May 24, 2013<\/p>\n
\u201cThe research described is a study of a clinical sample of 72 women who allegedly sexually abused 332 children. The Sample is examined from a variety of perspectives, including whether the abuse was intrafamilial (n = 33), extrafamilial (n = 18), or both (n = 21); and whether the abuse involved multiple intrafamilial offenders (n = 33), a solo intrafamilial offender (n = 17), multiple extrafamilial offenders (n = 16), or solo extrafamilial offenders (n = 6). Social situational factors and individual deficits \u2013 mental illness (n = 23), mental retardation (n = 16), substance abuse (n = 37), and other maltreatment of their children (n = 61) that might lead women to sexually abuse children \u2013 are examined. Case outcomes, including the number of confessions (n = 49), criminal prosecution (n = 3), and protection of victims (n = 44) are described.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u2013 From \u201c<\/em>A Clinical Sample of Women Who Have Sexually Abused Children<\/em><\/a>\u201d (abstract) by\u00a0<\/em>Kathleen Coulborn Faller<\/em><\/a>\u00a0in the Journal of Child Sexual Abuse (Vol. 4, Issue 3, 1996)<\/em><\/p>\n Yes, I am endlessly appalled by the ornateness of the statistical sham woven by the likes of Kathleen Faller,\u00a0Susan J. Kelley<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0David Finkelhor<\/a>.<\/p>\n