![\"121130Wolfe\"](\"http:\/\/www.littlerascalsdaycarecase.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/121130Wolfe.jpg\")
Nov. 30, 2012<\/p>\nNov. 30, 2012<\/p>\n
In 1993 (January-February issue), the journal Child Abuse & Neglect published \u201cSexual Abuse of Children in Day Care Centers\u201d by Susan J. Kelley, Renee Brant and Jill Waterman.\u00a0This is from the article\u2019s abstract:<\/p>\n
\u201cSexual abuse of children in day care center settings has received considerable attention in the past decade. The nature and extent of allegations of sexual abuse in day care poses unique challenges to clinicians. Cases of sexual abuse in day care typically involve multiple victims and multiple perpetrators, and use of extreme threats to prevent disclosure….\u201d<\/p>\n
The article’s misinformation has spread far beyond its original readership. Google Scholar shows \u201cSexual Abuse of Children in Day Care Centers\u201d\u00a0to have been cited in other publications no fewer than\u00a036 times, as recently as this year.<\/p>\n
I asked Child Abuse & Neglect to publish a retraction.<\/p>\n
I received this response from editor-in-chief David A. Wolfe, professor of psychology and psychiatry at the University of Toronto:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe journal only retracts papers if there are significant errors or other problems, such as plagiarism, health risks etc. Otherwise, it is up to the scientific community to decide when new knowledge or findings would usurp those previously published. This is the case in many areas of research, whereby older (sometimes well-accepted) findings are no longer given credence due to newer findings. It is not feasible or appropriate to remove the previous findings, as that is how science progresses.<\/p>\n
\u201cUnless you are aware of specific errors in the 1993 data, rather than drawing different conclusions, the journal would not take any further action.<\/p>\n
\u201cI trust this resolves your concerns.\u201d<\/p>\n
Well, no, actually it doesn\u2019t. This is what I wrote back to Dr. Wolfe:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe problem with \u2018Sexual Abuse of Children in Day Care Centers\u2019 is not a matter of \u2018different conclusions\u2019 being drawn from the data. The entire concept of the article is false: There was never any \u2018multiple victim, multiple offender\u2019 sexual abuse in day cares, any more than there was witchcraft in Salem. As has been thoroughly documented by social scientists such as Stephen J. Ceci and Maggie Bruck, and eventually validated in the legal system, all these ritual-abuse cases resulted from a moral panic.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis passage is from the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics: \u2018Retraction is a mechanism for correcting the literature and alerting readers to publications that contain such seriously flawed or erroneous data that their findings and conclusions cannot be relied upon. Unreliable data may result from honest error or from research misconduct.\u2019<\/p>\n