I met with a friend the other day and we spoke about her brother. He has just had a trial, been convicted and sentenced to something like 7 years in prison. (Spain) He is now a convicted pederast. Thing is one of the young girls he molested was her daughter, when she was 4. This was about 10 years ago. So this has all been a trauma for her and her daughter, and now they are trying to put this behind them. I mean it was her brother… and uncle of the girl
There came to me a thought which I turned into a question. From what I had read it seems that most child molesters or pederasts, whatever the term is, had been sexually abused themselves as youngsters. So I asked her if her brother fell into that category, if he had been abused as a child. Sure enough, she replied that yes, as a child in an Opus Dei school he had been sexually abused by a priest or priests. I didn’t go into detail with more questions.
But my question now is: Is it something akin to automatic that an abused child will grow up to be an abuser? (Actually I think not) So a further question is, are all abusers folks who had been abused?
People are far too complicated for that to be automatic. There is a higher prevalence, but not 1:1. Counselling for the daughter would be HIGHLY recommended; parents are usually not equipped with the skills or knowledge to help these children.
How could that possibly be the case? With each abuser abusing, on average, some number of kids >1, after a certain number of generations everyone would be an abuser, pyramid style.
We have several people in these same boards who have broken the cycle.
The longer answer, that’s one of those statistics people grab from the sharp end. “Abusers have often been themselves abused and have absorbed abuse as being correct behavior” is “apples are often yellow”; “everybody who’s ever been abused will be an abuser” would be “all yellow fruits are apples” - pears, lemons and plums beg to differ. Not everybody who’s ever been abused will abuse, and not everybody who abuses has been abused.
The key part is whether the abused person does indeed think that the abuse is what’s standard, normal, or even the best and most appropriate way to demonstrate love / caring / raise a child / treat a partner. Those who know it’s not will be a lot less likely to do it to others.
The actual answer might be quite a bit different if abuse was redifined. Any major mistakes we make in child rearing are forms of abuse even if they are not intentional. Spoiling a child might be just as abusive as beating him or her. What really defines abuse?
I don’t think you can abuse someone by accident. Misguidedly, sure (like withholding medical care for religious reasons), but not without taking an active role. Even neglect requires conscious inaction. But sometimes, mistakes in child rearing are just mistakes, not abuse.
I think we need to distinguish two or three different types -
-people who were physically (or emotionally) abused as children may or may not repeat this form of child care on those around them or their own children. They see this as the normal way to treat children; or they mature and realize that they were hard done by and decide not to act that way themselves. How the human mind works is an odd thing.
-there is a (small?) group of people, whose sexual gratification is attached to something other than “adult of the opposite sex”. Just as some people have their sex attraction tied to “adults of the same sex”, some have their sex attraction tied to “child of same sex” or “child of opposite sex”. If we could figure out how this happens, it would answer one of the mysteries of the human mind.
Let’s make this clear - my point is homosexuality is NOT the same as the urge to molest children, any more than heterosexuality is. It’s just that, same as homosexuality happens, so does child attraction - randomly, for no obvious reason. It seems to me that possibly, based on the number of people who are otherwise upright citizens but charged with child porn possession thanks to the internet - that the tendency is more widespread than we think but the majority control the urge to act on this.
-the third group would be those molested. Again, like those physically abused, some may see this as a gratifying way to treat children when they get older; after all, in some cases sex is about domination and power - for those unable to have a relationship with equals or those gratified by being in control. (It’s also suggested that this is one reason why some men are attracted to sexually mature but much younger women, because they are more easily in control.) Again, some personalities fall into the role of repeating what they “learned”, or simply enjoying being in the position of power. Perhaps just as many fall the other way and play the victim all their lives. But many use the experience as an object lesson. Plus, you have to separate the “one instance” from those who spent most of their childhood enduring abuse. The level of impact probably depends on the level shock of the experience, plus the length of time over which it repeated.
In any cases of abuse, I would equate it to situations to those of children of alcoholics or some such; some children may learn that alcoholism is proper behaviour, some may decide that they will never end up like their parent(s). It may have an impact on their life, it may negatively affect their mental well-being, but there is no “guarantee” that they will repeat their parent’s behaviour- often just the opposite.
For one thing, it’s making excuses for the abusers. “Oh, he was molested; he can’t help it.” Bullshit, he can’t help it.
Secondly, it assumes that abuse removes all sense of propriety and morality from the victim and somehow, no amount of therapy or recovery work can help. So it really undermines recovery and makes victims worry that* they *will become abusers. And it gives survivors zero credit for all recovery work done up to that point. That may be part of the reason there’s a stigma attached to admitting to being or having been abused: the shame of everyone “knowing” that *all *abused become abusers.
The earliest studies showed (IIRC) no correlation between sexual abuse and later risk of becoming an abuser. Later studies did show a correlation, but still: most abusers weren’t abused themselves, and most abuse victims never abuse anyone.