Educator sexual misconduct: Exposing or causing learners to be exposed to child pornography or pornography

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The law recognises that non-contact sexual offences can cause harm and several offences were created to regulate non-contact sexual child abuse offences. Several of these offences deal with the exposure or causing exposure of children to child pornography or pornography. Sexual grooming of children and the "Exposure or display of or causing exposure or display of child pornography or pornography to children" are criminalised in sections 18(2) and 19 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007. And offences in relation to exposing children to disturbing, harmful and age-inappropriate materials are criminalised in sections 24A(2) and (4) of the Films and Publications Act 65 of 1996. In this article the author considered the content of the offences of "Exposure or display of or causing exposure or display of child pornography or pornography to children" in relation to the other offences dealing with exposure of children to child pornography or pornography. Benchmarked against these criminal offences the author then conceptualised exposing learners, or causing the exposure of learners to child pornography or pornography as forms of educator misconduct. The seriousness that should be attached to these forms of misconduct was considered in light of the various criminal offences. The review of the criminal offences and the forms of educator misconduct brought the ineffectiveness of current forms of serious educator misconduct to the fore. There is no form of serious misconduct that covers the transgression of educators who expose learners to child pornography or pornography that can be classified as "XX". In conclusion a suggestion is made with regard to how a new form of serious misconduct could be worded so as to cover this gap, eg An educator must be dismissed if he or she is found guilty of -(g) exposing a learner to or causing exposure of a learner to material classified as "Refused"or "XX"in terms of the Films and Publications Act 65 of1996.

Related collections

Most cited references 53

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome.

R Summit (1982)

Child victims of sexual abuse face secondary trauma in the crisis of discovery. Their attempts to reconcile their private experiences with the realities of the outer world are assaulted by the disbelief, blame and rejection they experience from adults. The normal coping behavior of the child contradicts the entrenched beliefs and expectations typically held by adults, stigmatizing the child with charges of lying, manipulating or imagining from parents, courts and clinicians. Such abandonment by the very adults most crucial to the child's protection and recovery drives the child deeper into self-blame, self-hate, alienation and revictimization. In contrast, the advocacy of an empathic clinician within a supportive treatment network can provide vital credibility and endorsement for the child. Evaluation of the responses of normal children to sexual assault provides clear evidence that societal definitions of "normal" victim behavior are inappropriate and procrustean, serving adults as mythic insulators against the child's pain. Within this climate of prejudice, the sequential survival options available to the victim further alienate the child from any hope of outside credibility or acceptance. Ironically, the child's inevitable choice of the "wrong" options reinforces and perpetuates the prejudicial myths. The most typical reactions of children are classified in this paper as the child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome. The syndrome is composed of five categories, of which two define basic childhood vulnerability and three are sequentially contingent on sexual assault: (1) secrecy, (2) helplessness, (3) entrapment and accommodation, (4) delayed, unconvincing disclosure, and (5) retraction. The accommodation syndrome is proposed as a simple and logical model for use by clinicians to improve understanding and acceptance of the child's position in the complex and controversial dynamics of sexual victimization. Application of the syndrome tends to challenge entrenched myths and prejudice, providing credibility and advocacy for the child within the home, the courts, and throughout the treatment process. The paper also provides discussion of the child's coping strategies as analogs for subsequent behavioral and psychological problems, including implications for specific modalities of treatment.