Similarities in modi operandi of institutional and non-institutional child sexual offending: Systematic case comparisons |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Faculty of Business, Justice, and Behavioural Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Manly, Australia;2. Centre for Investigative Interviewing, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia;1. Institute of Child and Adolescent Health, School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, 38 Xueyuan Road, Beijing, 100191, China;2. Beijing Academy of Education Sciences, Tou tiao 3 Hao, Nan li shi Road, Beijing, 100045, China;1. Faculty of Educational and Social Sciences, Department of Pedagogic and Rehabilitation Psychology, University of Oldenburg, Germany, Ammerlaender Heerstrasse 114–118, 26111 Oldenburg, Germany;2. Faculty of Law, Department of Criminology, University of Hamburg, Germany, Rothenbaumchaussee 33, 20148 Hamburg, Germany;1. Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia; Canadian Institute for Advanced Research; British Columbia Children’s Hospital Research Institute, Canada;2. National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome, United States;3. British Columbia Children’s Hospital Research Institute, Canada;4. Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia; British Columbia Children’s Hospital Research Institute, Canada;5. British Columbia Children’s Hospital Research Institute; Department of Statistics, University of British Columbia, Canada;6. Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Canada;7. Global Health Promotion, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Japan;8. Department of Neurosurgery, University of British Columbia, Canada;1. National Centre of Psychotraumatology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark;2. Institute of Psychology Health and Society, University of Liverpool, L69 7ZX Liverpool, United Kingdom;3. Psychology Research Institute, Ulster University, BT48 7JL Derry, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom;4. School of Psychology, National College of Ireland, Dublin 1, Ireland;5. The Danish National Centre for Social Research, DK 1052 København K, Copenhagen, Denmark;1. DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Human Development, First Floor East Wing, School of Public Health, Education Campus, York Road, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, 2193, South Africa;2. The Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town, University of Cape Town, 46 Sawkins Road, Rondebosch, 7700, South Africa |
| |
| Abstract: | Little is known about the extent to whichinstitutional child sex offending differs from non-institutional offending. Strategies to secure the compliance of child victims were systematically compared to compare the modi operandi (prior to, during and following abuse), and the type of power (intimate, aggressive, coercive) applied by child sexual offenders in institutional versus non-institutional settings. A sample of 59 of the most recent child sexual abuse cases referred for prosecution in three Australian states was manually reviewed and coded. Of these, six were cases of institutional abuse, one of which involved crossover offending. Based on complainant age and gender and patterns in offending behaviors, institutional cases were matched with cases of non-institutional abuse. Complainants of both genders ranged in age from 5 to 16 years at abuse onset. Offenders were male family members or friends, priests, an employer and one female school teacher. Results demonstrated commonalities in the modi operandi and grooming methods applied in institutional and non-institutional contexts. Implications for abuse prevention are summarized. |
| |
| Keywords: | Child sexual abuse Institutional child sexual abuse Grooming Modus operandi Pragmatic psychology Paired cases Case study |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
