[Base] [Index]

Mrazek D.A.

Response to Bauserman Critique

Journal of Homosexuality 20, p.317-318 (1990)

Bauserman has reviewed my critique of the work of Theo Sandfort as well as a critique by Finkelhor and one by Masters and Johnson. Unfortunately, his review is based more on emotion than reason. Sandfort's study is methodically weak based on inherent sample bias, demand characteristics of the questions, and unchecked bias of the interviewers. While generalizability of these results is acknowledged to be completely unwarranted, such generalizations are made despite the authors stated disclaimer. Sandfort reported that selected young boys did describe did describe enjoying sex with adult men, but such an assertion could have been made based on a series of self-reports. In some ways, this is a good way to describe this "study" which is the compilation of solicited testimonials. These points were all made succinctly in my original one page review of Sandfort's book and remain valid criticism.

The ethical problems of this study are particularly disturbing. The basic question is whether appropriate human subjects safeguards were a part of this research. This question must be addressed concretely in proposing any research in the U.S. Research involving children requires particularly scrupulous attention to human subject concerns.

In this study, the researchers joined with the members of the National Pedophile Workshops to "study" the boys who were the sexual "partners" of its members. Both this study and the National Pedophile Workshops were financially supported by the Netherlands Association for Sexual Reform. There is no evidence that human subject safeguards were a paramount concern. However, there is ample evidence that the study was politically motivated to "reform" legislation. Specific risks that are not even acknowledged in the book include contradicting sexually transmitted diseases, legal prosecution, and breached confidentiality leading to peer discrimination and family disruptions. These researchers knowingly colluded with the perpetuation of secret illegal activity. External review of their activities was minimal. Possible negative consequences of their course of action were minimized despite the reality that some of the boys were as young as eleven years of age. In the majority of cases, these boys' parents were unaware of theses sexual activities with adult men, and the researchers contributed to this deception by their actions. Even if this study was methodologically sound, which it certainly is not, on moral grounds alone such "research" cannot be sanctioned.

Children are not developmentally prepared to enter into sexual relationships on an informed and equal basis with adults It is a basic responsibility of society to protect children and foster their development. These children were not adequately protected.