Victims' Retrospective Explanations of Sibling Sexual Violence.

Journal of Child Sexual Abuse

ISSN: 1053-8712 (Print) 1547-0679 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcsa20

Victims’ Retrospective Explanations of Sibling Sexual Violence Courtney McDonald & Katherine Martinez To cite this article: Courtney McDonald & Katherine Martinez (2017): Victims’ Retrospective Explanations of Sibling Sexual Violence, Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, DOI: 10.1080/10538712.2017.1354953 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2017.1354953

Published online: 02 Aug 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 60

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wcsa20 Download by: [Australian Catholic University]

Date: 29 September 2017, At: 03:31

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2017.1354953

Victims’ Retrospective Explanations of Sibling Sexual Violence Courtney McDonalda and Katherine Martinezb

Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 03:31 29 September 2017

a Department of Sociology, Criminal Justice, and Women’s Studies, University of South Carolina Upstate, Spartanburg, South Carolina, USA; bInstitute for Women’s Studies and Services, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA

ABSTRACT

ARTICLE HISTORY

While sibling sexual abuse may be the most common form of sexual violence within the family, relatively few studies have been conducted on this topic. The current study addresses this gap in the literature through analyses of thematic categories in narratives gathered from an online survey of sibling sexual violence. Survivors were asked to report why they believed their siblings had become sexually abusive toward them. Participants believed that their abusers had learned to be abusive due to their own victimization or exposure to pornography, were abusive to establish dominance over them, or had some undisclosed mental illness. While the study does not claim to test these explanations or include abusers’ own narratives, it offers insight as to how sibling sexual violence survivors make sense of their experiences and assign blame to abusers and their families. It also offers insights into future inquiries about sibling sexual abuse.

Received 24 August 2016 Revised 5 April 2017 Accepted 23 May 2017 KEYWORDS

adult survivor; family; incest; sibling abuse; victim

Introduction Sibling sexual violence may be the most common form of child sexual abuse, though it has received less empirical study than other forms of sexual abuse (Morrill, 2014). Often parents and guardians believe sibling sexual contact is nonharmful, consensual, and even a normal part of sibling relationships, particularly when the offender and victim are close in age and signs of obvious force are missing. These beliefs prevent parents from recognizing the serious nature of the offense and decrease the chances that parents report the abuse to authorities (Caffaro & Conn-Caffaro, 1998; McVeigh, 2003; Wiehe, 1991, 2002). Thus, empirical data on sibling sexual abuse is comparatively limited, especially in regard to the lived experiences of survivors. The current study contributes to the literature by analyzing accounts of sibling sexual abuse survivors who were asked to explain why such abuse occurs in an effort to understand how survivors make sense of these traumatic experiences. CONTACT Courtney McDonald [email protected] Department of Sociology, Criminal Justice, and Women’s Studies, University of South Carolina-Upstate, 800 University Way, Spartanburg, SC 29303. © 2017 Taylor & Francis

2

C. MCDONALD AND K. MARTINEZ


Juvenile sexual offending According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) (2015), about 23% of all sexual offenses were committed by a juvenile (when the offender was known). Prior research has consistently demonstrated the link between child maltreatment and juvenile offending, including sexual offending. Abuse (physical and sexual), witnessing domestic violence, and neglect are some of the primary predictors of juvenile sexual offending (Righthand & Welch, 2004). In 1998, Felitti and colleagues, with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a report linking seven adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) to chronic adulthood diseases. The CDC has since included an additional three measures in the ACE Study. The ACEs comprise three categories of experiences: abuse (emotional, physical, and sexual), household challenges (violent treatment toward mother, household substance abuse, household mental illness, parental separation or divorce, and having an incarcerated household member), and neglect (emotional and physical). As the number of ACEs increases, so too does a child’s risk of a range social and behavioral problems including juvenile delinquency (CDC, 2016). While the use of the ACE study to analyze juvenile offending is new, some studies have uncovered a clear link between ACEs and delinquent behavior. For example, one study of 64,000 juvenile offenders in Florida found that over 67% reported family violence, parental separation or divorce, and household member incarceration. Female offenders were particularly at risk; they had a higher prevalence of each ACE indicator, reported more ACEs, and were over four times more likely to have been sexually abused than their male counterparts (Baglivio et al., 2014). In another study of adjudicated juvenile offenders, those who had experienced multiple ACEs were more likely to commit serious, violent, and chronic offenses. Chronic and “one and done” offenders experienced similar rates of sexual abuse, which was a strong predictor of committing only one offense, but not chronic offenses (Fox, Perez, Cass, Baglivio, & Epps, 2015). Adult sexual offenders have higher ACE scores than the general public, with child sexual abuse, emotional neglect, and domestic violence at home being significant predictors of adult sexual offending (Levenson & Socia, 2016). Data from the ACE study are supported by other studies that measure trauma and sexual offending. One such study found that adjudicated male sexual offenders were more likely than nonsexual offending youth with conduct disorders to live in families characterized by higher rates of lying to children, creating myths about particular family members, and engagement in taboo sexual behaviors (such as parent–child sexual contact) (Baker, Tabacoff, Tornusciolo, & Eisenstadt, 2003). Male juvenile sexual offenders endure high levels of traumatic experiences during childhood, including


JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

3

physical and sexual abuse. Such trauma can produce negative mental health outcomes such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which is linked to sexual offending (McMackin, Leisen, Cusack, LaFratta, & Litwin, 2002). A study of 118 female juvenile sexual offenders in Florida revealed that many had come from families characterized by high rates of instability, disorganization, and lack of adult control or supervision. Half of them reported experiencing child maltreatment, including 26.3% who had been sexually abused. Maltreated girls were more likely to report problems in school, have a mental illness diagnosis, and have abused a sibling or other relative (versus a friend or neighbor) compared to nonmaltreated girls. Girls who were sexually abused were also more likely to have used greater force or coercion against their victims (Roe-Sepowitz & Krysik, 2008). From a nationally representative sample of 9th grade students in Switzerland, Aebi and colleagues (2015) concluded that boys and girls were more likely to admit to sexually coercive behaviors if they had been victimized by either contact or noncontact (e.g., forced to allow someone to take pictures of their naked body) sexual abuse. About 42% of males and 85% of females who had sexually coerced another person reported a history of sexual victimization. Thus, it is clear that adverse and traumatic childhood experiences (including sexual abuse) are important predictors of sexual offending among juveniles. Sibling sexual abuse According to data from NIBRS, just over 13,000 cases of sibling sexual violence were reported to the police between 2000 and 2007. The majority of the victims were girls under 13 years old and biologically related to the offending sibling. The offenders were most often older brothers, with a mean age difference between victim and offender of 5.5 years. Most offenders acted alone, although 10% were co-offenders. The most common victim-offender dyad was brother–sister, though 25% of the incidents consisted of brother– brother sexual abuse (Krienert & Walsh, 2011). This confirms clinical observations that the most common form of sibling sexual abuse involves older brothers abusing younger sisters (Caffaro & Conn-Caffaro, 1998; Wiehe, 2002). According to the NIBRS data, forcible fondling was the most common form of reported sexual violence. Few cases included serious injuries, and weapons were rarely used during the sexual abuse incident (Krienert & Walsh, 2011). Given the stigma of sibling incest, many survivors keep the abuse hidden for years, compounding feelings of shame and guilt. Survivors tend to have limited contact with offenders in adulthood and often have fractured relationships with other family members (Caffaro & Conn-Caffaro, 1998). Women in particular report difficulties in establishing and maintaining intimate relationships as adults, as abusive experiences with their brothers


4


produce feelings of mistrust and fear (Wiehe, 2002). Furthermore, adults who have experienced sibling sexual abuse have lower levels of self-esteem than nonvictims, especially if it occurred frequently (Morrill, 2014; Wiehe, 2002). Although far more research is needed to definitively say what the major risk factors are for sibling sexual abuse, it is likely that multiple factors play a role. Clinical observations with sibling sexual abuse perpetrators reveal the following characteristics: a compulsive and deviant sexual arousal pattern, the desire to exert power over a sibling, a wish to fulfill emotional or physical needs that are normally satisfied within the family, and attitudes that minimize abusive behavior (Caffaro & Conn-Caffaro, 1998, p. 43). These motivations are strongly related to the social context in which children are raised. For example, if parents lack clear sexual boundaries (e.g., exposing their children to sexual images at a very young age), siblings may model that behavior in inappropriate and abusive ways. Conversely, when parents are too repressive about sexual matters or if there is a pattern of secrecy within the family, children may be afraid to report coercive sexual incidents (Caffaro & Conn-Caffaro, 1998). Absent or neglectful parents increase the risk of sibling sexual abuse, as there is little deterrence for offenders (Caffaro & Conn-Caffaro, 1998; Wiehe, 2002). Relatedly, parents may give an older sibling the responsibility of watching younger siblings, providing not only an opportunity but authority to offend. Or if an older sibling perceives that a younger sibling is getting more attention or is otherwise favored by parents, he may engage in sexual coercion to regain status and control (Wiehe, 2002). Finally, the existence of violence within the home can make the use of force easier or it can make coercive sexual activity appear to be consensual (Caffaro & Conn-Caffaro, 1998). In a study of 166 male adolescents in a residential sex offender program, Latzman, Viljoen, Scalora, and Ullman (2011) found that compared to nonsibling sexual offenders, sibling offenders were more likely to have witnessed domestic violence, have been sexually abused themselves, and have been exposed to pornography. They did not differ from nonsibling offenders in terms of levels of family dysfunction, physical or emotional abuse, or neglect. The purpose of the current study is to explore the ways in which sibling sexual abuse is understood by victims. The study analyzes discourse used by sibling sexual abuse survivors to explain their experiences. Specifically, survivors were asked to explain why they believe their own siblings were sexually abusive. Important, the goal is not to uncover the actual motivations for sibling sexual abuse, as abusers themselves would need to answer this question. Instead, the study explores the discourses from which adult survivors of sibling sexual abuse draw in order to make meaning and assign blame for their experiences. Such information is vital for practitioners helping victims recover from childhood trauma, especially those who harbor resentment toward their sibling and other family members who they may blame for


5

failing to prevent or stop the abusive behavior (Monahan, 2010). In addition, participants’ narratives point to risk factors for sibling sexual abuse that should be included in future research.


Methods The current study was approved by the Georgia Southwestern State University’s Institutional Review Board in April 2012. Data collection was conducted via an online survey and began on approval and continued until November 2013. The e-mailed advertisement was sent to family violence agencies and to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community centers across the United States to recruit participants. The advertisement recruited “adults who had either perpetrated or been victimized by sibling abuse, and who are willing to share their experiences in an online survey.” It also stated that the purpose of the study was to collect narratives of sibling abuse and that the survey could take 30 minutes to two hours to complete. Furthermore, potential participants were told they would be asked about physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. A total of 63 adults who self-identified as victims or perpetrators of emotional, physical, or sexual sibling abuse participated in the online survey. The survey included questions about physical, sexual, and emotional sibling abuse, though the current study only analyzes the narratives of sexual abuse victims. In total, 33 participants answered yes to the following prompts: “Were you ever physically, emotionally, or sexually abused by a sibling?” and “Can you recall a time when a sibling touched you or made you touch someone else in a sexual way because he or she forced you in some way, drugged you, or threatened to harm you if you didn’t?” These participants were deemed to be sexual abuse victims, and their survey answers were included for analysis. Participants were prompted to identify which of their siblings perpetrated the sexual abuse, estimate the frequency and duration of the abuse, provide examples of their experiences, and speculate about how the abuse affected their lives. Participants were also requested to provide some kind of explanation for their perpetrators’ behaviors. The specific prompt was, “What do you think caused this to happen?” Clearly, a victim cannot know for certain the motives of a perpetrator. The goal here is to analyze how victims make sense of their experiences, learn more about their views of the perpetrators, and to potentially uncover other forms of family abuse that were occurring. The answers to this question comprise the data analyzed for the current study. The data were analyzed by the process of qualitative, grounded theory coding. This approach allows researchers to begin with the data and develop codes as they emerge (Charmaz, 2001). The first author conducted line-byline coding, a process in which initial codes are created (Charmaz, 2001).


6


Next, the first and second authors used focused coding to transform the initial codes into broader conceptual categories (Charmaz, 2001). The three major conceptual categories to emerge were “sexual abuse as learned behavior,” “the medicalization of sexual deviance,” and “power/control.” “Sexual abuse as learned behavior” was defined as any explanation of sexual abuse that attributed the offender’s motivation to influential media (e.g., violent pornography). “The medicalization of sexual deviance” category encompasses all narratives that suggest the offender was driven to sexual abuse by personality traits, psychological disorders, substance abuse issues, or biological drives (e.g., hormones). Finally, the “power/control” theme included those narratives in which the victim attributed sexual abuse to the specific desire to dominate, have power over, or control siblings’ behaviors.

Findings Sample characteristics

Of the 63 total participants, 33 identified as victims of sibling sexual abuse. Women represented the vast majority of sexual abuse survivors (n = 30, including a transgendered man who had been abused while living as a girl). Most participants were White/Caucasian (29), followed by biracial (3) and African American (1). Participant age at the time of the study ranged from 18 to 60, with a median age of 35 to 39 years old. The highest number of siblings was 8, with a median and mean number of 3 siblings. Seventeen participants identified as heterosexual and 16 as either lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, or pansexual. All but one participant, who was abused in her early 30s, experienced sibling sexual abuse during childhood. Excluding this case, the average age of sibling sexual abuse onset was 7.4 years old and cessation was 13 years old. On average, survivors endured abuse for 4.4 years. Only 9 participants believed they experienced 4 or fewer sexual abuse incidents, while the other 24 participants reported that it had happened at least 10 times, with some estimating they had been sexually abused hundreds of times. Most survivors experienced polyvictimization, as 79% reported physical abuse and 77% reported emotional abuse by siblings. Both gender (offenders were 81% male) and age (91% of offenders were older than victims) were associated with the perpetration of sibling sexual abuse. Brothers acting alone were the most common offender (n = 21), followed by sisters acting alone (n = 5). Eighteen of the male offenders were older than the victim, two were younger, and one perpetrator’s age could not be determined. Four of the five female offenders were older than the victim, and one sister’s age could not be determined. Four participants declined to specify the gender or age of their perpetrator, and three were


7

abused by multiple siblings (in two cases, the perpetrators were two older brothers, and in the third case the perpetrators were an older brother and older sister).


Narrative 1: Sibling sexual abuse in the context of violence

Most commonly, participants explained sibling sexual abuse as occurring in the context of other forms of violence or dysfunctional home lives. Specifically, they believed that sexual abuse was learned via dysfunctional familial interactions, prior abuse victimization, and violent pornography. Of the 13 participants who discussed their own victimization in relation to familial dysfunction, eight grew up in families fraught with absent, neglectful, or abusive parents. Parents were viewed as being responsible for the abuse, as they did not act appropriately to protect victims, discipline offenders, or provide adequate supervision. One woman reported that she has been sexually abused by her older brother for years (from age 7 to 16), generally when her parents were not in the home. She had disclosed the sexual abuse to her family, which she described several times as “dysfunctional,” but in her view they refused to “openly address the issue.” She was only able to end the abuse after a teacher helped her move out of the family home. For this woman, the ultimate blame fell on her parents for allowing her brother to be sexually abusive. Several other participants also attributed blame to parents for not “being there” or providing “intervention” or “adult supervision.” In other cases, parents were blamed for initiating abuse within the family and even encouraging siblings to abuse one another. One woman and her brother had been sexually abused by their mother and then forced into “sexual play” with one another. Another woman’s brother forced her to perform oral sex on his friend when she was 12 years old. Her narrative exemplifies how the children in her home learned that physical and sexual violence were “normal” and how a dysfunctional home can complicate siblings’ relationships with one another. In her case, her brother was both her “protector” and her abuser: My oldest brother was “protected” by my mother. He was physically abused by my father. And although my father sexually abused me, he protected me from my mother who physically and emotionally abused me. My brother and I were in constant conflict… . It [sibling sexual abuse] just emphasized my feelings of worthlessness and self-loathing. It made me want to isolate even more. But it was “normal” for me as I was sexually abused by my father.

Seven participants attributed their siblings’ violence to prior experiences with abuse victimization, during which they believed the siblings had learned how to abuse. Their stories suggest that older siblings who are sexually abused may in turn victimize younger siblings as a means of coping with their own

8


traumatic experiences. Participants were also critical of the ways in which their families dealt with the sexual abuse of their siblings. Several argued that if proper treatment had been sought, the siblings may not have abused them:


When he was seven, my brother was sodomized by a mentally ill older boy who was arrested and sent away for the crime. In the wake of the assault, my father briefly deserted us… . I was five and my brother was only seven [when he sexually abused me], so there was no sexual desire. I think it was the result of his rape, which no one discussed with him and for which he received no counseling. He was acting out in response to the horrific trauma he’d suffered, which was exacerbated by my father’s desertion.

In some cases, the participants were not aware of any abuse endured by a sibling but still believed that prior abuse was the only way children would know how to be sexually violent. Thus, they surmised their siblings must have been abused themselves, even absent evidence: “I don’t understand my older brother’s abuse of me because he was still a child when I remember it beginning. I wonder (but do not know) if he had been exposed to some kind of sexual trauma that made him act out.” Another woman who was abused by both of her older brothers during an 18-year span, wrote, “I question to myself if they were ever abused. It almost seems like they must have been.” Two participants identified violent pornography as the source of their siblings’ knowledge about sexual contact. One woman’s brother forced her to perform oral sex on his friend. She believed that they had been primarily influenced by pornography. Another woman reported that her brother began abusing her by showing her pornography as a means of teaching her to engage in sexual activities with him.

Narrative 2: Sibling sexual abuse as medical issue

The second major theme was the attribution of sibling sexual abuse to a medical condition. However, participants rarely identified the mental illness with which a sibling had been diagnosed or specified a particular malady that might affect a sibling’s behavior. Instead, participants used general terms of sickness and perversion: “I think they are both unhealthy individuals.” “He’s a pervert, who confused his teen intimacy urges for his 3- to 7-year-old sister who he distortedly adored.” “She is sick.” Given that participants did not specify particular mental illnesses, it is likely that their siblings had not in fact been diagnosed with a mental illness. Rather, the narratives reflect the cultural belief that “healthy,” “normal” individuals are incapable of inflicting such harm against others and thus those that do must be “unhealthy” or “sick” (see Pilgrim & Rogers, 2003). Only one woman identified a specific cause (drug addiction) of any real or imagined mental instability. Another woman referred to her older sister as a


9

“psychopath” by means of explaining her violence, but it is likely that her sister had not in fact been diagnosed with psychopathy. Narrative 3: Sibling sexual abuse as power


The final (and least common) theme in participants’ narratives was the view that sexual violence was an act of power intended to establish dominance over the victim. Five participants endorsed this view. Some participants believed that sexual abuse was the result of sibling rivalry and jealousy on the part of the offender, as in the case of this woman who was abused by her older brother: As we grew older, my older brother used to express resentment towards me because he thought that, as the only girl, I received special treatment. I used to feel guilty for this because it was not in my control how my parents treated me. I did better in school than he did, and my parents used to tell him to “be more like me.” I wonder if his abuse was a way for him to try and gain control over me, to “prove” that he was still the one in charge. My brother was given a lot of responsibility for me when I was growing up, so I trusted him and looked up to him. I think this was part of what meant that I allowed these things to happen and didn’t tell anyone.

This participant explains sexual abuse as a way for an older sibling to reassert power over a younger sibling who was perceived as receiving favor from parents. In addition, because her brother had been directly given power over her by their parents (who charged him with babysitting), she did not feel able to resist or report his sexual advances. Thus, sexual abuse is both a means to establish and a result of having power over another. Other participants explained sexual abuse as their siblings wanting to “establish dominance” or “exert power” over them, without further elaborating. Punishment for a perceived wrong is also a way of asserting power. One man believed he was abused by his older brother and sister as punishment because he had witnessed them having sex on a prior date. Discussion Relatively few empirical studies have been conducted about sibling sexual abuse despite the fact that it may be one of the most common forms of family violence (Morrill, 2014). The current qualitative, exploratory study analyzed narratives from 33 individuals who had been victimized by sibling sexual abuse. Most were women, and most had been abused by older brothers. Participants were prompted in an online survey to provide some explanation for the sexual abuse they endured. The data were coded using grounded theory methods (Charmaz, 2001). Three major leading explanations for sibling sexual abuse emerged. The first explanation espoused by participants was that the offenders had become abusive after experiencing or witnessing violence themselves. This finding


10


supports prior research linking sibling sexual abuse (Caffaro & ConnCaffaro, 1998; Wiehe, 2002) and other juvenile offending more broadly to dysfunctional home environments (Baglivio et al., 2014; Baker et al., 2003; Fox et al., 2015; McMackin et al., 2002; Righthand & Welch, 2004; RoeSepowitz & Krysik, 2008). Specifically, participants identified parents as being at fault for sending messages to children that violence was acceptable. Victims believed that neglectful or abusive parents created an environment in which violence (including sexual violence) was a common occurrence in the home and would not be punished. This view reflects social learning theorists’ claims that children who grow up in a violent home are at a greater risk of being victims or perpetrators of violence themselves (Gelles & Straus, 1988; Hotaling & Sugarman, 1986; Kalmuss, 1984; Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980; Waltz, Babcock, Jacobson, & Gottman, 2000; Widom, 1989; Wiehe, 2002). Children from violent homes may learn that violence is an acceptable means of conflict resolution (Belknap, 2007). It would not be surprising for such children to use violence against siblings, especially those who are younger and smaller, in order to settle the inevitable disputes that emerge between siblings. Several participants emphasized that their parents’ use of physical and sexual violence and their refusal to acknowledge or end the sibling sexual abuse sent a strong message to their siblings that such violence would be tolerated within the home. Participants also claimed that the offending siblings either were or may have been sexually abused themselves, thus learning how to be sexually abusive and to use their siblings as a means of coping with their own victimization. In these cases as well, parents were blamed for not seeking proper treatment for siblings and helping to create a cycle of abuse akin to that proposed by the intergenerational transmission of violence theory (Belknap, 2007). Here, though, the violence is transmitted intragenerationally. Similarly, violent pornography was identified by two participants as being a primary source of their abusive brothers’ learning about sexual activity. Many participants concluded their experiences of victimization were the result of a learning process that associated sexual contact with violence and coercion. Another leading explanation for sibling sexual abuse by the participants was related to the wider societal trend toward the medicalization of deviance, especially regarding violence (Pilgrim & Rogers, 2003). Given the incorporation of psychological/medical discourse into cultural discussions about violence and sexuality (Conrad, 1992; De Block & Adriaens, 2013; Hamilton, 2013; McGinty, Webster, Jarlenski, & Barry, 2014; Pilgrim & Rogers, 2003), it is not surprising that many participants felt their siblings must have been “unhealthy,” “sick,” or “perverted” to engage in nonconsensual incest, even though there is no indication that the offending siblings had been diagnosed with a mental illness. It is impossible in the current study to say whether



11

mental health issues played any role in the perpetration of sexual violence or if participants are using a medicalization discourse to express their beliefs that no “normal” or “healthy” individual would sexually abuse a sibling. Finally, the construction of rape as an act of power (Anderson, 2009; Belknap, 2007; Hester, Kelly, & Radford, 1996; Mason, 2002; Stark, 2009) was evident in several narratives. Participants blamed their siblings’ behaviors on the desire to assert dominance over younger siblings, either as a consequence of sibling rivalry, parental favoritism, or being given power via a babysitting role. As most of the offenders were both male and older, they enjoyed gender and age privilege over their victims. Victims who espoused this view saw sexual abuse as one of the tools by which their offenders maintained this balance of power. It is possible that sibling abuse perpetrators feel a sense of powerlessness, as children are rarely able to exert themselves beyond what is allowed by parents and other adult authority figures. However, by taking advantage of age and gender power imbalances, they can establish dominance over their siblings. Physical advantages and tacit social approval of male violence give brothers, especially older brothers, a chance to assert “masculinity” via their sibling relationships (Button & Gealt, 2010; Hoffman & Edwards, 2004). This exploratory study makes several important contributions to the growing body of knowledge about sibling abuse and underlines questions for future research. The participants’ narratives provide insight into to the environment in which sibling sexual abuse occurs. Participants indicated that they and their abusive siblings faced many adverse childhood experiences, including physical and sexual abuse, parental neglect or inattention, and intense jealousy and rivalry seemingly encouraged or allowed by parents. Although this study makes no attempt to evaluate the mental health of sibling abusers, some of our participants believed that their siblings were dealing with mental illness. Future research should evaluate the effects that adverse childhood experiences and having a sibling with mental illness or behavioral problems has on the occurrence of sibling sexual abuse. While the current study largely focused on the ways in which families contributed to sibling sexual abuse, it also highlights some of the effects that sibling sexual abuse in turn has on families. All three narratives indicate the strain that sibling sexual abuse placed on familial relationships long after the abuse had stopped and siblings reached adulthood. In the first narrative, participants squarely blamed their parents for allowing abuse to occur and in some cases even encouraging it. Several also believed their parents mishandled the sexual assault of their siblings, prompting the siblings to abuse them as a means of coping with the victimization. In the second narrative, the blame is placed on the abusing sibling but in terms of the sibling being sick, perverted, or mentally ill. That the participants claim their siblings have these seemingly incurable and lifelong traits suggests that they continue to view the abuse as having stemmed from a fundamental aspect of their


12


siblings’ character. In the third narrative, participants indicated that their siblings’ use of sexual violence as a means of establishing power was in part due to relationships between parents and their children that encouraged jealousy and rivalry. This was compounded when parents quite literally designated one child as more powerful (e.g., in charge while babysitting) than the other. There was little indication in the entirety of the participants’ responses that relationships with their siblings or parents had been repaired. Sibling sexual abuse likely causes the fracturing of familial bonds of all kinds, although no research has specifically addressed this topic. Therapists and others who work with child and adult victims of sibling sexual abuse must address not only the effects of sexual abuse but the strain that results from having fractured relationships with other family members. Finally, this study gives voice to survivors of sibling sexual abuse, a common though mostly hidden form of family violence. It is vital that practitioners know how such victims might interpret their traumatic childhood experiences if they are to help them recover. Participants in this study grappled with a range of adverse experiences, of which sibling sexual abuse was one. In a rare study of how sexual sibling abuse survivors deal with their victimization later in life, Monahan (2010) argues: Many sibling sexual abuse survivors enter treatment not realizing that the task at hand is to mourn the loss of a “normal” childhood… . Encapsulated within this task is the survivor’s need to acknowledge anger at parents who were in varying stages of denial or perceived as non-protective, as well as anger at the abusive sibling (p. 365).

Monahan (2010) points out that survivors may be unable to forgive a parent for not protecting them or a sibling for hurting them, and this is likely especially true if parents themselves are abusive or neglectful and if siblings refuse to acknowledge their culpability. This study helps inform practitioners as to how survivors explain the abuse to themselves, including how they see the abuse in the context of their families of origin. This is an important starting point, as sibling sexual abuse cannot be treated alone since survivors experience the abuse in the context of other family dynamics that must simultaneously be addressed. There are important limitations to the current study. The data were taken from a small, nonrepresentative sample of victims who were highly motivated to write about their experiences, which may not be generalizable to others. Given the small sample size, conclusions about differences relating to gender, race, age, or other demographic factors could not be made, though this is an important area of inquiry for future studies. The small sample size and nonrandomness of the sampling method prevents a generalization of the findings to the larger population of sibling sexual abuse survivors. Further inquiries should be made as to how demographic factors might influence the ways in which sibling sexual abuse survivors understand and cope with their victimization. As



13

the survey was online, the authors did not have the opportunity to ask followup questions for clarity, which limited the amount of data received. In addition, this is a retrospective study and none of the participants were being sexually abused at the time of the survey. Their recollection of the abuse has likely been affected by the time that has passed. This gap in knowledge could be addressed with more research done on children abused by siblings who are currently engaged in therapeutic programs or utilizing other social services. Finally, the accounts cannot be corroborated by other family members, including the siblings identified as sexually abusive. The narratives included for analysis suggest several ways that survivors of sibling sexual abuse may explain their siblings’ offending. However, the siblings themselves may provide entirely different accounts of their behavior. It is imperative that future research examine self-reported adverse childhood experiences of sibling sexual offenders. There is no way for a victim to fully know the motivations of a sexual offender, especially when the victim is a child. Thus, this study is not attempting to reveal the true motives behind sibling sexual abuse, nor is the purpose to build a theory of sibling sexual abuse. The goal of the study is to understand how victims make sense of their experiences, how they explain their siblings’ behaviors, and what factors they believe may have contributed to the abuse they endured. Far more research is needed concerning what factors do put children at risk for both sibling sexual offending and victimization, especially if we are to develop treatment plans for offenders, victims, and their families.

Disclosure of interest Authors McDonald and Martinez declare that they have no conflicts to report.

Ethical standards and informed consent All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committeeon human experimentation [institutional and national] and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in this study.

Notes on contributors Courtney McDonald, PhD, is an assistant professor of criminal justice in the Department of Sociology, Criminal Justice, and Women’s Studies at the University of South Carolina Upstate. Her major area of research focuses on family violence perpetrated against marginalized populations. Katherine Martinez, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Institute of Women’s Studies and Services at Metropolitan State University of Denver. Her areas of research interest include queer theories, practices, and activism, critical race studies, and feminist-marxism.

14



References Aebi, M., Landolt, M. A., Mueller-Pfeiffer, C., Schnyder, U., Maier, T., & Mohler-Kuo, M. (2015). Testing the ‘sexually abused-abuser hypothesis’ in adolescents: A population-based study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 2189–2199. doi:10.1007/s10508-014-0440-x Anderson, K. L. (2009). Gendering coercive control. Violence Against Women, 15(12), 1444–1457. doi:10.1177/1077801209346837 Baglivio, M. T., Epps, N., Swartz, K., Huz, M. S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N. S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in the lives of juvenileoffenders. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3(2), 1–23. Baker, A. J. L., Tabacoff, R., Tornusciolo, G., & Eisenstadt, M. (2003). Family secrecy: A comparative study of juvenile sex offenders and youth with conduct disorders. Family Process, 42(1), 105–116. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2003.00105.x Belknap, J. (2007). The invisible woman: Gender, crime, and justice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Button, D. M., & Gealt, R. (2010). High risk behaviors among victims of sibling violence. Journal of Family Violence, 25, 131–140. doi:10.1007/s10896-009-9276-x Caffaro, J. V., & Conn-Caffaro, A. (1998). Sibling abuse trauma: Assessment and intervention strategies for children, families, and adults. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press, Inc. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention & Kaiser Permanente. (2016). The ACE study survey data. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/ acestudy/about_ace.html Charmaz, K. (2001). Grounded theory. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research: Perspectives and formulations (2nd ed., pp. 335–352). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. Conrad, P. (1992). Medicalization and social control. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 209–232. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.18.080192.001233 De Block, A., & Adriaens, P. R. (2013). Pathologizing sexual deviance: A history. Journal of Sex Research, 50, 276–298. doi:10.1080/00224499.2012.738259 Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2015). National incident-based reporting system, 2015. Retrieved from https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2015/tables/data-tables Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., … Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults. The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258. doi:10.1016/S0749-3797(98) 00017-8 Fox, B. H., Perez, N., Cass, E., Baglivio, M. T., & Epps, N. (2015). Trauma changes everything: Examining the relationship between adverse childhood experiences and serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. Child Abuse & Neglect, 46, 163–173. doi:10.1016/j. chiabu.2015.01.011 Gelles, R. J., & Straus, M. A. (1988). Intimate violence. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. Hamilton, M. (2013). Adjudicating sex crimes as mental disease. Pace Law Review, 33, 536–599. Hester, M., Kelly, L., & Radford, J. (1996). Women, violence, and male power. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Hoffman, K. L., & Edwards, J. N. (2004). An integrated theoretical model of sibling violence and abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 185–200. doi:10.1023/B:JOFV.0000028078.71745.a2 Hotaling, G. T., & Sugarman, D. B. (1986). An analysis of risk markers in husband to wife violence: The current state of knowledge. Violence and Victims, 5, 227–242.



15

Kalmuss, D. (1984). The intergenerational transmission of marital aggression. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 11–19. doi:10.2307/351858 Krienert, J. L., & Walsh, J. A. (2011). My brother’s keeper: A contemporary examination of reported sibling violence using national level data, 2000–2005. Journal of Family Violence, 26, 331–342. doi:10.1007/s10896-011-9367-3 Latzman, N. E., Viljoen, J. L., Scalora, M. J., & Ullman, D. (2011). Sexual offending in adolescence: A comparison of sibling offenders and nonsibling offenders across domains of risk and treatment need. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 20, 245–263. doi:10.1080/ 10538712.2011.571233 Levenson, J. S., & Socia, K. M. (2016). Adverse childhood experiences and arrest patterns in a sample of sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(1), 1883–1911. doi:10.1177/0886260515570751 Mason, G. (2002). The spectacle of violence: Homophobia, gender, and knowledge. New York, NY: Routledge. McGinty, E. E., Webster, D. W., Jarlenski, M., & Barry, C. L. (2014). New media framing of serious mental illness and gun violence in the United States, 1997–2012. American Journal of Public Health, 104, 406–413. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301557 McMackin, R. A., Leisen, M. B., Cusack, J. F., LaFratta, J., & Litwin, P. (2002). The relationship of trauma exposure to sex offending behavior among male juvenile offenders. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 11(2), 25–40. doi:10.1300/J070v11n02_02 McVeigh, M. J. (2003). ‘But she didn’t say no’: An exploration of sibling sexual abuse. Australian Social Work, 56(2), 116–126. doi:10.1046/j.0312-407X.2003.00062.x Monahan, K. (2010). Themes of adult sibling sexual abuse survivors in later life: An initial exploration. Clinical Social Work Journal, 38, 361–369. doi:10.1007/s10615-010-0286-1 Morrill, M. (2014). Sibling sexual abuse: An exploratory study of long-term consequences for self-esteem and counseling considerations. Journal of Family Violence, 29, 205–213. doi:10.1007/s10896-013-9571-4 Pilgrim, D., & Rogers, A. (2003). Mental disorder and violence: An empirical picture in context. Journal of Mental Health, 12, 7–18. doi:10.1080/09638230021000058256 Righthand, S., & Welch, C. (2004). Characteristics of youth who sexually offend. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 13, 15–32. doi:10.1300/J070v13n03_02 Roe-Sepowitz, D., & Krysik, J. (2008). Examining the sexual offenses of female juveniles: The relevance of childhood maltreatment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 78(4), 405–412. doi:10.1037/a0014310 Stark, E. (2009). Rethinking coercive control. Violence Against Women, 15(12), 1509–1525. doi:10.1177/1077801209347452 Straus, M., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. New York, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday. Waltz, J., Babcock, J. C., Jacobson, N. S., & Gottman, J. M. (2000). Testing a typology of batterers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 658–669. doi:10.1037/0022006X.68.4.658 Widom, C. (1989). Does violence beget violence? A critical examination of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 3–28. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.106.1.3 Wiehe, V. R. (1991). Perilous rivalry: When siblings become abusive. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Wiehe, V. R. (2002). What parents need to know about sibling abuse: Breaking the cycle of violence. Springville, UT: Bonneville Books.

Symptoms of PTSD in a sample of female victims of sexual violence in post-earthquake Haiti.

Disclosure experiences of sexual minority college student victims of intimate partner violence.

Intimate Partner Violence and Drinking Among Victims of Adult Sexual Assault.

Child Victims of Sexual Assault.

Hidden victims: a call to action on sexual violence against men in conflict.

When residents are victims of violence.

Victims of violence--a health promotion clinic.

Victims of violence: psuchological effects and aftereffects.

Recognizing and reporting victims of domestic violence.

Sexual violence.

Identifying domestic violence victims--it's our job.

Mediators of sexual revictimization risk in adult sexual assault victims.

Psychological management of victims of sexual assault.

Self-concept of adolescent sexual abuse victims.

Vaginocervical cytology in victims of sexual assault.

Odontometric sexual dimorphism: a sibling correlation.

Adolescents.

Mental health of victims of sexual violence in eastern Congo: associations with daily stressors, stigma, and labeling.

Improving care for victims: a study protocol of the evaluation of a centre for sexual and family violence.

Child victims and poly-victims in China: are they more at-risk of family violence?

The mediating role of stigmatization in the mental health of adolescent victims of sexual violence in Eastern Congo.

Mental Health Disorders Among Women Victims of Conflict-Related Sexual Violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Understanding sexual violence perpetration.

Sexual Aggression Experiences Among Male Victims of Physical Partner Violence: Prevalence, Severity, and Health Correlates for Male Victims and Their Children.