How Parents Manage the Risk of Child Sexual Abuse: A Grounded Theory
Open accessAbstract
The aim of this study is to understand how parents manage the risk of child sexual abuse, including prevention as well as early intervention and detection strategies. Using a social constructivist theoretical foundation and grounded theory methods, qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with Australian parents between 2006 and 2008. Based on the data, a balance theory was developed, which explains how parents attempt to balance the type of information given to children in order to protect their children from sexual abuse without scaring them as well as how parents manage sexual boundary crossing incidents experienced by their children in the context of complex social relationships. Implications for prevention programs as well as reporting of child sexual abuse are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Parents use various protective practices, such as supervision, monitoring, and involvement, to create external barriers, with direct discussions of abuse prevention only a small part.
“parents use a variety of protective practices (e.g., supervision, monitoring and involvement) to create the external barriers that may keep their children safe from CSA, of which direct discussions of abuse prevention in the home are only a small part.”
From Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Opportunities: Parenting, Programs, and the Reduction of Risk (2018) · cites this paper as Babatsikos & Miles, 2015
Cites
Social Problems as Collective Behavior
Blumer, H. (1971) · Social Problems · doi:10.2307/799797 · Cited by 1,281 · cited 2× · see citing works
“The research was guided by the theories of social constructivism (Berger & Luckman, 1966) and interactionism (Blumer, 1971) and drew heavily on the knowledge and frameworks from the fields of social work”
Method
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Opportunities: Parenting, Programs, and the Reduction of Risk
Rudolph, J., Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Shanley, D. C., & Hawkins, R. (2018) · Child Maltreatment · doi:10.1177/1077559517729479 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Child Sexual Abuse Prevention: Parental Discussion, Protective Practices and Attitudes
Rudolph, J. I., Walsh, K., Shanley, D. C., & Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J. (2022) · Journal of Interpersonal Violence · doi:10.1177/08862605211072258 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
- Authors
- Babatsikos, G., & Miles, D.
- Affiliations
- Deakin University (AU)
- James Cook University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Babatsikos, Georgia
- ORCID
- Miles, Debra
- Venue
- Journal of Child Sexual Abuse
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-01-02
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 55-76
- ISSN
- 1053-8712 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-0679
- OpenAlex
- W2060122867
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5
- FWCI
- 3.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Child Sexual Abuse (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- James Cook University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Military, Security, and Education Studies
- Keywords
- child sexual abuse, child sexual abuse prevention, early intervention, abuse detection, balance theory, social constructivism, child abuse reporting, prevention programs
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Australia, Child, Child Abuse, Sexual, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Parents, Risk Factors, Grounded Theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
