Multi-Disciplinary Definitions and Understandings of ‘Paedophilia’

Abstract

Despite the current high-profile concern over paedophiles and paedophilic activity, there is no easily accessible or widely accepted multi-disciplinary definition of paedophilia. Commentators have pointed to a general contemporary misunderstanding surrounding the subject of paedophilia, and to the tensions between strong beliefs and facts in both societal and correctional contexts. We suggest that the current situation — societal, clinical and legal — can be problematic for both offenders and practitioners who are currently charged with, and involved in the risk treatment and/or management of paedophiles. This article attempts to begin to address these issues by looking at conceptions of paedophilia from a multi-disciplinary viewpoint. We examine understandings from clinical and legal sources, and present this analysis in a historical and cultural context. In drawing these divergent conceptions together, we highlight various contradictions and discrepancies. We suggest that these inconsistencies present significant problems in terms of professional engagement with paedophilia and paedophiles, and as a result illustrate the need to engage in more detailed debate regarding what constitutes ‘the problem’.

Attitudes towards sexual offenders: What do we know, and why are they important?

“…Harper and Hogue (2014) found that a large proportion of British media reports about sexual crime focus on offenses perpetrated against children. Additionally, it has been reported that sexual offenders against children are homogeneously labeled as 'pedophiles' (Feelgood & Hoyer, 2008;Harper & Hogue, 2015b;Harrison, Manning, & McCartan, 2010;Silverman & Wilson, 2002). Recent research has shown that the impact of the 'pedophile' label on judgments (e.g., about sentencing) can be profound.…”

Mobile phone technology and sexual abuse

“…In terms of their social interactions, Child Sexual Abusers (CSA), including paedophiles, are often quite adaptive knowing when to pursue, stop and alter their sexual offending behaviours; this is why many of them can have multiple victims, with the abuse often carrying on for years without being discovered by a third person/party. Although, CSA tend to be viewed heterogeneously rather than homogenously with explanations seeming to focus on its assumed homogeneous characteristics, instead of or in spite of its recognised heterogeneous nature (Bickley & Beech, 2001;Harrison et al, 2010). This is problematic as not all forms of child sexual abuse are similar, with different offender typologies (CSA, paedophile, incest abuser, etc.)…”

Changing Course: From a Victim/Offender Duality to a Public Health Perspective

“…Many of the challenges of defining the scope of sexual violence are linked to the fundamental question about how to consistently define sexual violence (Harrison et al, 2010). Estimates of sexual violence will vary widely depending upon how broadly or narrowly the term is defined (Zeuthen & Hagelskjaer, 2013); especially as there is a broad range of legal and clinical categories of sexual violence, both nationally and internationally.…”

“…Another example of conflagration of definitions is between child sexual abuse and pedophilia. The two terms are often used interchangeably in society (McCartan, 2010); when in fact we are talking about two distinct populations (Harrison et al, 2010), one that is primarily based on breaking social norms as well as laws (child sexual abuse) and the other primarily viewed as being a clinical issue (paedophilia). Someone who commits a child sexual offense can be a pedophilic or a hebophilic but does not have to be and a pedophile does have to commit a contact offence to be labelled as such.…”