“Prevention Alone Is Not Enough:” Stakeholders’ Perspectives About School-based Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) Prevention Programs and CSA Research in China

Abstract

While existing studies have examined the effectiveness of school-based child sexual abuse (CSA) prevention programs in China, there is currently little qualitative evidence on how stakeholders view these programs and research on CSA in China more generally. To address this research gap, the aims of this study were to explore stakeholders’ perspectives on: (a) school-based CSA prevention programs in China; (b) the components of these programs; (c) CSA research in China. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 participants in Beijing and a county under Lanzhou City, China. Interview transcripts were systematically coded and emerging themes were developed from the codes. An inductive thematic analysis approach was utilized to analyze the interview data. Participants’ perspectives on school-based CSA prevention programs included: (a) recognition of the importance of school-based CSA prevention programs; (b) fear about a possible negative impact on children participating in such programs; (c) assessment that school-based CSA prevention programs alone are not enough to prevent CSA. Components that participants thought needed to be part of Chinese school-based CSA prevention programs were: (a) content regarding online-facilitated CSA; (b) the use of a rights-based approach; and (c) greater parental and community involvement. Participants also identified factors that have both fostered the implementation of CSA research (e.g., the growing awareness of CSA in the central government) and prevented researchers from effectively conducting CSA research: (a) lack of national data; (b) inadequate government support; and (c) barriers to research collaboration among organizations. The findings indicate that while CSA prevention programs are on the whole regarded positively by key stakeholders in China, a number of important concerns were identified. Our study highlighted a number of ways in which future CSA prevention programs and research on CSA could be strengthened in the Chinese context.

Effectiveness of School-Based Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Programs in China: A Meta-Analysis

“…However, some studies have shown that specific sexual abuse prevention knowledge and skills (e.g., rejection skills) do not differ significantly from the control group after participation in a program (Chen et al, 2019). Few studies have examined the overall effects of school-based CSA prevention education in China (Lu et al, 2020), so it remains unclear what kinds of program content and formal design can have the greatest positive impact on children. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the effectiveness of current school-based CSA prevention programs in China.…”

Prevalence and determinants of sexual abuse among adolescent girls during the COVID-19 lockdown and school closures in Ghana: A mixed method study

“…While schools are deemed to be one of the most promising institution for the delivery of CSA prevention and response efforts due to their consistent and longitudinal contact with children and their families ( Lu et al, 2022 ), school closures in disruptive occurrences like the COVID-19 pandemic make it necessary to look for alternatives.…”

Unpacking School-Based Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Programs: A Realist Review

“…Third, we generated our initial program theory by examining studies in two recent systematic reviews on this topic (i.e. Walsh et al, 2015; Lu et al, in preparation). We addressed problems related to this approach at the theory refinement stage where we systematically searched for studies with a range of types of research designs.…”

“…Jin et al, 2017), there is a paucity of evidence regarding the underpinning context and mechanisms that contribute to the intended outcomes. A recent qualitative study (Lu et al, 2020) questioned the effectiveness of such programs given the lack of infrastructure services for children who disclose CSA in China, indicating the need to explore how contextual factors and underlying mechanisms impact intervention efficacy and uptake.…”