One in 10 children sexually abused by the age of 16
Fifteen per cent of girls and five per cent of boys are victims of child sexual abuse by that age, Home Office-funded research finds
Does rather depend upon what definition is being used, doesn’t it?
Ian Dean, the director of the CSA Centre, which is funded by the Home Office and hosted by Banardo’s, said: “Areas with low numbers of recorded cases may assume they have low levels of sexual abuse, but we know from prevalence data that this is simply not the case.
“With 500,000 children under 16 estimated to experience some form of child sexual abuse each year, the significantly lower levels identified in official data indicate that services are failing to identify and address what we know is a challenging but very worrying and hidden problem.”
AKA, give us more money to deal with this thing that we’ve identified.
Page 15 here. Telling a 17 year old that of course you’ll respect her in the morning would seem to be included. No, not being trite, they have gone for a very, very, wide definition. As we’d expect.
More like 90% of girls here in Rochdale.
That’s the problem when you let the zealots do the “research”… They invariably set the parameters so wide that any results are indistinguishable from “noise” and the the conclusions are therefore nonsense.
In what proportion of “cases” is the “some form of” “abuser” also a child?
I estimate there are 5000 elephants in my local river, but none have been reported. Give me some money to research it properly.
Help! I was abused by the local vicar’s son when we were both 8 and he persuaded me (against my will, of course) to play doctors and doctors. Who do I contact to claim my compensation from the Church of England?
If telling a 17 year old you’ll respect them in the morning counts as abusing a 16 year old, things are even wider than you suggest.
It is evil to abuse children.