Advertisement

Current Sexual Health Reports

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 121–128 | Cite as

Non-offending Pedophiles

  • James M. Cantor
  • Ian V. McPhail
Current Controversies (P Kleinplatz and C Moser, Section Editors)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Current Controversies

Abstract

Non-offending pedophiles are a unique population of individuals who experience sexual interest in children, but despite common misperceptions, have neither had sexual contact with a child nor have accessed illegal child sexual exploitation material. An emerging body of research has examined the prevalence of pedophilic interests, characteristics of non-offending pedophiles, correlates of pedophilic interests, and stigma associated with pedophilia. Treatment programs are beginning to produce findings regarding the effectiveness of treatment in supporting non-offending pedophiles to remain offence-free. The current review spans these areas of research and discusses potential treatment options for working with non-offending pedophiles based on that research base.

Keywords

Non-offending pedophiles Treatment Stigma-related stress Pedophilia 

Notes

Acknowledgments

IVM was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

JMC and IVM declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not report any study with human or animal subjects.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. 1.
    Beier KM, Ahlers CJ, Goecker D, et al. Can pedophiles be reached for primary prevention of child sexual abuse? First results of the Berlin Prevention Project Dunkelfeld (PPD). J Forensic Psychiatry Psychol. 2009;20:851–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shields RT, Benelmouffok A, Letourneau EJ. Help wanted: lessons on prevention from non-offending young adult pedophiles. Poster presented at the 34th annual conference for the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Montréal, Québec, Canada. October, 2015.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Joyal CC, Cossette A, Lapierre V. What exactly is an unusual sexual fantasy? J Sex Med. 2015;12:328–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dombert B, Schmidt AF, Banse R, et al. How common is males’ self-reported sexual interest in prepubescent children? J Sex Res. 2015. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2015.1020108.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: Author; 2013.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ahlers CJ, Schaefer GA, Mundt IA, et al. How unusual are the contents of paraphilias? Paraphilia-associated sexual arousal patterns in a community-based sample of men. J Sex Med. 2011;8:1362–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abdullahi H, Jafojo RO, Udofia O. Paraphilia among undergraduates in a Nigerian university. Sex Addict Compulsivity. 2015;22:249–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Perälä J, Suvisaari J, Saarni SI, et al. Lifetime prevalence of psychotic and bipolar disorders in a general population. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64:19–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alanko K, Salo B, Mokros A, et al. Evidence for heritability of adult men’s sexual interest in youth under age 16 from a population-based extended twin design. J Sex Med. 2013;10:1090–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dawson SJ, Bannerman BA, Lalumiere ML. Paraphilic interests: an examination of sex differences in a nonclinical sample. Sex Abuse. 2014:1–26.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Müller K, Curry S, Ranger R, et al. Changes in sexual arousal as measured by penile plethysmography in men with pedophilic sexual interest. J Sex Med. 2014;11:1221–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fedoroff JP, Curry S, Müller K, et al. Evidence that arousal to pedophilic stimuli can change: response to Bailey, Cantor, and Lalumière. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:259–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bailey JM. A failure to demonstrate changes in sexual interest in pedophilic men: comment on Mueller et al. (2014). Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:249–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cantor JM. Purported changes in pedophilia as statistical artefacts: comment on Müller et al. (2014). Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:253–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lalumière ML. The lability of pedophilic interests as measured by phallometry. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:255–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mokros A, Habermeyer E. Regression to the mean mimicking changes in sexual arousal to child stimuli in pedophiles. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;19:1–5.Google Scholar
  17. 17.•
    Tozdan S, Briken P. The earlier, the worse? Age of onset of sexual interest in children. J Sex Med. 2015;12:1602–8. Examined relationship between flexibility of pedophilic interests and onset, exclusivity, and self-efficacy.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schaefer GA, Mundt IA, Feelgood S, et al. Potential and Dunkelfeld offenders: two neglected target groups for prevention of child sexual abuse. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2010;33:154–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mitchell RC, Galupo MP. Interest in child molestation among a community sample of men sexually attracted to children. J Sex Aggress. 2015. doi: 10.1080/13552600.2015.1056263.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Raven R. Executive functioning in non-offending pedophiles. MA [thesis]. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Erasmus University Rotterdam; 2014.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jahnke S, Schmidt AF, Geradt M, Hoyer J. Stigma-related stress and its correlates among men with pedophilic sexual interests. Arch Sex Behav. 2015. doi: 10.1007/s10508-015-0503-7.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van Leeuwen ML, van Baaren RB, Chakhssi F, et al. Assessment of implicit sexual associations in non-incarcerated pedophiles. Arch Sex Behav. 2013;42:1501–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Santilla P, Antfolk J, Räfså A, et al. Men’s sexual interest in children: one-year incidence and correlates in a population-based sample of Finnish male twins. J Child Sex Abus. 2015;24:115–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Klein V, Schmidt AF, Turner D, et al. Are sex drive and hypersexuality associated with pedophilic interest and child sexual abuse in a male community sample? PLoS One. 2015;10:e0129730.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.•
    Houtepen JA, Sijtsema JJ, Bogaerts S. Being sexually attracted to minors: sexual development, coping with forbidden feelings, and relieving sexual arousal in self-identified pedophiles. J Sex Marital Ther. 2015. doi: 10.1080/0092623X.2015.1061077. Qualitative research providing in-depth understanding of pedophilic men’s experiences in coping with and understanding their sexual interests.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Freimond CM. Navigating the stigma of pedophilia: the experiences of nine minor-attracted men in Canada. MA [thesis]. Vancouver, Canada: Simon Fraser University; 2013.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jahnke S, Hoyer J. Stigmatization of people with pedophilia: a blind spot in stigma research. Int J Sex Health. 2013;25:169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Furnham A, Haraldsen E. Lay theories of etiology and ‘cure’ for four types of paraphilia: fetishism; pedophilia; sexual sadism; and voyeurism. J Clin Psychol. 1998;54:689–700.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McCartan KF. ‘Here there be monsters’: the public’s perception of paedophiles with particular reference to Belfast and Leicester. Med Sci Law. 2004;44:327–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McCartan KF. Student/trainee professional implicit theories of paedophilia. Psychol Crime Law. 2010;16:265–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hatzenbuehler ML. How does sexual minority stigma “get under the skin”? A psychological mediation framework. Psychol Bull. 2009;135:707–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Marshall WL, Marshall LE. Attachment and intimacy in sexual offenders: an update. Sex Relation Ther. 2010;25:86–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ward T, Siegert RJ. Toward a comprehensive theory of child sexual abuse: a theory knitting perspective. Psychol Crime Law. 2002;8:319–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jahnke S, Imhoff R, Hoyer J. Stigmatization of people with pedophilia: two comparative surveys. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:21–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Imhoff R. Punitive attitudes against pedophiles or persons with sexual interest in children: does the label matter? Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:35–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Theaker EA. Reframing the non-offending pedophile to combat child sexual abuse: a content analysis of public response to Luke Malone’s “Help Wanted”. MA [thesis]. Bothell, WA: University of Washington Bothell; 2015.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pescosolido BA. The stigma complex. Ann Rev Sociol. 2015;41:87–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jahnke S, Philipp K, Hoyer J. Stigmatizing attitudes towards people with pedophilia and their malleability among psychotherapists in training. Child Abuse Negl. 2015;40:93–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Beier KM, Grundmann D, Kuhle LF, et al. The German Dunkelfeld Project: a pilot study to prevent child sexual abuse and the use of child abusive images. J Sex Med. 2015;12:529–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Liao KY, Kashubeck-West S, Weng CY, et al. Testing a mediation framework for the link between perceived discrimination and psychological distress among sexual minority individuals. J Couns Psychol. 2015;62:226–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cantor J. Gold star pedophiles in general sex therapy practice. In: Hall K, Binik Y, editors. Principles and practice of sex therapy. 5th ed. New York: Guilford; 2014. p. 219–34.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Marshall WL, Marshall LE. The origins of sexual offending. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2000;1:250–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Chang EC, Lian X, Yu T, et al. Loneliness under assault: understanding the impact of sexual assault on the relation between loneliness and suicidal risk in college students. Pers Indivi Dif. 2015;72:155–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Stillman TF, Baumeister RF. Social rejection reduces intelligent thought and self-regulation. In: DeWall CN, editor. The Oxford handbook of social exclusion. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2013. p. 132–42.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    McPhail IV, Hermann CA, Nunes KL. Emotional congruence with children and sexual offending against children: a meta-analytic review. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2013;81:737–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hermann CA, McPhail IV, Helmus LM, Hanson RK. Emotional congruence with children is associated with sexual deviancy in sexual offenders against children. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2015. doi: 10.1177/0306624X15620830.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    McPhail IV, Hermann CA, Fernandez YM. Correlates of emotional congruence with children in sexual offenders against children: a test of theoretical models in an incarcerated sample. Child Abuse Negl. 2014;38:336–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mann RE, Hanson KR, Thornton D. Assessing risk for sexual recidivism: some proposals on the nature of psychologically meaningful risk factors. Sex Abuse. 2010;22:191–217.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    McPhail IV, Hermann CA, Fernane S, et al. Validity of phallometric tests of sexual interests in children: a meta-analytic review. 2015; (unpublished).Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Jespersen AF, Lalumière ML, Seto MC. Sexual abuse history among adult sex offenders and non-sex offenders: a meta-analysis. Child Abuse Negl. 2009;33:179–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    van Anders SM. Beyond sexual orientation: integrating gender/sex and diverse sexualities via sexual configurations theory. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:1177–213.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gottfredson DC, Cook TD, Gardner FEM, et al. Standards of evidence for efficacy, effectiveness, and scale-up research in prevention science: next generation. Prev Sci. 2015;16:893–926.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mental Health Commission of Canada. Changing how we see mental illness. Ottawa, Canada: The Mental Health Commission of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the World Psychiatric Association Scientific Section on Stigma and Mental Health, and the Public Health Agency of Canada; 2012.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pachankis JE. Uncovering clinical principles and techniques to address minority stress, mental health, and related health risks among gay and bisexual men. Clin Psychol. 2014;21:313–30.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Molina Y, Marquez JH, Logan DE, et al. Current intimate relationship status, depression, and alcohol use among bisexual women: the mediating roles of bisexual-specific minority stressors. Sex Roles. 2015;73:43–57.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Szymanski DM, Henrichs-Beck C. Exploring sexual minority women’s experiences of external and internalized heterosexism and sexism and their links to coping and distress. Sex Roles. 2014;70:28–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Campbell Family Mental Health Research InstituteCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthTorontoCanada
  2. 2.University of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations