By Kieran McCartan, PhD
Please note this is a reposting of a NOTA blog post by the same author, the original can be found here – kieran.
Late last week I attended a conference
on online perpetrators of sexual abuse hosted by the Lucy Faithful Foundation, the aim
of which was to make us reflect upon the reality of downloading and viewing
child sexual abuse imagery in the UK (i.e., that is 100,000
individuals downloading material in the UK currently), but especially in
the South West of England, as well as how to best respond to it. Although the
conference was interesting, informative and worthwhile, it was the questions
that were not answered or addressed that had the biggest impact on me. Not the
questions about perpetrators, policing or offence characteristics; but rather,
the questions about the collateral consequences of downloading and viewing
child sexual abuse imagery on the families, friends and communities linked to the
perpetrator.
When we talk about sexual abuse we tend to talk about
perpetrators and victims. We do not tend to talk about the surrounding family
and peers that are indirectly affected by the abuse and its consequences. Often
there is an assumption in contact offending that the perpetrator is offending
against members of their families, that members of their families are always at
risk and that partners are complicit in the abuse; but this is generally not
true. If it’s not true for contact offenders, is it also not true for individuals
who download and view child sexual abuse imagery? The short answer is that we
don’t know!
The conference really highlighted to me that we do not really
know, empirically, what the impact of having a parent convicted of online
sexual abuse, viewing inappropriate images, grooming children online or
networking with other perpetrators on the dark web is. There is a perception
that the collateral consequences of being convicted of viewing online child
sexual abuse imagery is the same for the perpetrator and their families as
being a contact offender, that is
-
That
perpetrators receive a prison/community sentence, they go on the sex offenders
register, are often being exposed in the press &/or community during their
trial, have the possibility of losing
their family, friends, peers, home, job and have a resultant social stigma;
-
That
families of perpetrators are too being socially stigmatised because of their relationship
to the perpetrator, can be exposed in the press &/or community by default
have the possibility of losing a family member/friend, might lose their home,
may lose additional income, may lose social standing and suffer from suspicion
around complicity (i.e. a feeling that somehow you should have known).
These assumptions are problematic as we do not really know if
they are as true in online offending as they are in contact offending. What we
do know, which the conference discussed at length, is the recognition that the
lives of people related to the online perpetrators have their worlds turned
upside down, directly and indirectly, by the behaviour and that they struggle
to cope with the related outcomes (i.e., the removal of technology, the police
investigation, the re-evaluation of who the perpetrator is and what you really
knew about them); but that there is not a lot of support for these indirect
victims of online sexual abuse (i.e., they were not abused but they have been
impacted by it). Which is problematic because families feel at a loss because
of the nature of the offence and that there are many misconceptions about the
perpetrators of online sexual abuse, the risk that they pose and the reality of
their offences by the public – which includes members of the public
misunderstanding what online offending looks like, its level off seriousness (is
it as serious as contact offenders?), whether online offending leads to contact
offending, whether it is easier to forgive the perpetrator compared to contact
offending or who the victim is? All of which means that the families of online
offenders can face collateral consequences similar to those of contact offenders,
but with less understanding, nuance and (possibly) less sympathy. Over the past
10 or 15 years the level of support and help for the families of individuals
who have downloaded and viewed child sexual abuse imagery has grown, but it
still not common place and these individuals do not always get the help that
they need. Research is starting to be done in this area. Lisa Thornhill presented
on her recently concluded research on the impact of having a father or family
member that has been arrested on suspicion of downloading and viewing child
sexual abuse imagery. This research is important is as it will give us an
empirical base to start developing and implementing appropriate services for
people directly impacted by having a parent of family member who has child
sexual abuse imagery so that they can understand the offences, the consequences
of the offences, be helped to process and move past the impact that the
offences have on their lives. Sexual abuse, in all its forms, impacts not only
the perpetrator and the victims but also the communities in which it happens;
therefore the more that we can help these communities understand and move past
sexual abuse the more adaptive they will be.
No comments:
Post a Comment