Citation

Lanning KV. J. Interpers. Violence 2017; 32(6): 967-978.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0886260516657359

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

As a result of his assignment to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Behavioral Science Unit, the author consulted on and has firsthand knowledge of most of the cases discussed in Cheit's book. He came to believe that there is a middle ground. Some of what victims allege may be true and accurate, some may be misperceived or distorted, some may be symbolic, and some may be contaminated or false. The problem and challenge, however, is to determine which is which. He basically agrees with much of what Cheit sets forth about seeds of truth in many allegations. He has concerns about some confusing and inconsistent definitions. What was and is referred to by many as the backlash can be confused with what Cheit refers to in his book as the witch-hunt narrative. Many professionals, including possibly Cheit, do not seem fully aware of the wide diversity of ways in which children are sexually victimized. The author believes that any delayed reporting and minimization of recent cases involving the Catholic priests and Penn Sate have more to do with inaccurate stereotypes perpetuated by child abuse idealists than some witch-hunt narrative. From a law enforcement perspective, more benefit would have come had Cheit's extensive research focused more on documenting how allegations became so bizarre and inaccurate and less on the alleged far-ranging harm caused by the witch-hunt narrative. In the author's opinion, it is that process and not the witch-hunt narrative that caused most of the long-term damage discussed.

Language: en