Condemnation of a Scientific Article: A Chronology and Refutation of the Attacks and a Discussion of Threats to the Integrity of Science

Abstract

R o b e r t B a u s e r m a n Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, State of MarylandOn July 12, 1999, our meta-analysis on child sexual abuse published in Psychological Bulletin, one of the American Psychological Association's (APA) premiere journals, was condemned by the U.S. Congress (H. Con. Res. 107).The condemnation followed months of attacks on the article, the APA, and us by various social conservatives and psychoanalytically-oriented clinicians. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) was asked by the APA to independently review our article. After considering criticisms of it and the article itself, AAAS declined, but commented that it was the criticisms, not our methods or analyses, that troubled them because these criticisms misrepresented what we wrote. The current article chronicles this whole affair. First, we provide background, explaining why an article such as ours was needed. Then we accurately summarize the article, given that it has been so widely misrepresented. Next we present a chronology of the events leading up to and following the condemnation. We then present and refute all the major criticisms of the article, which have included both methodological and conceptual attacks. Next we discuss the threat to science that these events portend. We conclude by discussing the need to separate moral judgments from scientific research, the conflation of which formed the basis for the distortions and condemnation.

When Compassion is Making It Worse: Social Dynamics of Tabooing Victims of Child Sexual Abuse

“…The taboo of sexual abuse of children is not universal across all societies; every society upholds different norms regarding sexual abuse of children, and the responses to different types of sexual abuse of children vary both between and within societies (Goody 1994;Malón 2009;Rind et al 1998;Turner 2008). Furthermore, the methodology used in studying sexual abuse of children has been much debated, and so has the need to separate moral judgments and biased representation from scientific research (Rind et al 2000;Landor and Eisenchlas 2012).…”

Childhood ‘Innocence’ is Not Ideal: Virtue Ethics and Child–Adult Sex

“…Little appears to have changed since then, although there has been a relatively recent review of such scientific studies of normal childhood sexual behaviour as have been conducted (de Graaf and Rademakers 2011). What we do have evidence for in abundance is that research into child sexuality has become so controversial that it is almost impossible to conduct, and that this work tends to be marginalised or actively censored (Hubbard and Verstraete 2013;Lilienfeld 2002;Oellerich 2000;Rind et al 2000). Indeed, the very concept of "child sexuality" is increasingly presented as an oxymoron (Angelides 2004).…”

Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons

“…Indeed, the best scientific evidence suggests that the most typical experiences considered childhood sexual abuse may not be as harmful as most people think. Specifically, sexual activity that children engage in voluntarily (albeit illegally) with adults is nearly uncorrelated with undesirable outcomes, and it remains unclear whether the small association is causal (Rind, Tromovitch, & Bauserman, 1998, 2000. Of course, ifsexualabuseisaccompaniedbyforce,threats,kidnappingortorture, the harmfulness vastly increases.…”