Pedophilia Treatment & Research Discussion

[JockNerd]

*MOD NOTE: I split out this discussion from the "what is your interest" thread. -t*

But, seperately, disorder-wise, 302.2 Pedophilia, particularly exclusive type. Hopefully spending two of the upcoming years specializing in treatment and forensic consultation on it.
...I don't have a lot of competition for this one....

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[RayneeDeigh]

But, seperately, disorder-wise, 302.2 Pedophilia, particularly exclusive type. Hopefully spending two of the upcoming years specializing in treatment and forensic consultation on it.
...I don't have a lot of competition for this one....

Not true! You know the crazy one in my cohort? That's her "thing" too.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Yeah, kid-touchers are definitely outside of my comfort zone, as a lot of my patients with sexual trauma were on the other end of their transgressions. I am thankful there are people out there willing to work with them.

 

[deleted176373]

Yeah, kid-touchers are definitely outside of my comfort zone, as a lot of my patients with sexual trauma were on the other end of their transgressions. I am thankful there are people out there willing to work with them.

Ya, this is one group that I would have difficulty working with, and that is despite realizing that many of them were abused to begin with. I have trouble finding sympathy for them.

Mark

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Ya, this is one group that I would have difficulty working with, and that is despite realizing that many of them were abused to begin with. I have trouble finding sympathy for them.

Mark

That actually happens less than you'd think; there is definitely a cycle of abuse, but the %'s aren't as high as people assume.

Good for you, that's brave, a lot of people won't take them on as patients. That would be a tough job but so great if you're able to help!

Multiple supervisors have told me that if I want to work with borderline patients to only handle a couple at a time. Unfortunately my populations of choice frequently get the, "only handle a couple at a time" tag....whoops.

 

[deleted176373]

That actually happens less than you'd think; there is definitely a cycle of abuse, but the %'s aren't as high as people assume.

I have known of offenders with both backgrounds of abuse and those without. You are right that there are a great many who were never abused (and that percentage may in fact be larger than the percentage that have been abused.)

The ones who were never abused absolutely get no sympathy from me what so ever. I know that's cold, I should understand that they are acting on impulses that are not completely under their control, but there is a part of me that reacts causticly to these people. I guess that's a inherent character flaw I will just have to learn to live with. I too am glad that there are others who can do this work, I cannot.

Mark

 

[paramour]

That actually happens less than you'd think; there is definitely a cycle of abuse, but the %'s aren't as high as people assume.

I have known of offenders with both backgrounds of abuse and those without. You are right that there are a great many who were never abused (and that percentage may in fact be larger than the percentage that have been abused.)

The ones who were never abused absolutely get no sympathy from me what so ever. I know that's cold, I should understand that they are acting on impulses that are not completely under their control, but there is a part of me that reacts causticly to these people. I guess that's a inherent character flaw I will just have to learn to live with. I too am glad that there are others who can do this work, I cannot.

Mark

A federal grant I worked on until the end of this past year is showing exactly that (i.e., there were significantly more convicted sex offenders who had not been abused as children/adolescents than those who had experienced abuse of ANY type). It was a relatively small percentage of individuals who had experienced abuse--Those who did were typically victims of physical abuse and not sexual abuse (unless talking about female sex offenders).

 

[MaddieMay]

A federal grant I worked on until the end of this past year is showing exactly that (i.e., there were significantly more convicted sex offenders who had not been abused as children/adolescents than those who had experienced abuse of ANY type). It was a relatively small percentage of individuals who had experienced abuse--Those who did were typically victims of child abuse and not sexual abuse (unless talking about female sex offenders).

Just curious - what about the ones that don't remember or are too ashamed to admit they were sexually abused? In particular, male offenders who were abused by other males?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I attended a seminar on internet sex offenders/pedophiles and did a bit of digging in the area afterwards and found that the %'s were particularly low in this instance. I think what was most disturbing was the 'grooming' aspects that happen, particularly the pervasiveness of offending as well as the offenders' abilities to suspend instant gratification using other means (which is why the, 'only pictures' defense is particularly problematic).

If you want, I can split this out to another discussion, as to not derail this thread.

 

[psychwanabe]

I posted a response about this in the other thread before I saw the split.

What about working with kids who offend? I don't know the research on this but I think those kids often have been abused themselves. Does anyone know this lit? I couldn't stomach working with an adult offender, but I had to think twice about working with a kid.

For those of you who have expressed opinions about not working with pedophiles, what if the offender was 16 or under and abused themselves? Would it change things for you?

 

[pingouin]

I posted a response about this in the other thread before I saw the split.

What about working with kids who offend? I don't know the research on this but I think those kids often have been abused themselves. Does anyone know this lit? I couldn't stomach working with an adult offender, but I had to think twice about working with a kid.

For those of you who have expressed opinions about not working with pedophiles, what if the offender was 16 or under and abused themselves? Would it change things for you?

I did my undergraduate practicum at a residential treatment center for adolescents- and immediately got assigned to the male locked unit, which had a special sex offender program. The treatment was interesting, to say the least, and I never felt unsafe in the unit. At any given time, probably 8/10 residents in that unit were themselves sex offenders, and most had been perped on as children. Given the data show above, I wonder if anyone knows whether age of 1st offense has any correlation with history of having been abused?

At any rate, what I do recall (this was over 10 years ago) are a couple of vivid stories about our clients having lured younger children into situations in order to perp them, and having safeguards in place so as to not get caught. Very intentional, predatory, and little to no remorse expressed. And the one I'm thinking of specifically was 10 when he did it- or should I say "when he got caught"-, and had a horrendous history of abuse (physical, emotional, and/or sexual) by pretty much every adult who had ever been responsible for him. To this day I remain very conflicted- recognizing him as both victim and perpetrator. But I'll tell you what- as sorry as I felt for him at times, if I had kids I wouldn't want him anywhere near them.

 

[JockNerd]

haha I was quite surprised to see this thread title with my name attached to it when I logged this afternoon....

 

[JockNerd]

Ya, this is one group that I would have difficulty working with, and that is despite realizing that many of them were abused to begin with. I have trouble finding sympathy for them.

Well, I don't think that sympathy is important for treating sex offenders. I don't have much in the way of sympathy for them... there are lots of pedophiles who never become child molesters (BIG diff between the two...), and actions, even compulsions, are still choices. Additionally, confrontation is important in sex offender treatment, and sex offenders tend to be VERY good at interpersonal manipulation, so I don't think sympathy would get you far anyway. Empathy, on the other hand, is something I can do with very little difficulty for this population. The important thing seems to be getting over this idea that empathy for them will somehow "contaminate" your value system.

 

[psychwanabe]

I did my undergraduate practicum at a residential treatment center for adolescents- and immediately got assigned to the male locked unit, which had a special sex offender program. The treatment was interesting, to say the least, and I never felt unsafe in the unit. At any given time, probably 8/10 residents in that unit were themselves sex offenders, and most had been perped on as children. Given the data show above, I wonder if anyone knows whether age of 1st offense has any correlation with history of having been abused?

At any rate, what I do recall (this was over 10 years ago) are a couple of vivid stories about our clients having lured younger children into situations in order to perp them, and having safeguards in place so as to not get caught. Very intentional, predatory, and little to no remorse expressed. And the one I'm thinking of specifically was 10 when he did it- or should I say "when he got caught"-, and had a horrendous history of abuse (physical, emotional, and/or sexual) by pretty much every adult who had ever been responsible for him. To this day I remain very conflicted- recognizing him as both victim and perpetrator. But I'll tell you what- as sorry as I felt for him at times, if I had kids I wouldn't want him anywhere near them.

This must have been really interesting work. Your experience gels with what I know about juveniles who perp. This isn't what Bandura had in mind, but I believe it has a lot to do with modeling!

Well, I don't think that sympathy is important for treating sex offenders. I don't have much in the way of sympathy for them... there are lots of pedophiles who never become child molesters (BIG diff between the two...), and actions, even compulsions, are still choices. Additionally, confrontation is important in sex offender treatment, and sex offenders tend to be VERY good at interpersonal manipulation, so I don't think sympathy would get you far anyway. Empathy, on the other hand, is something I can do with very little difficulty for this population. The important thing seems to be getting over this idea that empathy for them will somehow "contaminate" your value system.

You are right JN, and we will all have clients at some point for whom we feel no sympathy and even have trouble treating at all. A problem is a problem and people still need help. Learning to rise above your personal values and show empathy is a major skill to develop.

It's interesting that you used the word "choices". It reminded me that my prof in psychopathology last semester made a passing comment indicated that he believed pedophilia might be a sexual orientation. Has anyone heard this theory postulated? How prevalent is this line of thinking?

The very idea that he was comparing pedophilia to homosexuality was mindblowing to my class.

 

[JockNerd]

It's interesting that you used the word "choices". It reminded me that my prof in psychopathology last semester made a passing comment indicated that he believed pedophilia might be a sexual orientation. Has anyone heard this theory postulated? How prevalent is this line of thinking?

It's prevalent among some laypeople but erroneous. Sexual orientation is based on affection, love, etc. Pedophilia (along with sadism and rape drives) is based--I'd say invariably--on power.

The very idea that he was comparing pedophilia to homosexuality was mindblowing to my class.

I'd have had a fit because of the assumption that the comparison is with homosexuality.... heterosexuality is a sexual orientation too! Sounds to me like your prof has a pretty misguided perspective on sexuality and norming

 

[psychwanabe]

It's prevalent among some laypeople but erroneous. Sexual orientation is based on affection, love, etc. Pedophilia (along with sadism and rape drives) is based--I'd say invariably--on power.

I had another prof in another class say that rape and sexual crimes are not based in power but in desire. He said they are all about sex. I have had some flakey profs on this subject!

I'd have had a fit because of the assumption that the comparison is with homosexuality.... heterosexuality is a sexual orientation too! Sounds to me like your prof has a pretty misguided perspective on sexuality and norming

Well, the conversation was about homosexuality, and we went off on the pedophilia track for some reason (a question from the class I think...there was no comparison being made). That's the context of the comment. I don't think his perspectives on sexuality were off base...just his ideas about pedophilia being a sexual orientation.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Sexual orientation is based on affection, love, etc. Pedophilia (along with sadism and rape drives) is based--I'd say invariably--on power.

I can see in some cases how it is about power/dominance, though in others there is a true love/affection that is developed (however pathological), which is an area that is particularly hard to work with because to some offenders it is like loving a husband/wife. The NAMBLA folks are in this category. And in others there is a strand of compulsiveness and/or uncontrollable desire which can mimic addiction/withdrawal issues.

It really is a fascinating area of work, but I am concerned that there may not be a truly effective treatment. I wish there was a way to extinguish the behavior, because my guess is that most of the 'reformed' people in the research are just dormant until their next grooming opportunity.

 

[Psyched77]

I posted a response about this in the other thread before I saw the split.

What about working with kids who offend? I don't know the research on this but I think those kids often have been abused themselves. Does anyone know this lit? I couldn't stomach working with an adult offender, but I had to think twice about working with a kid.

For those of you who have expressed opinions about not working with pedophiles, what if the offender was 16 or under and abused themselves? Would it change things for you?

I've been a foster parent for a number of years, which inevitably changed my research interests. Anyway, my husband & I got the necessary training, clearances, etc. to get an "upgraded" license to specialize in children with severe emotional & behavioral problems. (We have mainly taken kids in the preteen to early teen range.) We've had 2 sexual perps long term, & it certainly hasn't been easy. With other children in the home, we were always on high alert...24/7 (aka "line of sight") supervision, alarms on bedroom doors, etc. It's like a nonstop war zone. The manipulation abilities of these kids (as someone mentioned before) is amazing, so we're always left to trying to analyze/scrutinize every single thing they say or do. (To complicate matters, both were always violent, one was homicidal, one was cruel to animals, & one had "intentional" enuresis.)

That being said, the experience has softened my heart (for the lack of a better term at the moment) to child-aged perps. As disgusted as I might have been at their intentions/past actions, I could also see their pain & anguish, their hope, & their past. These kids are tortured, & I just ached for them. I wished every day that I had a solution for them. Alas, I don't. That is what has driven my research interests. We may not be able to conceive today of an effective treatment for these cases, but just 50 years ago, psychologists lacked a number of (unrelated) treatments that we take for granted today. That fact gives me hope that someone, somewhere (maybe me? -- maybe a peer or colleague?) will have a breakthrough from which we can build.

I fully understand why people are completely "turned off" at the idea of working with pedophiles, & I don't fault them for it. I just thought I'd share a perspective of someone who is comfortable with them & anxious to work more with this population.

 

[psychwanabe]

We may not be able to conceive today of an effective treatment for these cases, but just 50 years ago, psychologists lacked a number of (unrelated) treatments that we take for granted today. That fact gives me hope that someone, somewhere (maybe me? -- maybe a peer or colleague?) will have a breakthrough from which we can build.

I hope so. I think T4C's right in his thoughts on recidivism. I think the rates are very high. I know this is the reason why laws have been put in place about registered sex offenders (this always opens up a whole conversation about civil rights).

 

[cara susanna]

Actually, I believe recidivism is lower than a lot of people think.

You also have to differentiate betwen non-pedophile offenders, because you can victimize children but not be a pedophile.

 

[Psyched77]

It's true that you have differentiate.

Here's one piece of info on pedophiles specifically:

"In a study of the characteristics of individuals who

repeatedly offend, Beier​

​

​

31 found that one fourth of heterosexual
pedophiles (n=62) and half of homosexual and bisexual
pedophiles (n=59) repeated offenses (as evidenced
by repeated arrests for a sexual violation or a self-reported​

violation) during a 25- to 32-year period."

http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/pdf/8204/8204sa.pdf

They point out, however, that they believe recidivism rates to be underestimated, as some studies (1) rely on arrest rates during a short period (ie, 5 years) of time, (2) rely on arrest rates, which are not necessarily indicative of actual incidence/prevalence rates, &/or (3) rely on self-reports that are not followed by a lie detector test or another such verifying mechanism.

Now, looking at sexual offenders in general: "Another polygraph study found a sample of imprisoned sex offenders to have extensive criminal histories, committing sex crimes for an average of 16 years before being caught (Ahlmeyer, English, and Simons, 1999)."

"Results show that over longer periods of time, child molesters have a higher failure rate—thus, a higher rate of rearrest—than rapists (52 percent versus 39 percent over 25 years)." (emphasis added)

This speaks volumes with regard to the self-report data issue: "The study revealed that before polygraph examinations, 6 percent of a sample of incarcerated sex offenders had both child and adult victims, compared to 71 percent after polygraph exams."

"One such study (Barbaree and Marshall, 1988) included both official and unofficial measures of recidivism (reconviction, new charge, or unofficial record). Using both types of measures, researchers found that 43 percent of these offenders (convicted of sex offenses involving victims under the age of 16 years) sexually reoffended within a four-year follow-up period."

http://www.csom.org/pubs/recidsexof.html

And so on. Anyway, that last one is a really great piece if you find time to read it. Really, the final word is that there is no conclusive way to know exactly what recidivism rates are, because every study to date has had major limitations. (...the same reason we don't have accurate measures on incidence/prevalence rates for child abuse, domestic violence, rape, etc.)

 

[deleted176373]

Well, I don't think that sympathy is important for treating sex offenders. I don't have much in the way of sympathy for them... there are lots of pedophiles who never become child molesters (BIG diff between the two...), and actions, even compulsions, are still choices. Additionally, confrontation is important in sex offender treatment, and sex offenders tend to be VERY good at interpersonal manipulation, so I don't think sympathy would get you far anyway. Empathy, on the other hand, is something I can do with very little difficulty for this population. The important thing seems to be getting over this idea that empathy for them will somehow "contaminate" your value system.

Perhaps I did use the wrong word, I think that empathy is a better word, and no I don't believe that I can generate it effectively with adults who molest children. There are exceptions, the cognitively impaired and others who simply have difficulty grasping right from wrong are far more likely to be able to elicit empathy from me.

It has nothing to do with corrupting or contaminating my value system but rather in the idea that I really don't feel that they are worth "fixing." Much has been made of the high recidivism rates and much like a violent animal should be put down or permanently incarcerated. I know that will raise howls of protests, but how in good conscience can you return people to society who are willing to prey on its most defenseless and innocent victims?

Mind you, I am not talking about questionable cases, I am talking about cases where the evidence is so overwhelming that there is simply no doubt whatsoever that the perpetrator was guilty. You are welcome to disagree, I welcome debate on the topic.

I have decided already that the ethical choice is to not treat people who I believe I cannot provide the highest standard of care for. Given my personal beliefs I don't believe that I would be a good choice to provide therapy, assessment, or any other services to these offenders. We all have professional limitations, this will likely be one of mine.

Mark

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I have decided already that the ethical choice is to not treat people who I believe I cannot provide the highest standard of care for. Given my personal beliefs I don't believe that I would be a good choice to provide therapy, assessment, or any other services to these offenders. We all have professional limitations, this will likely be one of mine.

That is also how I approach this population, but I'm glad that are others out there willing to try and work with them. I learned early on in my training that I wasn't a good fit for this population. One of my first cases was with someone who fell on the "power/control" side of things and their actions were disturbing and intentionally cruel. I made sure to keep an open dialogue with my supervisor about the case and I was able to work with them, but it was a challenge at times. In the end we saw some improvement, but will it last.....who knows. The pathology was so deeply rooted, the goals were around management and avoidance of destructive behaviors and incarceration.

The irony of all this was I had multiple opportunities to work in a forensic setting, but it is so far away from where I want to train and what I want to learn, that I passed them on to colleagues.

 

[JockNerd]

Perhaps I did use the wrong word, I think that empathy is a better word, and no I don't believe that I can generate it effectively with adults who molest children. There are exceptions, the cognitively impaired and others who simply have difficulty grasping right from wrong are far more likely to be able to elicit empathy from me.

I'm actually not catching you here... I'm wondering if you're still using the wrong word, actually, or if we just have really different perspectives. I would have sympathy for someone with a developmental disability who molested children, but I think I would have trouble empathizing there given that I don't have a DD and don't know if I could really track those feelings.

It has nothing to do with corrupting or contaminating my value system but rather in the idea that I really don't feel that they are worth "fixing."

Ah, ok, I see these two things as related. My perspective is that for many people, to consider child molesters to be anything but monstrous and unfixable endangers their value system.

Much has been made of the high recidivism rates and much like a violent animal should be put down or permanently incarcerated. I know that will raise howls of protests, but how in good conscience can you return people to society who are willing to prey on its most defenseless and innocent victims?

Well, the idea is to release them when they're no longer a significant threat... I do think that releases are done way too fast in the bizarre penal system, without enough consideration for adequate treatment and supports. For example, most people will find themselves unable to move back to the communities they came from and ejected from their families, leaving no source of social support beyond barely-monitored group therapy attendance.

Mind you, I am not talking about questionable cases, I am talking about cases where the evidence is so overwhelming that there is simply no doubt whatsoever that the perpetrator was guilty. You are welcome to disagree, I welcome debate on the topic.

I'm really only interested in the 100% guilty ones, myself. Ironically I'd find working with accused child molesters who I knew were innocent (say, a false accusation made to get child custody, or *cough* extort money from a celebrity) far more disturbing.

 

[deleted176373]

I'm actually not catching you here... I'm wondering if you're still using the wrong word, actually, or if we just have really different perspectives. I would have sympathy for someone with a developmental disability who molested children, but I think I would have trouble empathizing there given that I don't have a DD and don't know if I could really track those feelings.

I grew up with a developmentally disabled brother, so maybe that's why I can draw some empathy with regards to that. Who knows if I am using the wrong word, I am certainly not done growing intellectually or emotionally even at 41.

I have a great deal of respect for those that wish to take this on. Good luck, I am sure you will do well with this. You certainly seem to have the right attitude to do this kind of work.

Mark

 

[PsyDGrrrl]

It's interesting that you used the word "choices". It reminded me that my prof in psychopathology last semester made a passing comment indicated that he believed pedophilia might be a sexual orientation. Has anyone heard this theory postulated? How prevalent is this line of thinking?

The very idea that he was comparing pedophilia to homosexuality was mindblowing to my class.

I have heard this theory and I do believe that for some people, it is a sexual orientation. Sexual orientation describes who/what we are attracted to sexually. I honestly believe that for some people, children are their sexual orientation. This is not to say that it should be acceptable, but should be understood as pedophiles being hardwired (or possibly have become, though learning) to be attracted to children. This is not comparing pedophilia to homosexuality (and your last comment makes it sounds like "homosexuality" is the only sexual orientation). For one thing, there are plenty - if not the majority - of pedophiles who are heterosexually, pedophiliac-ly oriented. Also, sexual orientation, sexual behavior and sexual identity are all different things, really, and should be understood as being separate (someone could have sex with men but not identify as gay). Sexual offending against children is a behavior, but pedophilia (persistent, enduring sexual attraction to children) is an orientation.

Pedophilia, like other paraphilias, is not about power (whereas sexual offending, such as rape, can be). It is about sex and sexual attraction.