>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) >Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 14:02:59 -0400 >Reply-To: "Jordan, Sarah" >Sender: APA Division Officers list >From: "Jordan, Sarah" >Subject: Re: [DIVOFFICERS] Controversy Regarding APA Journal Article from > Ray Fowler >To: DIVOFFICERS@LISTS.APA.ORG > > Dr. Fowler asked that I pass along this memorandum that he wrote >informing the Council of Representatives of this situation which has >received a great deal of public attention. It may be helpful to pass this >information along to your members via the division listservs so that they >are aware of the controversy and APA's position. > > Thank you for your help with passing the information on. > > Sarah Jordan > Division Services Office > >> TO: Council of Representatives >> >> FROM: Raymond D. Fowler, Ph.D. >> >> DATE: May 25, 1999 >> >> SUBJECT: Controversy Regarding APA Journal Article >> >> >> You may be aware of an ongoing controversy regarding an APA journal >> article on child sexual abuse. Unfortunately, misinformation is being >> spread about this article by certain groups and some elements of the >> media. We don't question the right of those groups to express their own >> views vigorously, but in doing so they are distorting both the nature of >> the article and the policies of the American Psychological Association. >> Let me give you some background. >> >> Last July, APA published an article, "A Meta-Analytic Examination of >> Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples," by Rind, >> Tromovitch, & Bauserman, in Psychological Bulletin. The authors of the >> article reviewed the findings of 59 studies of college students who had, >> as children or adolescents, experienced some form of child sexual abuse. >> The authors subjected these studies to meta-analysis in an effort to >> determine the common factors across studies. >> >> The first overall finding was that those students who had been the victims >> of child sexual abuse were somewhat LESS well adjusted than those students >> who had not suffered such abuse. The next level of finding was that there >> was a great deal of individual variability in the reports of the abused >> students about how the experience had affected them---their self-reports >> of their reactions ranged from highly negative to somewhat positive. That >> anyone reported childhood sexual abuse as "positive" may seem surprising >> and may be an artifact of both the criteria used to define child sexual >> abuse and of gender differences. Male adolescents were more likely to >> report neutral or positive reactions than females or younger children, >> whose reactions were reported as much more negative and whose long-term >> adjustment was more negatively impacted. >> >> Many factors seemed to determine the long-term effects of the abuse, >> including the sex of the child, the nature of the abuse (violent or >> non-violent), and the family environment. For example, the damage was >> greater and more long lasting among females, when violence was used and >> when the family was, in other ways, dysfunctional. The authors concluded >> that the effects of child sexual abuse vary with the individual, that some >> child sexual abuse victims perceived it, at the time and in retrospect, as >> a positive rather than negative experience, and that there was no support >> for the general belief that child sexual abuse always has long term >> negative effects on all victims. The article does not address the >> question of whether or not some of the students had received any form of >> psychotherapy, which may have ameliorated the long-term impact of >> childhood abuse experiences. Many of these findings, while answering >> important empirical questions, provided an opportunity for the article to >> be misrepresented as condoning sexual contact between adults and children, >> or at least failing to condemn it. >> >> Several months after the article was published, the Web site of NAMBLA >> (the North American Man-Boy Love Association) publicized the study as >> "Good News," misrepresenting it as support for their position in favor of >> sexual relations between men and boys. Subsequently, it was denounced by >> "Dr. Laura," a talk show host who spent hours attacking APA for publishing >> what she called "severely flawed" "junk science." This, in turn, >> attracted the attention of some members of Congress who participated in a >> press conference on the issue and subsequently submitted a resolution in >> the House of Representatives condemning the study and, by implication, >> APA. That resolution (attached) is currently referred to House Committee, >> but no action has been taken. >> >> The conclusions of the study have been strongly objected to by critics, >> even though the findings are consistent with, and, in fact, based on, the >> 59 previous studies. The report that some college students, who as >> children or adolescents had experienced sexual interactions with adults, >> reported it as positive has especially aroused anger and outrage. Many >> critics have demanded that APA repudiate the study. >> >> Because the article has attracted so much attention, we have carefully >> reviewed the process by which it was approved for publication and the >> soundness of the methodology and analysis. This study passed the >> journal's rigorous peer review process and has, since the controversy, >> been reviewed again by an expert in statistical analysis who affirmed that >> it meets current standards and that the methodology, which is widely used >> by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop guidelines, is >> sound. We also believe it asked a valid and important research >> question--are there varying degrees of harm from child sexual abuse? Can >> the child's age, resiliency, and family environment lessen the ill effects >> of such abuse? There is no support in the article for a change in social >> policy or current law vis-ˆ-vis pedophilia. In fact, the authors state >> that questions of harmfulness are separate from the question of the >> wrongfulness of the act. >> >> These conclusions have been distorted and misreported by various groups >> and media figures who are now claiming that APA is saying that child >> sexual abuse is not harmful to children, or that young children are >> capable of "consenting" to sex with adults. Of course, APA's position is >> just the opposite; child sexual abuse is harmful to children. Pedophilia >> is WRONG, should never be considered acceptable behavior, and is properly >> punishable by law. In response to the controversy, the Board of >> Directors approved a resolution on child sexual abuse reaffirming APA's >> longstanding policies on the topic (see below). >> >> In essence, we believe that, through this issue, science has been >> misrepresented to further the cause of politics and sensationalist >> publicity. That is ultimately a disservice to science, to society and to >> children. We are working hard to try and correct the record with those >> politicians and members of the media who care about the facts. >> >> You will find below a copy of the Board of Directors' resolution on child >> sexual abuse, which will be brought before Council in August for >> ratification. A statement that further outlines APA's position is also >> posted on APA's Web site if you want to direct colleagues who have >> questions to it. The citation to the article is below: the full text of >> the article can be located in the member services section of the APA Web >> site. >> >> Citation: Rind, B., Tromovitch, P., & Bauserman, R. (1998). A >> meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse >> using college samples. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 22-53. The full text >> can be located at: http://members.apa.org/governance/bulletin/ >> >>