Author:
Melsom Tuva Mari,Sørheim Bodil,Mørch Eva
Abstract
Background: Restorative process has been used as a treatment intervention in cases where children sexually abuse other children. However, empirical knowledge of the method is scarce. Aim: This study aims to explore therapists` reflections on how restorative process affects children who participate. Method: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 therapists working with sexually abused children and child abusers. Six of the participants had experience in using restorative process. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: The analysis resulted in three themes: (1) becoming stronger, (2) making matters worse, and (3) restorative conditions. Conclusion: The majority of the therapists point out that restorative process can be helpful if it is well prepared, both children want to participate, and the abuser takes responsibility. Without these factors, restorative process can be harmful, especially for the victim. Keywords: harmful sexual behaviour, child sexual abuse, restorative process, qualitative method, therapist experience
Reference27 articles.
1. Andersson, H. & Sten Madsen, K. (2016). Møde mellem offer og krænker. En antologi om mægling i en terapeutisk ramme ved seksuelle overgreb. Frydenlund.
2. Askeland, I. R., Jensen, M. & Moen, L. H. (2017). Behandlingstilbudet til barn og unge med problematisk eller skadelig seksuell atferd. En nasjonal kartleggingsundersøkelse (Rapport 1/2017). Nasjonalt kunnskapssenter om vold og traumatisk stress. https://www.nkvts.no/content/uploads/2017/03/NKVTS_Rapport_1_2017.pdf
3. Barbaree, H. E. & Marshall, W. L. (2006). The juvenile sex offender (2. utg.). The Guilford Press.
4. Binder, P. E., Holgersen, H. & Moltu, C. (2012). Staying close and reflexive: An explorative and reflexive approach to qualitative research on psychotherapy. Nordic Psychology, 64(2), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2012.726815
5. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa