will gravitate. This is precisely why no-one involved in coaching should take personal offence at the need for clubs and schools to be extremely vigilant about their recruitment and monitoring.
Nor should men involved in coaching the sport now protest that they are not trusted any more, that children or parents will think they are unsafe, and that they are put off volunteering at all. There can be a defensive self-indulgence about this, though it may sound harsh to say so. Adults working in professions where there have been scandals can be assured that children and young people sense when the ways in which adults talk, behave and touch are safe or unsafe. Survivors of sexual abuse will confirm this. If you are a safe person, and with no sexual interest in young people, they will sense it.
It is still very understandable that parents will feel more anxious than before. They can find at least considerable reassurance in the children’s safeguarding initiatives, in football and other sports, which are now in place. They can take an active interest in what these are, and how they might be improved, in their own children’s clubs.
One of the greatest of safeguards lies in parents telling their children repeatedly to let them know straight away if anyone makes them feel uncomfortable in a sexual way, and that they will not be angry with them, will not dismiss nor blame them -whoever that person is - even a family friend, relative or respected member of the community.
When parents say this, they need to mean it too. So they should talk through with each other, or with a support organisation, any understandable difficulties they would have in taking on board difficult information about somebody they trust.
Amongst the genuinely disturbing scale of current revelations about football there are some very encouraging aspects. In a “macho” sport notable for silencing any issues of sexuality which do not involve boasting about women, numerous men continue to come forward publicly with courage and strength, to talk openly and angrily about an abuse which still fills many men with deep shame and humiliation.
They have set a striking example to others who remain silenced. They have spurred on inquiries about past, unacknowledged crimes – and a greater alertness to current ones.
Sarah Nelson is author of Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Radical approaches to prevention, protection and support (Policy Press, 2016). Several chapters in this book describe research carried out at CRFR, including research with male survivors.
http://www.children1st.org.uk/what-we-do/how-we-help/safeguarding-in-sport/
https://sportscotland.org.uk/about-us/our-publications/archive/child-protection
The Scottish Football Association urges anyone with any information relating to abuse or inappropriate behaviour – whether current or historic – to get in touch via the NSPCC’s helpline 0800 023 2642, or email childrenswellbeing@scottishfa.co.uk
Monday, 14 November 2016
Silencing and disclosure in child sexual abuse
Ahead of her two seminar series on Childhood Sexual Abuse, CRFR Associate Researcher Dr Sarah Nelson writes for us about silencing and disclosure.
There is a great disparity between cases of child sexual abuse (CSA) which are known to the authorities, and its prevalence in society.
For instance, a major report (Children’s Commissioner, 2015) estimated that only one in eight sexually abused children is identified. A meta-analysis of more than 200 international studies of prevalence across 28 years, with 10 million participants, revealed self-reported prevalence figures (18.0% of women, 7.6% of men) which were 30 times higher than prevalence rates reported by authorities (Stoltenborgh et al, 2011). In my own study with abused young people (Nelson, 2008), they gave me fourteen reasons why they had stayed silent in their childhood and teens. These included:
Additionally, in boys there is often a pervasive fear of being thought gay, or somehow unmasculine.
In my book Tackling Child Sexual Abuse (Nelson, 2016), I also chart in detail a worrying and continuing decline in identified cases of CSA by child protection authorities throughout Britain, despite the high publicity for the subject. A considerable fall in CSA registrations and child protection plans has coexisted with considerable growth in those for emotional abuse and neglect. That suggests not genuine declines in CSA, but changed priorities in policy and practice.
For all these reasons, it is important that we renew efforts to find child-centred ways of enabling sexually abused young people to tell what is happening to them. While the new emphasis on, and national strategy towards, child sexual exploitation is very welcome, a failure to address the earlier CSA which makes so many children and teenagers vulnerable to CSE means that such exploitation can never be fully addressed.
In my CRFR seminar this week (Wednesday 16 November) I outline some thought-provoking research findings by Rosaleen MacElvaney and colleagues on disclosure and non-disclosure of sexual abuse among young people. They identify first an active withholding of the secret, which gives some sense of control in an unsafe world. Secondly there is the pressure- cooker effect created by wanting to tell, yet simultaneously not wanting to.
That means the secret is often blurted out without either prior planning or support. Thirdly, there is confiding: few children tell the people they’re meant to tell (teachers, police, social workers and so on). If they tell, it is usually to a friend or to their mother, neither of whom has a support system of their own.
Thus, say McElvaney and colleagues, “in supporting children to tell, the need for the secret to be contained and controlled must be respected”.
That doesn’t mean - nor should it mean - that we can offer them complete confidentiality. It can mean slowing down the process to the child’s pace, offering them more choice and control, creating genuinely child-centred environments, and switching the emphasis from relying so heavily on children’s testimony to a perpetrator-focused strategy.
In my presentation this week I give examples, among others, of Scotland’s innovative “Stop to Listen” (formerly Confidential Space) project being pioneered by four local authorities; of the successful Barnahus children’s houses from Scandinavia, now being actively explored by the Scottish government; of possible statutory sector alliances with confidential children’s services; and of imaginative perpetrator-focused strategies. These include both successful ones from the past which were closed down, and inspiring examples of perpetrator-focused models, which have been used in the fight against child sexual exploitation.
McElvaney, R., Greene, S. and Hogan, D. (2012) ‘Containing the secret of child sexual abuse’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(6): 1155–75.
McElvaney, R. (2013) ‘Disclosure of Child Sexual Abuse: Delays, Nondisclosure and Partial Disclosure. What the Research Tells Us and Implications for Practice’, Child Abuse Review, DOI: 0.1002/car.2280
Nelson, S. (ed) (2008) See us – Hear us! Schools working with sexually abused young people, Dundee: Violence is Preventable, 18 and Under, www. violenceispreventable.org.uk/see%20us%20hear%20us.pdf
Nelson, S. (2016) Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Radical approaches to Prevention, Protection and Support, Bristol: Policy Press.
Stoltenborgh, M., van Ijzendoorn, M., Euser, E. and BakermansKranenburg, M. (2011) ‘A Global Perspective on Child Sexual Abuse: Meta-Analysis of Prevalence Around the World’, Child Maltreatment, 16(2): 79–101.
Children’s Commissioner (2015) Protecting children from harm: A critical assessment of child sexual abuse in the family network in England and priorities for action, London: Children’s Commissioner for England.
There is a great disparity between cases of child sexual abuse (CSA) which are known to the authorities, and its prevalence in society.
For instance, a major report (Children’s Commissioner, 2015) estimated that only one in eight sexually abused children is identified. A meta-analysis of more than 200 international studies of prevalence across 28 years, with 10 million participants, revealed self-reported prevalence figures (18.0% of women, 7.6% of men) which were 30 times higher than prevalence rates reported by authorities (Stoltenborgh et al, 2011). In my own study with abused young people (Nelson, 2008), they gave me fourteen reasons why they had stayed silent in their childhood and teens. These included:
- fear
- violence and intimidation
- shame
- embarrassment and humiliation, especially with their peers
- mixed loyalties towards their abuser
- self-blame and guilt
- worry about the effect on their non-abusing parent(s)
- uncertainty about what would happen
- fear of being in trouble
- a conviction that they would not be believed
Additionally, in boys there is often a pervasive fear of being thought gay, or somehow unmasculine.
In my book Tackling Child Sexual Abuse (Nelson, 2016), I also chart in detail a worrying and continuing decline in identified cases of CSA by child protection authorities throughout Britain, despite the high publicity for the subject. A considerable fall in CSA registrations and child protection plans has coexisted with considerable growth in those for emotional abuse and neglect. That suggests not genuine declines in CSA, but changed priorities in policy and practice.
For all these reasons, it is important that we renew efforts to find child-centred ways of enabling sexually abused young people to tell what is happening to them. While the new emphasis on, and national strategy towards, child sexual exploitation is very welcome, a failure to address the earlier CSA which makes so many children and teenagers vulnerable to CSE means that such exploitation can never be fully addressed.
In my CRFR seminar this week (Wednesday 16 November) I outline some thought-provoking research findings by Rosaleen MacElvaney and colleagues on disclosure and non-disclosure of sexual abuse among young people. They identify first an active withholding of the secret, which gives some sense of control in an unsafe world. Secondly there is the pressure- cooker effect created by wanting to tell, yet simultaneously not wanting to.
That means the secret is often blurted out without either prior planning or support. Thirdly, there is confiding: few children tell the people they’re meant to tell (teachers, police, social workers and so on). If they tell, it is usually to a friend or to their mother, neither of whom has a support system of their own.
Thus, say McElvaney and colleagues, “in supporting children to tell, the need for the secret to be contained and controlled must be respected”.
That doesn’t mean - nor should it mean - that we can offer them complete confidentiality. It can mean slowing down the process to the child’s pace, offering them more choice and control, creating genuinely child-centred environments, and switching the emphasis from relying so heavily on children’s testimony to a perpetrator-focused strategy.
In my presentation this week I give examples, among others, of Scotland’s innovative “Stop to Listen” (formerly Confidential Space) project being pioneered by four local authorities; of the successful Barnahus children’s houses from Scandinavia, now being actively explored by the Scottish government; of possible statutory sector alliances with confidential children’s services; and of imaginative perpetrator-focused strategies. These include both successful ones from the past which were closed down, and inspiring examples of perpetrator-focused models, which have been used in the fight against child sexual exploitation.
McElvaney, R., Greene, S. and Hogan, D. (2012) ‘Containing the secret of child sexual abuse’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(6): 1155–75.
McElvaney, R. (2013) ‘Disclosure of Child Sexual Abuse: Delays, Nondisclosure and Partial Disclosure. What the Research Tells Us and Implications for Practice’, Child Abuse Review, DOI: 0.1002/car.2280
Nelson, S. (ed) (2008) See us – Hear us! Schools working with sexually abused young people, Dundee: Violence is Preventable, 18 and Under, www. violenceispreventable.org.uk/see%20us%20hear%20us.pdf
Nelson, S. (2016) Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Radical approaches to Prevention, Protection and Support, Bristol: Policy Press.
Stoltenborgh, M., van Ijzendoorn, M., Euser, E. and BakermansKranenburg, M. (2011) ‘A Global Perspective on Child Sexual Abuse: Meta-Analysis of Prevalence Around the World’, Child Maltreatment, 16(2): 79–101.
Children’s Commissioner (2015) Protecting children from harm: A critical assessment of child sexual abuse in the family network in England and priorities for action, London: Children’s Commissioner for England.
Friday, 10 June 2016
The strange disappearance of child sexual abuse: New book charts decline
Sarah Nelson, CRFR Associate
Has child sexual abuse been steadily falling off the child protection ‘radar’? That sounds a very strange question, given the current - almost daily - publicity and concern about ‘celebrity’ perpetrators, about clergy abuse, child sexual exploitation, and historic abuse in care.
Yet statistics and professional feedback paint a different, worrying picture, as my new book details. ‘Tackling child sexual abuse: radical approaches to prevention, protection and support’ is launched on Monday 13 June at the CRFR International Conference: Unequal Families & Relationships.
Throughout the UK, a continuing fall in officially known sexual abuse cases and concerns has occurred alongside considerable growth in those about emotional abuse, neglect and parental substance misuse. That suggests not genuine declines or increases in these social problems, but altered priorities among policymakers and practitioners.
For example highly-publicised child deaths, such as that of ‘Baby Peter’ Connelly in 2007, brought large increases in UK care orders involving young children, where there were concerns about neglect or physical abuse. Thus, after the case, numbers in England subject to a child protection plan increased by 47% between 2008 and 2012; numbers on child protection registers increased in Scotland by 23%. In 2007–08, registrations in Scotland for sexual abuse were down by 33% on the previous year alone. From 2012 onwards in Scotland, multiple concerns could be recorded at each case conference. Most common were parental substance misuse (39%), emotional abuse (39%) and domestic abuse (37%). Sexual abuse was ninth in a list of 11 concerns, at just over 3%.
Overall, only 5% of all the children on child protection registers or subject to child protection plans in the UK were under a category that included sexual abuse in 2013.
Accepting that child protection registers and child protection plans only form one way of addressing sexual abuse, such figures do not even begin to reflect the most conservative estimates of child sexual abuse (CSA) prevalence. Police figures themselves hint at greater problems. In Scotland in 2013–14 there were 3,742 recorded sexual offences against children under 18. A major study by the Children’s Commissioner for England (2015) estimated that only one in eight sexually abused children is identified by professionals. This was largely, they found, because protective services were geared to children self-reporting, yet children rarely do this. An analysis of more than 200 international studies of prevalence, from 1980 to 2008, with a total of nearly 10 million participants, revealed wider disparities still: prevalence figures of self-reported sexual assault (18.0% of women, 7.6% of men), 30 times higher than the prevalence rates reported by authorities (Stoltenborgh et al, 2011).
Again, when in 2014 Professor Alexis Jay, after extensive study of records, calculated that at least 1,400 children, some as young as 11, had been sexually exploited in Rotherham over 16 years, it became clear that these cases had been neither classified nor recorded as sexual abuse. This was because the stigmatised girls were viewed by most authorities as freely choosing prostitution. Thus, only now will these cases count in official records as ‘substantiated’.
Researchers and trainers in the CSA field have been told in conferences, seminars and discussions with child protection professionals (including social workers, children’s panel members and safeguarding board members) that the priority for CSA has gradually diminished. Some gave feedback that it was regarded as “yesterday’s issue”. Concern was such that in 2013 Scottish specialists working with CSA wrote to the media and met the Association of Directors of Social Work about their deep concern that “sexual abuse is being allowed to disappear off the statutory radar”. They said different types of abuse “should not be in competition with each other for resources, but approached on the basis of need”.
Could the shocking abuse and killing of the toddler Liam Fee further skew child protection priority towards physical harm to very young children, at the expense of vulnerable older children and teenagers, especially with reference to CSA and CSE (child sexual exploitation)?
We cannot hope to meet today’s multiple online and offline challenges from sexual violence against children and young people - and at times by young people themselves upon others -without honestly and carefully examining why this decline in priority has been happening. Many committed professionals believe the situation must change, and currently four Scottish local authorities are pioneering the Stop to Listen project, a Children 1st initiative overseen by a senior multidisciplinary, statutory/voluntary steering group. This and other imaginative initiatives, designed to help abused young people tell without fear and to ensure whole communities are genuinely involved in protecting children in their neighbourhood, are described in my book.
It also includes chapters on major issues which adult survivors face, including mental health and – for some - involvement in the penal system, after offending born from anger and despair. I hope the book will enable the findings of those research projects, carried out at CRFR, to reach an even wider and more diverse audience.
==============
Delegates of CRFR's International Conference are invited to attend the launch of Sarah Nelson's new book Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Radical Approaches to Prevention, Protection and Support, Bristol: Policy Press at the conference drinks reception on Monday 13 June, 5.30pm.
You can follow live tweets from the conference using the hashtag #CRFR2016 on Twitter.
References
Dempster, H., Henry, M., Houston, A., Matthew, L., McCrae, R., Nelson, S., Rennie, J. and Stark, R. (2013) ‘Listening Watch’, Letters, Scotsman, 24 January.
Haringey Local Children Safeguarding Board (LCSB) (2010) Serious Case Review: Baby Peter, 2nd Review. London: Haringey LSCB, October
HM Government (2014) The Fifth Periodic Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: United Kingdom, May, www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/upload/Pdfs/The%20UK’s%20Fifth%20Periodic%20Review%20Report%20on%20the%20UNCRC.pdf
Jay, A. (2014) Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham (1997–2013), Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council.
McLeod, S., Hart, R., Jeffes, J. and Wilkin, A. (2010) The Impact of the Baby Peter Case on Applications for Care Orders, Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.
Norfolk, A. (2012) ‘Police files reveal vast child protection scandal – Confidential papers show a decade of abuse in south Yorkshire’, The Times, 24 September.
NSPCC (2015) How safe are our children? 2015, Indicator 4, London: NSPCC.
Stoltenborgh, M., van Ijzendoorn, M., Euser, E. and Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. (2011) ‘A Global Perspective on Child Sexual Abuse: Meta-Analysis of Prevalence Around the World’, Child Maltreatment, 16(2): 79–101.
Scottish Government (2014a) Children’s social work statistics Scotland, 2013–14, Chart 8.
Scottish Government (2014b) Child protection key trends: Last update, March 2014, www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Children/TrendChildProtection
Tuesday, 1 December 2015
Understanding paedophilia: Back to Victorian answers?
CRFR Associate Researcher Sarah Nelson blogs in response to last week’s programme on BBC2 ‘The Truth About Child Sex Abuse’
Last week, a major study by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner in England into intra-familial childhood sexual abuse estimated that only one in eight children who are sexually abused are identified by professionals. There is no reason to suppose Scottish statistics will be significantly different. This study calls for a range of urgent actions to improve prevention and early identification of child sexual abuse (CSA) and the support given to victims. Its recommendations merit close reading by everyone, including policymakers, who is concerned about tackling and reducing CSA.
Yet its findings were overshadowed by the largely uncritical popularisation in broadcast, print and online media, by Professor Tanya Byron and others, of a theory on the causes of paedophilia which does not feature in that report. The report became a “peg” on which to hang a theory which, it turns out, has a noticeable lack of promotion in peer-reviewed journals.
Are child abusers short, left-handed, dim and cross-wired?
Dr James Cantor’s study with, and about, child sex offenders found from his 2008 study using MRI imaging that a sample of paedophiles (convicted of offences with pre-adolescents) had less white matter - the connective tissue that carries messages to other parts of the brain - than other types of criminal offenders. He believes a range of evidence suggests that paedophilia results from atypical wiring in the brain. Using other collected data he finds they are more likely to be left handed, shorter in stature and lower in measured intelligence than average in the population. He believes paedophilic sexual orientation is hard-wired into the brain, and may be a fixed sexuality at birth- “core to our being”.
There are many problems about such a theory and its popularisation. Only a small percentage of child sex offenders is identified and even fewer convicted, thus these will be doubtfully representative. Many crimes of convicted sex offenders will remain unrevealed. The MRI scan study was reported as done before the huge numbers of educated, often intelligent middle class men viewing child abuse images online were fully realised. Some broader findings on paedophiles’ characteristics appeared to include research from as far back as the 1930s, when overwhelmingly those convicted of sex crimes would be the poor and stigmatised - likely to appear lower on IQ tests, and smaller in growth than average.
The greatest problem about this theory is that it divorces the behaviour of child sex abusers from the impact of beliefs, values, institutions and power relations throughout the wider society. Hence it appealingly divorces governments, institutions and public from the impetus critically to examine and change those features of society which allow, or encourage, CSA. Nor does it provide any explanation of why the perpetration of child sexual abuse and exploitation is so heavily gendered. Instead it reverts back towards Victorian phrenology. Finally, there may be very different reasons why the brains of a sample of convicted child sex offenders have shown certain abnormalities.
Widespread abusive practices
Is child sexual abuse really about individual deviancy? Consider for instance widespread, prolonged abuses of children as young as 11, in Britain in this 21st century - including multiple rapes and extreme physical brutality, as the Jay Report demonstrated - in towns such as Rochdale, Rotherham and Oxford. Those towns may have been home to concentrations of left-handed men with odd brain-wiring. Alternatively, abuse may have happened and continued for many years because disparaging, contemptuous beliefs about vulnerable girls by their perpetrators were shared by protective agencies, who considered the girls delinquents, “slags” and freely-choosing child prostitutes.
Consider for instance the international practice of child marriage which remains widespread, particularly in parts of Africa, the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent. There are worldwide campaigns against this practice, on behalf of girls. Are men sexually attracted to very young girls because in some countries far more of them than in neighbouring countries are short and unintelligent with oddly-wired brains: or through factors such as powerful religious and cultural beliefs, the inferior position of women and girls in that society, dowry and bride-price issues, pressures of family poverty, violent abuses in war and forced migration?
Supporters of the Cantor theory may reply that most “child brides” are post-pubertal (although a high percentage are under 15) while they refer to abusers of prepubertal children. However, not only are many prepubertal girls indeed forced into child marriage, but the rigid distinctions and classifications attempted of sex offenders, e.g. as paedophiles, hebephiles, intra- or extra-familial offenders and so on, are only maintained by ignoring the experience provided over decades to researchers and support services by abuse survivors themselves. They reveal an extremely common pattern of being abused well before puberty and continuing to be in the teenage years, by perpetrators who also abused others, and who continued to have sexual relations with adults.
A different reason for brain changes?
If the sample of paedophiles (apparently only about 65 men) showed slight changes in “brain-wiring” from non-paedophiles through modern MRI imaging techniques, perhaps the reason lies in a very different place from the womb. It may lie in neurobiological advances in understanding effects of prolonged early childhood trauma, on parts of the developing brain and central nervous system.
While it cannot be stressed strongly enough that most sexually abused men and women do not go on to abuse others (despite damaging myths to the contrary) a few do. Research and practice repeatedly find victim-perpetrators in the most prolific forms, such as repetitive predation on numerous young boys, and particularly violent, hostile or unusual forms of abuse against women and children: including assault of babies and toddlers, with its own industry of online abuse images. For instance Hilton and Mezey (1996) found the severity of secure hospital patients’ abusive behaviour was linked to rates of past assault. They also found, with Cohen et al. (2002) and Briggs (2003) that such perpetrators tended to abuse victims in ways and at ages which replicated and acted out their own abuse trauma.
Such findings do not mean the effects are unchangeable. Far less are they handy excuses for sexual assault. Rather, skilled trauma work within sex offender programmes might reduce the dangerousness to women and children of some survivor-offenders.
For modern neurobiological research suggests severe abuse and neglect in early life produces post-traumatic neurological influences which can, for a minority of victims, include emotional numbing and loss of ability to empathise with self or others (Creeden, 2004, Van der Kolk et al., 2005, de Zulueta, 2006). Stein (2006) challenges sex offender treatment programmes to address serious childhood trauma: contending that severe trauma has created dissociated moral feeling in certain offenders. This undermines moral integration, by perpetuating the illusion that one is not morally implicated in what one does. She argues for integration of dissociated memories and emotions as the first goal of therapy.
I believe we need to search for explanations for child sexual abuse in the wider values of societies and institutions, and in the way we bring up our young people of both genders, as well as through pursuing these positive challenges to sex offender programmes for survivor –offenders. Such wider approaches are likely to offer far more promise than divorcing child sex abusers’ behaviour from influences within their own societies; or (through focusing on events in the womb) holding the pregnancy behaviour of disadvantaged mothers responsible, yet again, for major problems in our society.
=====
Sarah Nelson is a CRFR Associate Researcher. She is a specialist on child sexual abuse issues and the effects of CSA throughout life. She is a frequent commentator in the media on these issues and her forthcoming book 'Rethinking Childhood Sexual Abuse: Radical Approaches to Prevention, Protection and Support (Policy Press)' will include chapters on two research projects with women and men, carried out collaboratively with CRFR.
=======
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06qs7k7/the-truth-about-child-sex-abuse
Briggs, F. (2003) ‘From victim to perpetrator: factors in the transition process’, Paper presented to international conference on trauma, attachment and dissociation.
http://jamescantor.com/
Protecting children from harm:A critical assessment of child sexual abuse in the family network in England and priorities for action. https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/news/only-1-8-children-who-are-sexually-abused-are-identified-professionals
Cohen, L., McGeoch, P., Gans, S., Nikiforov, K., Cullen, K. and Galynker, I. (2002) ‘Childhood sexual history of 20 male pedophiles vs. 24 male healthy control subjects’, J Nerv Ment Dis., 190 (11):757-766
Creeden, K. (2004) ‘The neurodevelopmental impact of early trauma and insecure attachment: Re thinking our understanding and treatment of sexual behavior problems’, Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention, 11 (4): 223-247.
Hilton, M. and Mezey, G. (1996) ‘Victims and perpetrators of child sexual abuse’, British Jnl of Psychiatry, 169 (4): 408-415.
Jay, A. (2014) Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham (1997 - 2013), Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
van der Kolk, B.,, Roth, S., Pelcovitz, D., Sunday, S. and Spinazzola, J. (2005) ‘Disorders of extreme stress: The empirical foundation of a complex adaptation to trauma’, Journal of Traumatic Stress, 18 (5): 389–399.
http://16days.thepixelproject.net/16-organisations-working-to-stop-child-marriage/
Stein, A. (2006) Prologue to Violence, Dissociation, and Crime. Routledge.
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/12/22/is_pedophilia_a_sexual_orientation.html
de Zulueta, F. (2006) From Pain to Violence: the Traumatic Roots of Destructiveness, Chichester: John Wiley.
Last week, a major study by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner in England into intra-familial childhood sexual abuse estimated that only one in eight children who are sexually abused are identified by professionals. There is no reason to suppose Scottish statistics will be significantly different. This study calls for a range of urgent actions to improve prevention and early identification of child sexual abuse (CSA) and the support given to victims. Its recommendations merit close reading by everyone, including policymakers, who is concerned about tackling and reducing CSA.
Yet its findings were overshadowed by the largely uncritical popularisation in broadcast, print and online media, by Professor Tanya Byron and others, of a theory on the causes of paedophilia which does not feature in that report. The report became a “peg” on which to hang a theory which, it turns out, has a noticeable lack of promotion in peer-reviewed journals.
Are child abusers short, left-handed, dim and cross-wired?
Dr James Cantor’s study with, and about, child sex offenders found from his 2008 study using MRI imaging that a sample of paedophiles (convicted of offences with pre-adolescents) had less white matter - the connective tissue that carries messages to other parts of the brain - than other types of criminal offenders. He believes a range of evidence suggests that paedophilia results from atypical wiring in the brain. Using other collected data he finds they are more likely to be left handed, shorter in stature and lower in measured intelligence than average in the population. He believes paedophilic sexual orientation is hard-wired into the brain, and may be a fixed sexuality at birth- “core to our being”.
There are many problems about such a theory and its popularisation. Only a small percentage of child sex offenders is identified and even fewer convicted, thus these will be doubtfully representative. Many crimes of convicted sex offenders will remain unrevealed. The MRI scan study was reported as done before the huge numbers of educated, often intelligent middle class men viewing child abuse images online were fully realised. Some broader findings on paedophiles’ characteristics appeared to include research from as far back as the 1930s, when overwhelmingly those convicted of sex crimes would be the poor and stigmatised - likely to appear lower on IQ tests, and smaller in growth than average.
The greatest problem about this theory is that it divorces the behaviour of child sex abusers from the impact of beliefs, values, institutions and power relations throughout the wider society. Hence it appealingly divorces governments, institutions and public from the impetus critically to examine and change those features of society which allow, or encourage, CSA. Nor does it provide any explanation of why the perpetration of child sexual abuse and exploitation is so heavily gendered. Instead it reverts back towards Victorian phrenology. Finally, there may be very different reasons why the brains of a sample of convicted child sex offenders have shown certain abnormalities.
Widespread abusive practices
Is child sexual abuse really about individual deviancy? Consider for instance widespread, prolonged abuses of children as young as 11, in Britain in this 21st century - including multiple rapes and extreme physical brutality, as the Jay Report demonstrated - in towns such as Rochdale, Rotherham and Oxford. Those towns may have been home to concentrations of left-handed men with odd brain-wiring. Alternatively, abuse may have happened and continued for many years because disparaging, contemptuous beliefs about vulnerable girls by their perpetrators were shared by protective agencies, who considered the girls delinquents, “slags” and freely-choosing child prostitutes.
Consider for instance the international practice of child marriage which remains widespread, particularly in parts of Africa, the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent. There are worldwide campaigns against this practice, on behalf of girls. Are men sexually attracted to very young girls because in some countries far more of them than in neighbouring countries are short and unintelligent with oddly-wired brains: or through factors such as powerful religious and cultural beliefs, the inferior position of women and girls in that society, dowry and bride-price issues, pressures of family poverty, violent abuses in war and forced migration?
Supporters of the Cantor theory may reply that most “child brides” are post-pubertal (although a high percentage are under 15) while they refer to abusers of prepubertal children. However, not only are many prepubertal girls indeed forced into child marriage, but the rigid distinctions and classifications attempted of sex offenders, e.g. as paedophiles, hebephiles, intra- or extra-familial offenders and so on, are only maintained by ignoring the experience provided over decades to researchers and support services by abuse survivors themselves. They reveal an extremely common pattern of being abused well before puberty and continuing to be in the teenage years, by perpetrators who also abused others, and who continued to have sexual relations with adults.
A different reason for brain changes?
If the sample of paedophiles (apparently only about 65 men) showed slight changes in “brain-wiring” from non-paedophiles through modern MRI imaging techniques, perhaps the reason lies in a very different place from the womb. It may lie in neurobiological advances in understanding effects of prolonged early childhood trauma, on parts of the developing brain and central nervous system.
While it cannot be stressed strongly enough that most sexually abused men and women do not go on to abuse others (despite damaging myths to the contrary) a few do. Research and practice repeatedly find victim-perpetrators in the most prolific forms, such as repetitive predation on numerous young boys, and particularly violent, hostile or unusual forms of abuse against women and children: including assault of babies and toddlers, with its own industry of online abuse images. For instance Hilton and Mezey (1996) found the severity of secure hospital patients’ abusive behaviour was linked to rates of past assault. They also found, with Cohen et al. (2002) and Briggs (2003) that such perpetrators tended to abuse victims in ways and at ages which replicated and acted out their own abuse trauma.
Such findings do not mean the effects are unchangeable. Far less are they handy excuses for sexual assault. Rather, skilled trauma work within sex offender programmes might reduce the dangerousness to women and children of some survivor-offenders.
For modern neurobiological research suggests severe abuse and neglect in early life produces post-traumatic neurological influences which can, for a minority of victims, include emotional numbing and loss of ability to empathise with self or others (Creeden, 2004, Van der Kolk et al., 2005, de Zulueta, 2006). Stein (2006) challenges sex offender treatment programmes to address serious childhood trauma: contending that severe trauma has created dissociated moral feeling in certain offenders. This undermines moral integration, by perpetuating the illusion that one is not morally implicated in what one does. She argues for integration of dissociated memories and emotions as the first goal of therapy.
I believe we need to search for explanations for child sexual abuse in the wider values of societies and institutions, and in the way we bring up our young people of both genders, as well as through pursuing these positive challenges to sex offender programmes for survivor –offenders. Such wider approaches are likely to offer far more promise than divorcing child sex abusers’ behaviour from influences within their own societies; or (through focusing on events in the womb) holding the pregnancy behaviour of disadvantaged mothers responsible, yet again, for major problems in our society.
=====
Sarah Nelson is a CRFR Associate Researcher. She is a specialist on child sexual abuse issues and the effects of CSA throughout life. She is a frequent commentator in the media on these issues and her forthcoming book 'Rethinking Childhood Sexual Abuse: Radical Approaches to Prevention, Protection and Support (Policy Press)' will include chapters on two research projects with women and men, carried out collaboratively with CRFR.
=======
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06qs7k7/the-truth-about-child-sex-abuse
Briggs, F. (2003) ‘From victim to perpetrator: factors in the transition process’, Paper presented to international conference on trauma, attachment and dissociation.
http://jamescantor.com/
Protecting children from harm:A critical assessment of child sexual abuse in the family network in England and priorities for action. https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/news/only-1-8-children-who-are-sexually-abused-are-identified-professionals
Cohen, L., McGeoch, P., Gans, S., Nikiforov, K., Cullen, K. and Galynker, I. (2002) ‘Childhood sexual history of 20 male pedophiles vs. 24 male healthy control subjects’, J Nerv Ment Dis., 190 (11):757-766
Creeden, K. (2004) ‘The neurodevelopmental impact of early trauma and insecure attachment: Re thinking our understanding and treatment of sexual behavior problems’, Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention, 11 (4): 223-247.
Hilton, M. and Mezey, G. (1996) ‘Victims and perpetrators of child sexual abuse’, British Jnl of Psychiatry, 169 (4): 408-415.
Jay, A. (2014) Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham (1997 - 2013), Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
van der Kolk, B.,, Roth, S., Pelcovitz, D., Sunday, S. and Spinazzola, J. (2005) ‘Disorders of extreme stress: The empirical foundation of a complex adaptation to trauma’, Journal of Traumatic Stress, 18 (5): 389–399.
http://16days.thepixelproject.net/16-organisations-working-to-stop-child-marriage/
Stein, A. (2006) Prologue to Violence, Dissociation, and Crime. Routledge.
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/12/22/is_pedophilia_a_sexual_orientation.html
de Zulueta, F. (2006) From Pain to Violence: the Traumatic Roots of Destructiveness, Chichester: John Wiley.
Wednesday, 7 November 2012
Listening – or really hearing victims of abuse?
Sarah Nelson, CRFR Research Associate, writes on the implications of the Jimmy Savile abuse revelations:
Amid shock and dismay at the unfolding revelations of the Savile sexual abuse scandal, many people ask how we can better protect children in future. Perhaps the most frequent demand from professionals, politicians, media and the public has been that we “listen more to the victims”.
That is understandable, and indeed true, especially in relation to stigmatised young people who are often still disbelieved when they report: as the Rochdale sexual exploitation case among others has graphically revealed. But it skirts the awkward problem that the majority of Savile’s victims did not report him, and most children do not report sexual abuse. Too often, we would be listening for a merely silent victim.
In my own research with sexually abused young people and adults, both at CRFR and during 2011-12 with Open Secret in Falkirk, survivors described how intense shame, self-blame, hopelessness, distrust or fear of reprisal kept most of them silent until well into adulthood. One small group of young people came up with fourteen different reasons why they did not tell.
In particular, very few children tell the agencies they are urged to tell, such as teachers, police or social workers. They are more likely to turn to a school friend or their mother. The child protection system urgently needs to take these uncomfortable facts on board and to reflect the way real children think, act and behave, in order to ensure that current distressing revelations leave a more positive legacy for our children. Otherwise, it will continue to unearth very few cases of child sexual abuse.
In my own research studies, these are some suggestions for change which survivors themselves, both male and female, have made:
For further discussion of the experiences of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, please read:
Nelson, S. (2009) Care and support needs of male survivors of childhood sexual abuse, CRFR Research Briefing, no.44, Edinburgh: Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.
Amid shock and dismay at the unfolding revelations of the Savile sexual abuse scandal, many people ask how we can better protect children in future. Perhaps the most frequent demand from professionals, politicians, media and the public has been that we “listen more to the victims”.
That is understandable, and indeed true, especially in relation to stigmatised young people who are often still disbelieved when they report: as the Rochdale sexual exploitation case among others has graphically revealed. But it skirts the awkward problem that the majority of Savile’s victims did not report him, and most children do not report sexual abuse. Too often, we would be listening for a merely silent victim.
In my own research with sexually abused young people and adults, both at CRFR and during 2011-12 with Open Secret in Falkirk, survivors described how intense shame, self-blame, hopelessness, distrust or fear of reprisal kept most of them silent until well into adulthood. One small group of young people came up with fourteen different reasons why they did not tell.
In particular, very few children tell the agencies they are urged to tell, such as teachers, police or social workers. They are more likely to turn to a school friend or their mother. The child protection system urgently needs to take these uncomfortable facts on board and to reflect the way real children think, act and behave, in order to ensure that current distressing revelations leave a more positive legacy for our children. Otherwise, it will continue to unearth very few cases of child sexual abuse.
In my own research studies, these are some suggestions for change which survivors themselves, both male and female, have made:
- Children very often try to tell in oblique, childlike or roundabout ways. Always ask sensitively if for instance they keep being tearful or very withdrawn, or persistently act out distress through bad behaviour.
- An independent counsellor in a school or youth setting, posters placed anonymously on school lockers or inside toilets, and other discreet or anonymous publicity is very helpful in reducing the shame and stigma teenagers feel, at the prospect of becoming known to their peers as a victim.
- In my own research, male survivors in particular were often excluded from school for acting-out in bad behaviour. This placed them in much greater danger on the streets, and safe alternatives to school exclusions need to continue to be sought.
- Peers and mothers need greater support when they are the recipients of information about current abuse.
- There is now “third-party reporting” available for hate crime such as homophobic crime, and race crime. People can report to certain voluntary agencies if they fear or distrust to report directly to police or social work and that could be extended to the reporting of childhood sexual abuse.
- Both adults and young people who have been abused felt strongly that social stigma has assertively to be combated with publicity campaigns, since many families and communities still prefer victims to avoid shaming them by speaking out. Likewise they wish schools to tackle the perceived stigma of being a victim: just as many schools now encourage pupils not to stigmatise, for example, young people who self-harm, or young gay people. That might reduce many boys’ fear of being branded a “poof” if they reveal abuse.
For further discussion of the experiences of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, please read:
Nelson, S. (2009) Care and support needs of male survivors of childhood sexual abuse, CRFR Research Briefing, no.44, Edinburgh: Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)