How to Predict Child Sexual Abuse
David Finkelhor came up with the influential Four-Point Precondition Model that continues to be used today
It rarely helps to get aghast when confronted with some dark contortion, like child abuse. It’s an upsetting concept, triggering to most. Learning of it, we oscillate between depression and rage.
Contortion: the action of twisting or bending violently and unnaturally into a different shape or form.
Another emotion we encounter is being totally confused, baffled— even disbelieving that something so onerous (synonyms: burdensome, exacting, oppressive) exists in this reality. When I first met a protective parent, who I call Ruth (and whose kid has motivated me to start this substack) she shared documentation about her case. I came away with the sense that while I believed her, I could not believe it.
Ruth shared a report from a nationally recognized expert on domestic abuse (AKA coercive control, intimate partner violence, amongst other names/ terms). It systematically outlined the progressive escalation of control/ violence that Ruth (and later, her son) had endured. It was organized, thorough and horrendous.
There were parallels with my own experience of coercive control. I had this experiential bridge that helped me relate and understand something that most people struggle to comprehend. (Which, side note, it really sucks that most people don’t believe abuse. Should we have more PSAs, more education about abuse so that society can recognize it better, acknowledge how widespread it is, and be more empathetic/ supportive of victim-survivors?)
The abuse of Ruth’s son, though. My mind struggled to process it, resisted its truth, tried to come up with alternative interpretations. I found myself looking for ways to explain or excuse the inexcusable. It must be this same knee-jerk mental reaction that has family court judges thinking a woman is lying about abuse, rather than recognizing a kid is actually being abused.
In time, after sifting through the years of evidence (protective parents have drawers of documentation, USBs full of evidence)— I couldn’t escape the true story. I remember sitting there quietly in my living room after a day of review/ research.
There was a quiet, solid understanding. The thought naming on the crushing fact that “he burned his boy.” This man, who walks around in society, goes to work, buys groceries and does yoga— he burned his boy. On purpose.
Once we believe this I’m-gonna-be-sick awful thing has happened, the mind automatically asks: why does he do that?
David Finkelhor asked the same question and came up with answers.
Finkelhor has been studying and writing about child abuse since the 1970’s. He is a sociology professor at the University of New Hampshire, director of the Crimes against Children Research Center and co-director of the Family Research Laboratory.
His bio and publications are at the UNH website here. His Google Scholar page is also helpful in that it lists his publications and how many times they’ve been cited. This is a quantitative way to measure a publication’s impact, similar to how many times a social media post (or substack post, wink wink) has been shared/ forwarded. From the citations data, we can extrapolate that Finkelhor’s research is highly influential and he has a significant track record of publication.
What is now known as Finkelhor’s “Four Preconditions Model” or “Four-Point Precondition Model” originated from his 1986 publication “Explanations of pedophilia: A four factor model” published in the Journal of Sex Research. To note is that this study is focusing on one type of child abuse— sexual abuse by a parent. Ostensibly we could extend this model to other forms of abuse— verbal, physical, emotional. This extension aligns with what we know about abuse, which is that it’s common/ probable for all forms of abuse to occur in tandem.
The abstract of a research paper serves as a succinct synopsis, like a trailer for a movie. From the abstract, the authors tell us that the paper is based on a review of pre-existing theories about how child sexual abuse can happen, what is the necessary framework/ context for it to occur. Finkelhor and his co-author, Sharon Araji, came to the conclusion that explanatory theories took four approaches.
(#1) emotional congruence— why the adult has an emotional need to relate to a child;
(#2) sexual arousal— why the adult could become sexually aroused by a child;
(#3) blockage— why alternative sources of sexual and emotional gratification are not available;
(#4) disinhibition— why the adult is not deterred from such an interest by normal prohibitions.
The paper concluded by suggesting these four lens be combined to explain pedophilic behavior in a more thorough, comprehensive manner. Thus, the “Four Preconditions Model,” was created.
With more research and more minds invested in this topic, people came up with new language that frames the model in a clearer way. For example, when mandated reporters go through training, the model is introduced as such:
“According to Finkelhor, four preconditions must be met in sequence before a person is likely to commit a sexual offense against a child— 1) motivation to sexually abuse; 2) overcoming internal inhibitors; 3) overcoming external inhibitors; and finally, 4) overcoming child resistance.
Thanks for reading this far. It is a hard topic to sit with. The next post will go into the four preconditions in more depth.
The hope is that, in sharing such research, you might be better equipped to talk to people about child sexual abuse. If people can understand more about the problem, we are better prepared to recognize it, prevent it, deal with it and heal it. Ignorance helps no one and only perpetuates the problem.
Take care —