Template:EGLHarm: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
File:Boyscouts.png|What victimologists say about youth perception + admissions of iatrogenic harm | File:Boyscouts.png|What victimologists say about youth perception + admissions of iatrogenic harm | ||
File:Secharm.png|Some reading on secondary harm and perception/situational variables | File:Secharm.png|Some reading on secondary harm and perception/situational variables | ||
File:Philippines 03.png|More secondary harms | |||
File:Daly2021RindRepeatedSelfPerceptionNotCSA.jpg|Daly's 2021 repetition of Rind (1998), finds that self-perception is far more important that abuse status | File:Daly2021RindRepeatedSelfPerceptionNotCSA.jpg|Daly's 2021 repetition of Rind (1998), finds that self-perception is far more important that abuse status | ||
File:Innocence.jpg|General reading on intrinsic harm | File:Innocence.jpg|General reading on intrinsic harm | ||
Revision as of 07:23, 12 November 2021
-
Rind and Tromovitch (2000) on Iatrogenic Harm
-
Research pointing to no intrinsic harm profiled in The Guardian
-
What victimologists say about youth perception + admissions of iatrogenic harm
-
Some reading on secondary harm and perception/situational variables
-
More secondary harms
-
Daly's 2021 repetition of Rind (1998), finds that self-perception is far more important that abuse status
-
General reading on intrinsic harm
-
The Rind team comment on the self-fulfilling prophecy of iatrogenic harm
-
The Rind team comment further on iatrogenic harm
-
CSA harm was known to be confounded even before Rind
-
No "typical" CSA reaction or "syndrome"
.jpg)
.jpg)
