• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pedophilia

Pardus

Proud to be a Sinner.
Yet another tabooish question, because everything should be asked.

What is wrong with pedophilia? (no "you should already know" answers, don't waste both our times)

What is more important maturity or age?

If a victim never receives help and then becomes an offender, are they still a victim?

If your child was in a relationship with someone just beyond the legal age difference by one week what would you do?
 

standing_on_one_foot

Well-Known Member
Pardus said:
Yet another tabooish question, because everything should be asked.

What is wrong with pedophilia? (no "you should already know" answers, don't waste both our times)

What is more important maturity or age?

If a victim never receives help and then becomes an offender, are they still a victim?

If your child was in a relationship with someone just beyond the legal age difference by one week what would you do?
Well, for one thing, it's illegal (well, pedophilia isn't illegal, but acting on it is). And I honestly don't think little kids can consent, and nonconsenual sex ain't a good thing. Once you get into late teens things start to hit a grey area, I'll admit that.

I would say that both maturity and age are important. I might lean more towards age. I'm more comfortable with the idea of an immature 25 year old having sex than a mature 13 year old.

Yes, the victim remains a victim of abuse. And now they're also a perpetrator. I'm not entirely seeing the point of the question. It's sad that they were never helped, but they still did it.

If my kid were seventeen and having safe and consensual sex with an eighteen year old, I would not have any more problem than I would if my kid were eighteen (I'm not saying I wouldn't necessarily have a problem, but in that case it wouldn't be age difference related).
 

mr.guy

crapsack
Baseball really, really sucks. In my opinion, you'd have to be sick to wanna force kids to play it.
 

Ardent Listener

Active Member
mr.guy said:
Baseball really, really sucks. In my opinion, you'd have to be sick to wanna force kids to play it.
O.k., now I undestand. ;) As a child I really sucked at playing baseball. And I agree with you, "You'd have to be sick to wanna force kids to play it." Like my 4th grade teacher was.:areyoucra
 

Fluffy

A fool
Pedophilia is not a sin. Pedophiles are statistically less inclined to be law abiding individuals but this not mean that they have to be criminals. Pedophiles can be good, productive members of society. I refuse to colour my view of a subsection of society based on the actions of even the majority of that subsection.
 

Fluffy

A fool
I appreciate a fresh view, but that one has caught me off-guard.

Care to expand?
The term "pedophile" has become one of those heralded terms that a media spokesperson can unleash whenever they wish to gain the publics confidence with absolute certainty, much in the same way as "terrorist" was used.

The effect of this? To describe all people who have sex with children under the age of 18 (and in some cases 21) as pedophiles. Absurdity to the extreme. A pedophile is somebody who has a sexual addiction to prepubescent children for starters.

Secondly, the majority of criminals who commit sexual offenses against children are not pedophiles. They are situational child molesters or rapists. They do not give a damn what you are, they rape you because you are an easy target or because they have fantasies of control. Big, big difference.

Pedophilia is a sexuality, in my mind. One that I cannot allow to be expressed since its expression requires the ignorance of consent but if this is the only moral component it would be deeply wrong of me to not try and combat the misinformation spread by the media and to treat law abiding, conscientious pedophiles who, despite their sexual attraction, refuse to have non consensual sex, as any different from other people.

I know I come across as very strong on this issue. But imagine if you lived in a society where the majority of people used the term "homosexual" to refer to those people who raped others of the same gender, demonised those homosexuals who refused to have non consensual sex and continuously ignored the basic facts that showed their assumptions to be false and you would be in a similar situation to the one I feel I am in! :eek:
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Pardus said:
Yet another tabooish question, because everything should be asked.

What is wrong with pedophilia? (no "you should already know" answers, don't waste both our times)

What is more important maturity or age?

If a victim never receives help and then becomes an offender, are they still a victim?

If your child was in a relationship with someone just beyond the legal age difference by one week what would you do?
I like your questions; I too think that 'Taboo' is dangerous; it always reminds me of brushing dirt under the carpet.................

If you really are interested, here is a pretty thorough assessment of the effects and repercussions of pedophelia. The article here is only an abstract; if you want to read the full piece, please follow the link. I have posted what I considered to be the minimum)
http://www.davidicke.net/medicalarchives/effects/pedophilia.html
HARMING THE LITTLE ONES:

THE EFFECTS OF PEDOPHILIA ON CHILDREN​
(1)


by
Timothy J. Dailey, Ph.D
"EARTH IS AN INSANE ASYLUM,

TO WHICH THE OTHER PLANETS DEPORT THEIR LUNATICS."​
--Voltaire (Memnon the Philosopher).​

by Timothy J. Dailey, Ph.D.

“There are things that happened to me when I was a kid that you don’t know about. …” So recounts Richard Hoffman in his critically acclaimed autobiography Half the House: A Memoir, attempting to speak to his father about the child sexual abuse he had suffered in secret from his baseball coach 30 years earlier.

Hoffman still feels his father is complicit in the abuse because of the neglect and malicious beatings that drove him to seek love and affection elsewhere. He knows he must confront his father after seeing a horribly burned boy whose disfigurement reminds him of his still painful emotional scars: “My eyes welled and I trembled. It wasn’t so much pity for the boy that moved me, although I pitied him, but my identification with him.”2

Now in his forties, Hoffman listens with mounting anger to his father’s reaction. After all these years he displays the same callousness, making light of the emotional devastation suffered by his young son. Finally he can be still no longer, and explodes with rage: “‘Do you have any idea?’ I was on my feet now, fists clenched at my sides, leaning over him, roaring. ‘DO YOU HAVE ANY ****** IDEA WHAT HAPPENS TO A LITTLE BOY’S SOUL WHEN YOU SHOVE A **** UP HIS ***? DO YOU?’”3

Righteous anger such as that expressed by Richard Hoffman is often absent in sterile, academic debates about whether sexual abuse4 is harmful to children. But one finds an echo in the warning of Jesus: “But whosoever shall offend one of these little ones who believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the sea.” (Matthew 18:6)

Sexual Deviation and the Academy

A key element of those forces striving to transform our culture and overturn its historic Judeo-Christian sexual norms is the social legitimization of sexual deviancies — which pedophile activist David Thorstad calls “complementary facets of the same dream.”5 This all-encompassing goal of unrestrained sexuality cannot succeed as long as such practices are marginalized, confined to sleazy bookstores in the seedier areas of cities, and subject to societal opprobrium.

The crucial battle, however, is not being fought on the level of the vice squad. Rather, the struggle is being played out in the academic citadels of the land. Given the almost religious authority accorded to scientific disciplines in Western culture, professional organizations such as the American Psychiatric Association and its sister guild, the American Psychological Association, exert enormous influence upon the public perception of sexual behavior.

The “sacred text” of the American Psychiatric Association is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), considered the authoritative guide to psychiatric disorders. Evolving views of sexual deviancy found in the DSM have proven to be an influential force for transforming cultural norms of sexual behavior.

A gradual progression away from traditional views can be seen, for example, in the APA’s piecemeal acceptance of homosexuality. The first version of the DSM, appearing in 1952, listed homosexuality in a group of sexual sociopathic personality disorders classed as sexual deviations. A subtle but crucial change appeared in the revised version, DSM II, which called homosexuality a sexual orientation disorder only for those who are disturbed by their condition or wish to change their sexual orientation. According to DSM II, homosexuality was no longer considered to be in itself a psychiatric disorder.

The final step came in 1973, when DSM III no longer referred to homosexuality by itself as a sexual orientation disturbance. Homosexuality was considered a problem only when it was “ego-dystonic,” causing unwanted and persistent stress for the individual. Subsequent revisions of the Manual, DSM III-R and DSM IV, make no mention of homosexuality whatsoever.

A similar progression to legitimize sexual aberrance is evident with regard to pedophilia. DSM I and II both classify pedophilia as “sexual deviation.” However, in DSM III pedophilia is labeled a “paraphilia” (an aberrant sexual fantasy or behavior), a less pejorative designation than “sexual deviation.” DSM III-R, a revision of DSM III, adds a subjective qualification similar to that which appeared with regard to homosexuality: The individual must be “markedly distressed” by his own pedophilic activity to be considered needful of therapy.

 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Pt2.

The diagnostic criteria in the latest revision, DSM IV, specify that pedophilia is to be considered a paraphilia when the behavior causes “clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.”6 The same changes in DSM IV can be seen with regard to sexual sadism, sexual masochism and voyeurism.7

The APA’s classifications of sexual deviancy gradually have shifted from an objective description of aberrant behavior to the subjective perception of the individual. Thus, according to DSM IV, if a person feels no desire to change, there is no need to seek therapy.

The far-reaching ramifications of the APA’s reclassification of homosexuality have extended beyond medicine and law — where a proliferation of homosexual rights legislation has swept the country — to popular culture, where homosexuality is almost invariably portrayed as a positive and healthy, if misunderstood, lifestyle.

Cracks in the floodgates have been appearing regarding pedophilia as well. Emboldened by the APA’s acceptance of homosexuality as a valid lifestyle, advocates of adult-child sex are making cautious forays into the scholarly literature. Once again, this move is shrewdly calculated, with the expectation that society in general will follow the lead of the “high priests” of the scientific community.

A significant initial salvo for the acceptance of pedophilia in academia was the publication of what would become a highly controversial study on child sexual abuse in the prestigious journal Psychological Bulletin. Authored by Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch, and Robert Bauserman, the study — “A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples” — asserted that the widely held belief that sex between adults and children always causes harm to children “is of questionable scientific validity.”8

While the authors contend that “the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative effects from their CSA [child sexual abuse] experiences,” they nonetheless allow that some experiences result in negative consequences for the victim.9 And to what are these negative effects attributed? To none other than family environment factors such as “traditionalism” that prevent the child’s parents from lending support to the child engaged in pedophilic activity.10

According to the Rind study, the child sexual abuse itself was “relatively unimportant compared with family environment” in causing negative effects.11 The clear implication is that children would suffer few if any negative effects from pedophilia if only society were more accepting of such behavior.

Adult-child sex, conclude the authors, should not be indiscriminately termed child sexual abuse. “One possible approach,” they suggest, “is to focus on the young person’s perception of his or her willingness to participate and his or her reactions to the experience. A willing encounter with positive reactions would be labeled simply adult-child sex, a value-neutral term.”12

The Rind study was roundly condemned by many and eventually criticized by the American Psychological Association, publisher of Psychological Bulletin. Paul Fink, M.D., former president of the American Psychiatric Association, pointed out that most of the studies discussed by the authors had never undergone rigorous peer review, and that the results were largely based on one study conducted over 40 years ago.13

In addition, the majority of the incidents of “child sexual abuse” included in the study consisted of indecent exposure that did not involve physical contact, or sexual advances that were rebuffed by the subject. Thus, in most cases the “sexual abuse” was either comparatively minor or nonexistent. As Dr. Fink observes, “It is as if a study that purports to examine the effects of being shot in the head contained a majority of cases in which the marksman missed. Such research might demonstrate that being shot in the head generally has no serious or lasting effects.”14

A study by Debra K. Peters and Lillian M. Range found significant differences between contact and non-contact child sexual abuse (distinctions that for statistical purposes the Rind study ignores):

Further, a consistent finding was that women and men whose sexual abuse involved touching were more suicidal, less able to cope, and felt less responsible to their families than nonabused students. Adults whose sexual abuse was exploitative but involved no touch were not significantly different from nonabused adults. The experience of being touched in a sexual way appears to be more damaging than other kinds of unwanted sexual experiences. …15
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Pt3

Steven M. Mirin, M.D., medical director for the American Psychiatric Association, stated that his organization “strongly disagrees” with the conclusion of the Rind study “that not all sexual contact between adult and child should be considered abusive.” He explained,

[F]rom a psychological perspective, sex between adults and child[ren] is always abusive and exploitative because the adult always holds the power in the relationship and the child does not. Such exploitation destroys the child’s trust that the adults in his or her life will not harm [him or her].16

Undeterred by the scholarly panning of the Rind study, the North America Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) — otherwise known as the “the intellectual elite of child molesting” — in a press release touted the study as “good news.”17 Since efforts to legitimize pedophilia can be expected to continue unabated, let us pose a series of questions that address the chief contentions of the advocates of adult-child sex.

The Effects of Child Abuse

Does pedophilia cause harm to children?
NAMBLA’s web page cites a German study of 8,000 reported victims of sex offenses, which, NAMBLA reports, concluded, “None of the boys experienced force or coercion, and no negative outcomes were observed for any of the boys.”18 (Emphasis in original.) This astounding interpretation of the study by NAMBLA is one that even the Rind study — which conceded some degree of negative effects — would not support.

In truth, those who would dismiss the negative effects of child sexual abuse do so against a veritable mountain of evidence documenting the pernicious consequences of adult-child sex. Lucy Berliner and Diana M. Elliott, in The APSAC Handbook on Child Maltreatment, summarize, “Research conducted over the past decade indicates that a wide range of psychological and interpersonal problems are more prevalent among those who have been sexually abused than among individuals with no such experiences.”19 In their review of 45 studies, Kathleen A. Kendall-Tackett, Linda Myer Williams, and David Finkelhor concur, “Fears, posttraumatic stress disorder, behavior problems, sexualized behaviors, and poor self-esteem occurred most frequently among a long list of symptoms noted. …”20 David Lisak adds to this long list of pernicious effects suffered by the survivors of child sexual abuse, which he describes as “a legacy of childhood abuse that permeates all of the important domains of its victims’ lives”:

The analysis identified prominent affects and affective states (anger, fear, helplessness, loss, guilt, and shame), salient cognitive sequelae (inability to legitimize their experience as abuse, negative schemas about the self and about people and self-blame), pervasive issues around gender and sexuality (homosexual issues, masculinity issues and problems with sexuality), and interpersonal difficulties (betrayal, isolation and alienation, and negative childhood peer relations).21

Researchers attribute the harm inflicted on the child to a number of factors: The abuse is often confusing, frightening — and painful. Sexual activity between children and adults, by its very nature nonconsensual, interferes with normal development processes and leads to maladjustment later in life.22 These negative effects can be categorized according to age group.

Effects of Child Sexual Abuse on Children. Contrary to the opinions of those who would minimize the negative consequences of adult-child sex, the effects are immediate and often severe. In a clinical study, Robert L. Johnson, M.D., found that “70% of those who had been molested (by a male or female) felt devastated immediately after the molestation incident had occurred.”23 Bill Watkins and Arnon Bentovim, in their review of research on the sexual abuse of male children, found three common short-term effects.24

One effect is the development of homosexual tendencies. Watkins and Bentovim found that adolescents attributed the onset of their homosexual desires to having been victimized by an older male. Secondly, male victims of sexual abuse often turn their rage outward and attempt to reassert their masculinity in inappropriate ways, such as aggressive and antisocial behavior. Finally, some boy victims try to recapitulate — or re-enact — their victimization, this time with themselves as the perpetrator and someone else as the victim.

Another common reaction is for the victim to withdraw into himself or herself, dejected and plagued with self-doubt. This only aggravates the pain, for it is thought that children who do not speak about their sexual abuse suffer greater psychic distress than those who are able to seek help.25 Johnson notes:

Low self-esteem and depression are the most important long-term effects experienced by sexually abused boys, along with a tendency to feel helpless and vulnerable. Some of these boys are almost compulsively drawn into situations where they are repeatedly victimized. Adult types of sexual dysfunction appear to be as common among former sexual abuse victims as they are in adult rape victims.26
 

Pardus

Proud to be a Sinner.
I'm going to have to read all that stuff in a second, i will add to this i have experienced sexualt assault as a child from more than one person, and what pisses me off the most is the ammount of crap thrown around about it.

And yes there is a tendency for those who fall prey to such events to become offenders, i know this to be true and it terrifies me because i feel it within myself, i have little doubt i can keep my actions in check, but i do also know that alot of people are not as strong as i am.

I feel pity for the victims who become offenders, there is very little help out there for them before and after they do offend, who can they talk to? where can they seek help without worrying about involvement of the authorities? all they generally have to look forward to is the mob calling for their blood.
 

Ðanisty

Well-Known Member
Fluffy said:
Pedophilia is a sexuality, in my mind. One that I cannot allow to be expressed since its expression requires the ignorance of consent but if this is the only moral component it would be deeply wrong of me to not try and combat the misinformation spread by the media and to treat law abiding, conscientious pedophiles who, despite their sexual attraction, refuse to have non consensual sex, as any different from other people.
I'm surprised to see this point of view. I look at pedophilia in the same way and I've never met another person who understands where I'm coming from. It's refreshing to see that I'm not just crazy.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Ðanisty said:
I'm surprised to see this point of view. I look at pedophilia in the same way and I've never met another person who understands where I'm coming from. It's refreshing to see that I'm not just crazy.
I actually agree with that train of thought - in principle.

The trouble is that when you try to apply it to human beings, well, we are all human.........

It strikes me that if a Pedophile is chaste - Power to him, and I guess he is a great guy; The same can be said for Catholic priests who need to remain chaste.

The trouble is though, that I think that to expect chastity from a 'normal' human is asking a lot. I would have no trouble being chaste now:D , but If someone had told me my sexual orientation meant that I would have to be chaste for the rest of my life at the age of eighteen........well, I am not sure how I would have coped.

Sex is a great tension reliever apart from anything else; if there is no outlet for tension.............
 

jeffrey

†ßig Dog†
Excellent points, michel. Question though. Pardus stated in the post a couple up from this that some people, including himself that have been molested might molest themselves. Why is that? You would think the opposite would be true. Would there be a revenge factor? I'm asking with all sincerity.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
http://www.aberdeennews.com/mld/aberdeennews/news/12617959.htm
Posted on Sun, Sep. 11, 2005
Psychopathy, pedophilia may be caused by genetic factors

Minds of sexually deviant may not be 'normal,' social elements may also exist

By Matt Crenson

AP National Writer

For months, anyone could follow the epic struggle in the mind of Joseph Edward Duncan III - live, on the Internet.

''It is a battle between me and my demons,'' Duncan wrote in his Web log on April 24. ''I'm afraid, very afraid. If they win then a lot of people will be badly hurt.''

Three weeks later the demons won, authorities say.

The toll? Three members of an Idaho family bludgeoned to death. Two children dragged to a remote part of Montana, where both were sexually molested and the 9-year-old boy was murdered.

Brain abnormalities: It's hard to conceive a heart black enough to commit such evil acts. But researchers are beginning to understand how another organ, the brain, can conjure the demons that haunt Duncan and other violent sexual predators.

Many, perhaps most, dangerous sexual predators appear to possess one or more brain abnormalities that predispose them to their extreme criminal behavior. Those defects can be caused by traumatic childhood experiences, genetics or events that happen as a person's brain develops in the womb before birth.

Freudians might find the seeds of Duncan's behavior in his youth - a lonely childhood, a domineering mother, his parents' tumultuous relationship.

An unhappy upbringing certainly increases a boy's chances of growing up to be a violent sex offender. But if an unhappy childhood were all it took to create a sadistic pedophile, every town in America would live under perpetual Amber Alert.

Growing up: Long before the carnage at the Groene home in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, Duncan had unleashed his demons on the world. In 1980, at the age of 17, he earned a 20-year prison sentence for raping and torturing a 14-year-old boy at gunpoint. After his arrest for that crime, he told authorities that he had raped 13 boys by the time he was 16. And authorities now believe that while free on parole in 1997, Duncan kidnapped, raped and murdered a 10-year-old boy in Southern California.

He moved to Fargo, N.D., in 2000.

Right and wrong: Psychopathy is a personality disorder that afflicts a tiny fraction of the general public, but about 25 percent of the prison population. Psychopaths are impulsive and self-centered, with little capacity for guilt, fear or remorse. They take great pleasure in manipulating and exploiting other people to get what they want and tend to live disorganized, nomadic lives on society's fringes.

''Psychopaths do know right from wrong, they can tell you right from wrong. They just don't care,'' said Kent A. Kiehl, a psychiatrist at the Olin Neuropsychiatry Research Center in Hartford, Conn.

Kiehl's research suggests that psychopaths have abnormalities in the paralimbic system, a far-flung network of brain structures associated with emotion and emotional memories.

People with brain damage in one component of the paralimbic system, the orbitofrontral cortex, often behave impulsively and selfishly. When epilepsy causes damage to the anterior temporal lobe - another element of the system - the result can be inappropriate sexual behavior, problems maintaining personal relationships and a lack of empathy.

Brain activities: Experiments indicate that psychopaths have decreased brain activity in all of those regions. Now Kiehl and his colleagues want to know why.

''Most likely, as with most disorders, there's multiple pathways,'' Kiehl said.

For example, abuse or stress during childhood could affect how the paralimbic system develops. Brain damage due to a head injury might induce psychopathic behavior.

The role of genes: But genes almost certainly play a role. A recent study of 7-year-olds by British researchers found that if one in a pair of twins has psychopathic tendencies - especially, a callous and unemotional personality - the other is more likely to share those qualities, as long as the two are identical rather than fraternal.

Evolution's factor: Some psychologists believe that psychopathy is not so much a disease as an evolutionary artifact. During the millennia of human history before there were criminal justice systems and written records, they say, a small number of psychopaths could lie, cheat and steal their way to success.

In a 1995 paper, the late sociobiologist Linda Mealey argued that evolution created two types of psychopath. The first is purely genetic, born without the capacity for normal human emotion.

The other type of psychopathy is also genetic. But it is only produced in the kind of stressful or chaotic social environment where following the rules does a person no good.

For example, a child who grew up in an abusive clan might produce high levels of cortisol - a stress hormone. The majority of people might have genes for psychopathic behavior that are turned on only in a cortisol-rich brain.

If Duncan ever did have a chance to become a well-balanced individual, he lost it early. Court records indicate that his family moved constantly because of his father's military career. His parents fought incessantly and he rarely, if ever, made friends. He was often teased by his peers. By his own admission, Duncan committed his first sexual assault at the age of 12. The victim was a 5-year-old boy.

A pedophile's mind: How could Duncan have developed his deviant sexual attraction at such a young age?

Like psychopathy, pedophilia appears to originate in a number of ways. But just as the various elements of psychopathy all appear to relate to the paralimbic system, the various paths to pedophilia all seem to pass through a particular part of the brain.

Located just above the ears, the temporal lobe is involved in face and object recognition, musical ability, personality and sexual behavior. If epilepsy or some other condition causes damage to the temporal lobe, a person can become sexually attracted to inappropriate stimuli, even inanimate objects.

Working with several colleagues, Galynker has performed brain scans on 22 pedophiles and found that they had below-normal activity in the temporal lobe. Other studies have found a similar pattern. And medical journals describe rare cases of men who began molesting children when tumors invaded the same part of their brains; when the tumors were removed, their pedophilia subsided.

''There's something different about the brains of pedophiles,'' said Vernon L. Quinsey, a psychologist at Queen's University in Canada. ''But what exactly it is, it's hard to say so far.''

But Quinsey believes it is more likely the tendency toward pedophilia arises even before birth. Some researchers have proposed that male homosexuality can result if the mother's immune system attacks her son's cells in utero, disrupting the process that gradually differentiates male from female brains.

''We think that some similar mechanism might also relate to pedophilia,'' Quinsey said.

Quinsey proposes that pedophiles have the part of the apparatus that codes for robustness and youth - but they lack the requirement for sexual maturity. So they focus their sexual energies on children.

Quinsey's hypothesis is beyond the ability of current science to test. But whatever it is about their brains that attracts pedophiles to children, it is clear they have no choice in the matter, said Fred S. Berlin, founder of the Sexual Disorders Clinic at Johns Hopkins University.

Finding middle ground: That leaves society with a difficult question - how to handle someone who will never be truly ''cured'' of his deviance?

In his Internet diary, Duncan railed against sex offender registration laws and complained about police officers checking up on him at his apartment.

Yet sex offender laws gave Duncan enough privacy, freedom and anonymity to go to Idaho three months later with rape and murder on his mind.

Even a Washington state law that allows for the indefinite commitment of sex offenders after they have served their prison terms failed to contain Duncan. Before releasing him from prison in 2000, the state considered holding him for treatment under the law. But because Duncan had been convicted of only one offense before going to prison for virtually all of his adult life, there was no way to demonstrate legally that he couldn't control himself in public - he had never really had a chance to live there
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
jgallandt said:
Excellent points, michel. Question though. Pardus stated in the post a couple up from this that some people, including himself that have been molested might molest themselves. Why is that? You would think the opposite would be true. Would there be a revenge factor? I'm asking with all sincerity.
I have found this........
http://www.webmd.com/content/article/60/67158?src=Inktomi&condition=Mental%20Health

Feb. 6, 2003 -- It is widely believed that boys who are victims of sexual abuse become abusers themselves. Studies of pedophiles suggest this often is the case, but new research shows that the risk may be smaller than previously thought.

Roughly one in 10 male victims of child sex abuse in a U.K. study later went on to abuse children as adults. But the risk was far greater for sexually victimized children who came from severely dysfunctional families. Family history of violence, sexual abuse by a female, maternal neglect, and lack of supervision were all associated with a threefold-increased risk that the abused would become an abuser. The study is reported in the Feb. 8 issue of The Lancet.

"The message here is that sexual victimization alone is not sufficient to suggest a boy is likely to grow up to become a sex offender," study author and psychiatrist Arnon Bentovim tells WebMD. "But our study does show that abused boys who grow up in families where they are exposed to a great deal of violence or neglect are at particular risk."

Bentovim and colleagues from London's Institute of Child Health identified 224 adult male victims of child sexual abuse whose childhood medical and social service records were available for review. They then searched arrest and prosecution records to determine their later criminal activity. Most of the subjects were 20 years old or older when the study was conducted.

Twenty-six of the 224 sex abuse victims (12%) later committed sexual offenses, and in almost all cases their victims were also children. Abused children who came from families where violence was common were more than three times as likely to become abusers as were those who experienced maternal neglect and sexual abuse by females.​
One-third of the adult abusers had been cruel to animals as children, compared with just 5% of the child abuse victims who did not grow up to commit sexual crimes. But abusers and nonabusers experienced similar levels of physical abuse as children, and there were few significant differences in the severity or characteristics of the sexual abuse they suffered.

"It is clear that prevention of sexual abuse involves not just treating the victim, but ensuring that the family environment is safe," Bentovim says. "If you leave a child in a family situation where he continues to be subjected to abuse, even if it is not sexual, you are probably wasting your time."

Child health specialist Paul Bouvier, MD, tells WebMD that the real incidence of abused boys becoming pedophiles themselves is probably higher than the U.K. study suggests because it only included sexual predators who had been caught.

In an editorial accompanying the study, Bouvier argues that much can be learned by studying child sexual abuse victims who do not go on to become sexual predators or experience long-lasting trauma.

"It is quite important to know the risks for these children to have a bad outcome," he tells WebMD. "But it is also important to look at those who are resilient and who don't become abusers later in life. What are the characteristics of those who evolve beyond this experience and go on to have a meaningful life?"
 
Top