Rethinking the routine provision of psychotherapy to children/adolescents labeled “sexually abused”.

Abstract

Whether symptomatic or asymptomatic, children labeled sexually abused are routinely offered treatment at considerable financial cost. One result of this is that mental health professionals are being charged with exploiting the problem of child sexual abuse (CSA). Is the routine provision of psychotherapy for children and adolescents labeled sexually abused warranted? In this paper, it is argued that the evidence indicates it is not warranted. Further, its provision is not in the best interests of either the children or mental health professionals. It is argued it is time to rethink the routine provision of psychotherapy to children and adolescents labeled sexually abuse. A number of recommendations are given which follow from the evidence.

Child Sexual Abuse- Clinical Challenges and Practical Recommendations

“…Certain recommendations state that clinicians should consider treatment only if there is demonstrable harm, i.e., the child/adolescent is symptomatic [14] while others argue that since CSA is a risk-factor for later psychopathology, treatment should be provided to prevent future pathology [15]. However, the argument in favour of treatment cannot be limited to 'demonstrable harm' or 'risk for future psychopathology'; it is sufficient that that the child has been sexually abused and this alone warrants action from a child rights' perspective.…”