Nelsons daughter and son-in-law accused of sex abuse

[_Mary]

Snow and Sorensens article.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1997290

Available online

http://www.childmatters.org.nz/file/Dip ... ild-sa.pdf

[_Lemmie]

With regard to the way *children* tell, I have found a copy of Snow and Sorensen's article online, which I have added to the timeline. Many of Snow's assumptions have been corroborated through more recent analysis of the way children behave and tell, and who have definitely been abused.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20206999

Abstract

"Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
The present study investigated 27 sexually abused children's reports about abuse given in the context of police interviews. All abuse cases had been verified (with, e.g., photographs or video films), proving that abuse had occurred.

METHOD:
The interviews with the children were analyzed regarding amount and type of information reported, and the frequency of denial and avoidance. Furthermore, children's reporting on different interview occasions was investigated.

RESULTS:
Children reported significantly more neutral information from the abusive acts per se than sexual information. The children were also highly avoidant and, on several occasions, denied that (documented) sexual acts had occurred. Furthermore, the second and third interviews generated twice as many (new) sexual details as the first interview. The children also produced more denials and avoidances at the first interview compared to subsequent interviews.

CONCLUSIONS:
The present study indicates that sexually abused children may be highly resistant to reporting about the abuse in police interviews, and that two or three interviews may be needed to enable children to give complete and informative reports. It is of vital importance that professionals within the legal system be aware of this problem when conducting child interviews and when evaluating the reliability of child sexual abuse reports."

Just to clarify, what you quoted is not either of Snow's articles, right?

Could you be more specific about how what you quoted supports the second Snow article in your chronology?

[_Lemmie]

Snow and Sorensens article.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1997290

Available online

http://www.childmatters.org.nz/file/Dip ... ild-sa.pdf

This is the second Snow article you added to the chronology, right?

It seems that the first article you referred to is the one that has more bearing on the subject of this thread:

1990 December 1st, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Barbara Snow and Teens Sorensen,
“Ritualistic Child Abuse in a Neighborhood Setting"

The abstract, from your link:

Abstract
Ritualistic child sexual abuse is a relatively unknown and poorly understood form of child maltreatment. This study describes the common characteristics evident in five cases of ritualistic abuse that occurred in five separate neighborhood settings. The sample consisted of 39 children, from 4 to 17 years of age, who described in clinical interviews at least six elements of ritual abuse. Three distinct components to the abuse were identified: incest, neighborhood juvenile perpetration, and organized adult ritual sex rings. These components operated simultaneously and interacted with one another. Lack of understanding of these separate components led to oversimplification of the problem, inaccurate investigative work, and attempts to discredit victims and therapists. Disclosures were difficult and progressed slowly. The majority of children showed little symptomology at initial referral with significant increases during the disclosure process. Perpetrators involved religious leaders, women, and many juveniles that were considered conscientious, responsible members of their community. This study suggests that ritual abuse in neighborhood settings appears secretive, coercive, and complex.

[bolding added]
That article was published in 1991. It seems that it would be Snow's own words, about the subject of this thread.

[_Mary]

Snow and Sorensens article.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1997290

Available online

http://www.childmatters.org.nz/file/Dip ... ild-sa.pdf

This is the second Snow article you added to the chronology, right?

It seems that the first article you referred to is the one that has more bearing on the subject of this thread:

1990 December 1st, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Barbara Snow and Teens Sorensen,
“Ritualistic Child Abuse in a Neighborhood Setting"

The abstract, from your link:

Abstract
Ritualistic child sexual abuse is a relatively unknown and poorly understood form of child maltreatment. This study describes the common characteristics evident in five cases of ritualistic abuse that occurred in five separate neighborhood settings. The sample consisted of 39 children, from 4 to 17 years of age, who described in clinical interviews at least six elements of ritual abuse. Three distinct components to the abuse were identified: incest, neighborhood juvenile perpetration, and organized adult ritual sex rings. These components operated simultaneously and interacted with one another. Lack of understanding of these separate components led to oversimplification of the problem, inaccurate investigative work, and attempts to discredit victims and therapists. Disclosures were difficult and progressed slowly. The majority of children showed little symptomology at initial referral with significant increases during the disclosure process. Perpetrators involved religious leaders, women, and many juveniles that were considered conscientious, responsible members of their community. This study suggests that ritual abuse in neighborhood settings appears secretive, coercive, and complex.

[bolding added]
That article was published in 1991. It seems that it would be Snow's own words, about the subject of this thread.

That's the one I don't have access to. I'll look again.

[_Mary]

Actually, this one is up to date and looks interesting.

https://www.academia.edu/2128441/The_ro ... o=download

The Role of Ritual in the Organised Abuse of Children
Michael Salter
Recommended citation: Salter M. (2012) The Role of Ritual in the Organised
Abuse of Children. Child Abuse Review 21: 440-451.

[_Mary]

"There is a significant disjunction between the views of those professionals
working directly with clients disclosing ritual abuse and those of many
academics and journalists writing on the issue. Surveys of mental health
practitioners in Britain, the US and Australia indicate that a significant minority
of mental health practitioners have encountered one or more clients disclosing ritual abuse and the majority of these take such reports seriously (Andrews et al.,
1995; Bottoms et al., 1996; Schmuttermaier and Veno, 1999). In contrast, the
existence of ritual abuse has been robustly contested by sceptical journalists and
academics who have argued that most, if not all, allegations of ritual abuse are
the product of ‘moral panic’, ‘false memories’ and community ‘hysteria’ about
sexual abuse (e.g. Guilliatt, 1996; Loftus and Ketcham, 1994; Ofshe and Watters,
1996). In criminological and sociological literature, the sceptical account of ritual
abuse has proven most influential, and pejorative references to allegations of
ritual abuse as lacking substance or credibility are now a mainstay of writings on
‘moral panic’ (e.g. Cohen, 2005; Garland, 2008; Jenkins, 1992). Ritual abuse is
also frequently cited in psychological literature as an example of ‘false memories’
(Davis and Loftus, 2009; McNally and Geraerts, 2009).

[_cinepro]

Actually, this one is up to date and looks interesting.

https://www.academia.edu/2128441/The_ro ... o=download

The Role of Ritual in the Organised Abuse of Children
Michael Salter
Recommended citation: Salter M. (2012) The Role of Ritual in the Organised
Abuse of Children. Child Abuse Review 21: 440-451.

If you can't see the huge problem with that study, I don't know what to tell you.

First, let me say that I'm not denying that child abuse happens, or that there aren't people out there who abuse many children. But in the context of this discussion about the accusations about the Miles, we need to acknowledge that abuse claims that have their root in therapy sessions or "recovered memories" should be taken with extreme skepticism, and that outside evidence should be a prerequisite for belief.

And sadly, for cases in the 1980s and 90s, even confessions and medical support may not be valid evidence for such claims.

The "study" you linked to is based on the premise that these stories are true. Since he doesn't get into the specific nature of the types of claims that were studied, or the context in which those claims were made, it's impossible to know whether he was just surveying people with a bunch of recovered false memories, or victims of other types of abuse.

It may be an interesting paper for those who are already believers, but it offers absolutely no support for the reality of the kinds of abuse we've been discussing. It may as well be a research paper on what we can learn from people who remember being abducted by aliens.

[_Rosebud]

It would be valuable to look at a lit review of other research on this topic.

[_Mary]

Actually, this one is up to date and looks interesting.

https://www.academia.edu/2128441/The_ro ... o=download

The Role of Ritual in the Organised Abuse of Children
Michael Salter
Recommended citation: Salter M. (2012) The Role of Ritual in the Organised
Abuse of Children. Child Abuse Review 21: 440-451.

If you can't see the huge problem with that study, I don't know what to tell you.

First, let me say that I'm not denying that child abuse happens, or that there aren't people out there who abuse many children. But in the context of this discussion about the accusations about the Miles, we need to acknowledge that abuse claims that have their root in therapy sessions or "recovered memories" should be taken with extreme skepticism, and that outside evidence should be a prerequisite for belief.

And sadly, for cases in the 1980s and 90s, even confessions and medical support may not be valid evidence for such claims.

The "study" you linked to is based on the premise that these stories are true. Since he doesn't get into the specific nature of the types of claims that were studied, or the context in which those claims were made, it's impossible to know whether he was just surveying people with a bunch of recovered false memories, or victims of other types of abuse.

It may be an interesting paper for those who are already believers, but it offers absolutely no support for the reality of the kinds of abuse we've been discussing. It may as well be a research paper on what we can learn from people who remember being abducted by aliens.

Cinepro. I referred to it because it adds another perspective to the discussion. It was written in 2010 I think..so up to date. I'm sure the debate still rages. Introvigne recognised the debate.

Look, you seem to go out of your way to look for information that supports your position. Your mind is made up already. I'm keeping more of an open mind to all possibilities. Not all accounts of ritual abuse are necessarily false. Not all accounts of ritual abuse are necessarily true.

His overall point about power, gender and control are interesting.

Look, we know even from the 1995 AG report that there was one substantiated account of ritual abuse because the parents admitted it. They admitted other adults were involved. It happens. It's hopefully rare.

[_Rosebud]

"There is a significant disjunction between the views of those professionals
working directly with clients disclosing ritual abuse and those of many
academics and journalists writing on the issue. Surveys of mental health
practitioners in Britain, the US and Australia indicate that a significant minority
of mental health practitioners have encountered one or more clients disclosing ritual abuse and the majority of these take such reports seriously (Andrews et al.,
1995; Bottoms et al., 1996; Schmuttermaier and Veno, 1999). In contrast, the
existence of ritual abuse has been robustly contested by sceptical journalists and
academics who have argued that most, if not all, allegations of ritual abuse are
the product of ‘moral panic’, ‘false memories’ and community ‘hysteria’ about
sexual abuse (e.g. Guilliatt, 1996; Loftus and Ketcham, 1994; Ofshe and Watters,
1996). In criminological and sociological literature, the sceptical account of ritual
abuse has proven most influential, and pejorative references to allegations of
ritual abuse as lacking substance or credibility are now a mainstay of writings on
‘moral panic’ (e.g. Cohen, 2005; Garland, 2008; Jenkins, 1992). Ritual abuse is
also frequently cited in psychological literature as an example of ‘false memories’
(Davis and Loftus, 2009; McNally and Geraerts, 2009).

Yes, there is a very wide divide between the people on the ground, so to speak, and the people elsewhere.

In addition, there's also a wide separation between therapists and court processionals. I've been thinking about Res' perception that a therapist isn't supposed to be an advocate because the attorney is the one who is supposed to be partial to a party. It's a perception that is so far away from the field of professional therapy that I was struck by the major divide between the professions. In the court system, an attorney is supposed to represent a party. Other court professionals, such as mediators, are supposed to remain impartial to both parties. Judges are supposed to order a resolution when deciding partiality after listening to the representations from both sides.

An attorney's perception that a therapist is supposed to be impartial must come from the perception that a therapist somehow fits into the court role structure.

The reality is that a therapist is primarily an advocate for a client.... but an advocate towards healing rather than "winning." It's not surprising at all that therapists have, in general, taken the position that the Court system is a waste of time since it's difficult to prove allegations. And because even when there's proof of abuse through physical examinations, etc., it's really difficult to know exactly who the predators were. What's the point of a victim coping with the trauma of Court without much hope of restitution but with sure trauma if the allegation is legitimate?

The result is that alleged victims will rarely take cases to trial. And when they do, families just get more hurt. Res made a post about that early on in this thread. Court is generally not in anyone's best interests.

Maybe all that, along with a media and other writers who are in the sky rather than on the ground, so to speak, contributes to the public thinking people like Snow happened "back then."

I wonder if the opposite is true but therapists are being silent along with the alleged victims, not wanting to speak because of fear of retaliations. It's a good Q. It'd be difficult to investigate, though.

If some therapists on the ground are believing victims a really important question would be, "Why? It makes sense that there would be a good answer to that question if it were possible to get people to speak.