Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 591–593 | Cite as

Child Pornography Use and Internet Solicitation in the Diagnosis of Pedophilia

  • Michael C. SetoEmail author
Letter to the Editor

The DSM-V Paraphilias subworkgroup has proposed a number of changes to the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia (Blanchard, 2009a). In this commentary, I briefly discuss some of these changes in light of recent research on internet-facilitated sexual offenders and focus on the relevance of child pornography and internet solicitation when considering the diagnosis of pedophilia.

Ascertaining Paraphilias versus Diagnosing Paraphilic Disorders

The proposed distinction between ascertaining a paraphilia when the sexual interest exists and making a paraphilia diagnosis only when there is evidence of distress or impairment addresses the seeming paradox that a person would not be diagnosed with pedophilia under DSM-IV (and, to a lesser extent, DSM-IV-TR) if the person was sexually attracted to prepubescent children but was not distressed or impaired (including conflict with the law) as a result.

Blanchard (2009a) suggests that “ego-syntonic, euthymic, chaste pedophiles” are rare. Consistent...

Keywords

Sexual Interest Child Pornography Sexual Compulsivity Pedophilia Paraphilic Disorder 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Ray Blanchard, James Cantor, Meredith Chivers, Angela Eke, and Grant Harris for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this commentary.

References

  1. Blanchard, R. (2009a). The DSM diagnostic criteria for pedophilia. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-009-9536-0.
  2. Blanchard, R. (2009b). Reply to letters regarding Pedophilia, Hebephilia, and the DSM-V [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 331–334. doi: 10.1007/s10508-008-9427-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blanchard, R., Kolla, N. J., Cantor, J. M., Klassen, P. E., Dickey, R., Kuban, M. E., & Blak, T. (2007). IQ, handedness, and pedophilia in adult male patients stratified by referral source. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 19, 285–309. doi: 10.1177/107906320701900307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchard, R., Lykins, A. D., Wherrett, D., Kuban, M. E., Cantor, J. M., Blak, T., … Klassen, P. E. (2009). Pedophilia, hebephilia, and the DSM-V. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 335–350. doi: 10.1007/s10508-008-9399-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Harris, A., Phenix, A., Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2003). Static-99 coding rules revised2003. Retrieved on September 12, 2005, from http://www.psepc-sppcc.gc.ca/publications/corrections/pdf/Static-99-coding-Rules_e.pdf.
  6. Neutze, J., Seto, M. C., Schaefer, G. A., Mundt, I. A., & Beier, K. M. (2009). Predictors of child pornography offenses and child sexual abuse in a community sample of pedophiles and hebephiles. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  7. O’Donohue, W., Regev, L. G., & Hagstrom, A. (2000). Problems with the DSM-IV diagnosis of pedophilia. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 12, 95–105. doi: 10.1177/107906320001200202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Quayle, E., & Taylor, M. (2002). Child pornography and the internet: Perpetuating a cycle of abuse. Deviant Behavior, 23, 331–361. doi: 10.1080/01639620290086413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Riegel, D. L. (2004). Effects on boy-attracted pedosexual males of viewing boy erotica [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33, 321–323. doi: 10.1023/B:ASEB.0000029071.89455.53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Rosenbloom, M. L., & Tanner, J. (1998). Misuse of Tanner puberty stages to estimate chronological age. Pediatrics, 102, 1494.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Seto, M. C. (2008). Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: Theory, assessment, and intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Seto, M. C., Cantor, J. M., & Blanchard, R. (2006). Child pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 610–615. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.115.3.610.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Seto, M. C., & Eke, A. W. (2008, October). Predicting new offenses committed by child pornography offenders. Paper presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  14. Seto, M. C., Reeves, L., & Jung, S. (in press). Motives for child pornography offending: The explanations given by the offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression.Google Scholar
  15. Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Wakefield, J. C. (1992). The concept of mental disorder: On the boundary between biological facts and social values. American Psychologist, 47, 373–388. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.47.3.373.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K. J. (2005). Child pornography possessors arrested in Internet-related crimes: Findings from the National Online Victimization Study. Retrieved November 3, 2009, from http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/publications/NC144.pdf.
  18. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K. (2009). Trends in arrests of “online predators”. Crime Against Children Research Center. Retrieved November 3, 2009, from http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/cv194.pdf.
  19. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K., & Ybarra, M. (2008). Online “predators” and their victims: Myths, realities, and implications for prevention and treatment. American Psychologist, 63, 111–128. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.2.111.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Integrated Forensic ProgramRoyal Ottawa Health Care GroupBrockvilleCanada

Personalised recommendations