No abstract

This article presents the first Danish study of the acceptance of children's nudity and sexuality at Danish childcare institutions. The study revealed an important cultural shift in the attitude toward children's nudity and sexual games, the so-called doctor games. Although these were quite accepted at Danish childcare institutions until the beginning of this century, the study showed that new, pervasive regulations had been established to control the child's body and its sexuality. A new discourse revealed that fear of child sexual abuse, in particular, had influenced views of children's sexual games and nudity and that, at times, the child itself was viewed as a potential threat to other children. This marks a new development in Denmark, internationally known for its broadmindedness, and this article discusses the background to this cultural shift in the institutions, and possible implications for the children.

Since the 1980s, the fear of child sexual abuse (CSA) has become a major cultural feature of a large part of the Western world. Internationally, the unintended consequences of the fear surrounding CSA are rarely investigated and doing so is often controversial. The purpose of this study was to investigate how this widespread fear of CSA has influenced practices and teacher–child relationships at childcare institutions. This is the first study of Danish childcare facilities’ guidelines for protecting children against CSA, and staff against wrongful allegations of CSA. Examples of such guidelines include staff being forbidden to have children sit on their lap, or male staff being forbidden to change diapers. This mixed methods survey, which involved the participation of 2051 directors and teachers from approximately one-quarter of Danish childcare facilities, showed that the majority of institutions had guidelines that were aimed mostly at protecting staff from wrongful allegations. The study revealed that the guidelines were a sign that male workers were being stigmatized, and that some institutions had discriminatory guidelines that applied exclusively to men. Furthermore, the guidelines conflicted with staff’s trusting relationships with children, and the task of caring for them.

No abstract