The Utility of the Diagnosis of Pedophilia: A Comparison of Various Classification Procedures

Abstract

This study examined the utility of the diagnosis of pedophilia in a sample of extra-familial child molesters assessed at a university teaching hospital between 1982 and 1992. Pedophilia was defined in one of four ways: (1) DSM diagnosis made by a psychiatrist; (2) deviant phallometric profile; (3) DSM diagnosis and a deviant phallometric profile; and, (4) high scores based on the Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interest (Seto & Lalumière, 2001). Demographic data, psychological tests, and offence history were obtained and group differences were analyzed along with the ability of certain variables to contribute uniquely to the classification of pedophilia. Results indicated that few significant differences existed on psychological measures between pedophilic and nonpedophilic extra-familial child molesters regardless of the classification system employed. Finally, results indicated that the procedures used to define pedophilia were not significantly related to one another. Results are discussed in terms of the utility of the diagnosis of pedophilia.

The Relationship between Mental Disorder and Recidivism in Sexual Offenders

“…One limitation is that interrater reliability of these diagnoses was not available. Indeed, there is accumulating evidence of specific problems with the reliability of some diagnoses, particularly among the paraphilias (Kingston, Firestone, Moulden, & Bradford, 2007;Kingston, Seto, Firestone, & Bradford, 2010). Additionally, we were unable to determine whether an individual was in an acute phase of their illness (i.e., exhibited symptoms of their diagnosed mental disorder) at the time of reoffense.…”

The DSM Diagnostic Criteria for Pedophilia

“…It is well established that self-report alone cannot be used to diagnose pedophilia in offenders against children (see, e.g., Kingston, Firestone, Moulden, & Bradford, 2007;Marshall, 1997;O'Donohue & Letourneau, 1993;O'Donohue et al, 2000;Wormith, 1983). Men whose histories of sexual offending against children are so extensive that they cannot plausibly be explained by anything besides pedophilia may nonetheless deny that they have a sexual preference for children or else claim that they had ''a problem'' in the past but that their sexual feelings for children have now disappeared.…”

“…Research by Kingston et al (2007) Findings Kingston et al (2007) studied adult men who had been convicted of hands-on sexual offences against an unrelated male or female child who was under the age of 16 at the time of the offence. The patients were assessed at a university teaching hospital in Ottawa, Ontario between 1982 and 1992.…”

Pornography use and sexual aggression: the impact of frequency and type of pornography use on recidivism among sexual offenders

“…All participants signed a consent form at the time of assessment permitting use of their data for research, which was conducted in compliance with the internal review board of the hospital. Portions of this sample have been examined in other studies [see Firestone et al, 1999Firestone et al, , 2006Kingston et al, 2007;Nunes et al, 2002], but the relationship between pornography and recidivism was not investigated.…”