Understanding Child Sexual Exploitation in Australia: An Empirical Contribution to the Evidence Base.
Saved in:
| Title: | Understanding Child Sexual Exploitation in Australia: An Empirical Contribution to the Evidence Base. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Hallett, Sophie |
| Source: | Children & Society. Sep2025, Vol. 39 Issue 5, p920-928. 9p. |
| Subjects: | Prevention of child sexual abuse, Child welfare, Risk assessment, Professional practice, Government policy, Sex offenders, Terms & phrases, Residential patterns, Families, Child sexual abuse, Crime victims, Attitudes of medical personnel, Departments, Health facilities, Needs assessment, Interpersonal relations, Disease susceptibility |
| Geographic Terms: | Australia |
| Abstract: | Attention has been given to child sexual exploitation (CSE) internationally yet there is limited evidence about the issue deriving from Australian contexts, particularly so for understanding this form of sexual abuse. This qualitative study explored CSE from the perspectives of child protection and out‐of‐home caseworkers (N = 15) from across three regional offices of one large state government district department in Australia. The aim was to provide an empirical contribution to the Australian evidence base in order to progress understanding of CSE, and to support policy and practice developments regarding its conceptualisation and definition for effective prevention and intervention. Analysis indicates three victimisation pathways for sexual exploitation, organised around (unmet) need and perpetrator gain, with no single perpetrator type. Family, relationships, living circumstances and statutory care involvement are important domains for 'risks' that coalesce to inform vulnerability to sexual exploitation, while also being significant in their own right. Findings suggest an urgent need for a shared definition in policy and practice directions in Australia that accounts for multiple models of CSE victimisation, and which recognises the centrality of unmet need to non‐commercial CSE vulnerability and abuse. This paper therefore also contributes to emerging critical debate about the particularities of sexual exploitation as a form of a sexual abuse, and the need to retain its definitional distinction as exploitation for effective response strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Children & Society is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Attention has been given to child sexual exploitation (CSE) internationally yet there is limited evidence about the issue deriving from Australian contexts, particularly so for understanding this form of sexual abuse. This qualitative study explored CSE from the perspectives of child protection and out‐of‐home caseworkers (N = 15) from across three regional offices of one large state government district department in Australia. The aim was to provide an empirical contribution to the Australian evidence base in order to progress understanding of CSE, and to support policy and practice developments regarding its conceptualisation and definition for effective prevention and intervention. Analysis indicates three victimisation pathways for sexual exploitation, organised around (unmet) need and perpetrator gain, with no single perpetrator type. Family, relationships, living circumstances and statutory care involvement are important domains for 'risks' that coalesce to inform vulnerability to sexual exploitation, while also being significant in their own right. Findings suggest an urgent need for a shared definition in policy and practice directions in Australia that accounts for multiple models of CSE victimisation, and which recognises the centrality of unmet need to non‐commercial CSE vulnerability and abuse. This paper therefore also contributes to emerging critical debate about the particularities of sexual exploitation as a form of a sexual abuse, and the need to retain its definitional distinction as exploitation for effective response strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09510605 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/chso.12961 |
