Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Sexual Health Reports
Published in: Current Sexual Health Reports 4/2018

01-12-2018 | Current Controversies (PJ Kleinplatz and C Moser, Section Editors)

Can Pedophiles Change?

Author: James M. Cantor

Published in: Current Sexual Health Reports | Issue 4/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose of Review

To provide a critical analysis of purported claims to have cured pedophilia, including their scientific and policy implications.

Recent Findings

A single recent study has been in published in which authors claimed to find evidence that half of pedophiles cease to be pedophiles, when tested with a phallometric test in use at those authors’ facility. Bootleg simulation of the original dataset confirmed prior criticisms: When analyzed correctly, the data were indistinguishable from random. Despite that the study was not a treatment study, claims continue to appear that pedophiles can become non-pedophiles.

Summary

To tell pedophiles that they cease to be pedophiles relieves them from any need to develop skills for managing that pedophilia (the current clinical consensus of the field). Although it is hoped that there may one day be methods to “convert” pedophiles into non-pedophiles, there is no evidence we are there yet.
Literature
1.
Rahman Q. The neurodevelopment of human sexual orientation. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2005;29:1057–66.CrossRef
2.
•• Dyshniku F, Murray ME, Fazio RL, Lykins AD, Cantor JM. Minor physical anomalies as a window into the prenatal origins of pedophilia. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:2151–9. Study provides direct, physical evidence of features of the body that develop before, and only before, birth being significantly different among pedophiles than non-pedophiles, demonstrating that the factors leading to pedophilia were in effect before birth.CrossRef
3.
•• Fazio RL, Dyshniku F, Lykins AD, Cantor JM. Leg length versus torso length in pedophilia: further evidence of atypical physical development early in life. Sex Abus: J Res Treat. 2017;29:500–14. Study replicates the presence of significant differences in physical development among pedophiles and demonstrates the effect size to be substantially larger than what is typically associated with environmental factors but similar to neurodevelopmental ones. CrossRef
4.
•• Fazio RL, Lykins AD, Cantor JM. Elevated rates of atypical-handedness in paedophilia: theory and implications. Laterality. 2014;19:690–704. Study replicates and extends finding of handedness differences among pedophiles. Because handedness is determined by brain structure (relative dominance of the cerebral hemispheres), the data demonstrate an association between pedophilia and brain structure. Because handedness develops before birth, the association indicates the neurological difference was present before birth. CrossRef
5.
•• Seto MC. Is pedophilia a sexual orientation? Arch Sex Behav. 2012;41:231–6. Article provides a comprehensive review of the correlates of sexual interest patterns, exploring both the similarities and differences among these categories. CrossRef
6.
Alford GS, Morin C, Atkins M, Schoen L. Masturbatory extinction of deviant sexual arousal: a case study. Behav Ther. 1987;18:265–71.CrossRef
7.
Josiaseen RC, Fantuzzo J, Rosen AC. Treatment of pedophilia using multistage aversion therapy and social skills training. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 1980;11:55–61.CrossRef
8.
Foote WE, Laws DR. A daily alternation procedure for orgasmic reconditioning with a pedophile. J Behav Ther Exp Ther. 1981;12:267–73.CrossRef
9.
Johnston P, Hudson SM, Marshall WL. The effects of masturbatory reconditioning with nonfamilial child molesters. Behav Res Ther. 1992;30:559–61.CrossRef
10.
VanDeventer AD, Laws DR. Orgasmic reconditioning to redirect sexual arousal in pedophiles. Behav Ther. 1978;9:748–65.CrossRef
11.
Kelly RJ. Behavioral reorientation of pedophiliacs: can it be done? Clin Psychol Rev. 1982;2:387–408.CrossRef
12.
•• Seto MC. Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: theory, assessment, and intervention. Washington, DC: APA Books; 2008. This book continues to serve as the most comprehensive text on the subject matter, including both clinical and theoretical aspects. CrossRef
13.
Tozdan S, Briken P. ‘I believed I could, so I did’—a theoretical approach on self-efficacy beliefs to positively influence men with a risk to sexually abuse children. Aggress Violent Behav. 2015;25:104–12.CrossRef
14.
Müller K, Curry S, Ranger R, Briken P, Bradford J, Fedoroff JP. Changes in sexual arousal as measured by penile plethysmography in men with pedophilic sexual interest. J Sex Med. 2014;11:1221–9.CrossRef
15.
Briken P, Fedoroff JP, Bradford JW. Why can’t pedophilic disorder remit? Arch Sex Behav. 2014;43:1237–9.CrossRef
16.
Tozdan S, Kalt A, Dekker A, Keller LB, Thiel S, Müller JL, et al. Why information matters: examining the consequence of suggesting that pedophilia is immutable. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2018;62:1241–61.CrossRef
17.
Fedoroff JP. Managing versus successfully treating paraphilic disorders. In Handbook of clinical sexuality for mental health professionals. Edited by Levine SB, Risen CB, Althof SE. Routledge; 2016:345–361.
18.
Fedoroff JP. Interventions that work. In: Psychiatric times; 2016.
19.
Bailey JM. A failure to demonstrate changes in sexual interest in pedophilic men: comment on Müller et al. (2014). Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:249–52.CrossRef
20.
Cantor JM. Purported changes in pedophilia as statistical artifacts: comment on Müller et al.: (2014). Arch Sex Behav. 2015(44):253–4.CrossRef
21.
Lalumière ML. The lability of pedophilic interests as measured by phallometry. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:255–8.CrossRef
22.
•• Mokros A, Habermeyer E. Regression to the mean mimicking changes in sexual arousal to child stimuli in pedophiles. Arch Sex Behav. 2016;45:1863–7. Analysis represents a perfect example of how to examine the validity of non-standard statistical methods, with simulations using the original dataset. CrossRef
23.
24.
25.
Metadata
Title
Can Pedophiles Change?
Author
James M. Cantor
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Sexual Health Reports / Issue 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1548-3584
Electronic ISSN: 1548-3592
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-018-0165-2

Other articles of this Issue 4/2018

Current Sexual Health Reports 4/2018 Go to the issue

Male and Female Surgical Interventions (A Burnett and C Carson, Section Editors)

Current Concepts in Scrotal Reconstructive Surgery

Sexual Orientation and Identity (E Coleman and J Vencill, Section Editors)

Improving Clinical Education and Training on Sexual and Gender Minority Health

Sexual Orientation and Identity (E Coleman and J Vencill, Section Editors)

Neurocognitive Mechanisms in Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder

Correction

Correction to: Can Pedophiles Change? Response to Opening Arguments and Conclusions

Female Sexual Dysfunction and Disorders (T Lorenz and R Nappi, Section Editors)

Impact of Infertility on the Sexuality of Couples: an Overview

Male Sexual Dysfunction and Disorders (A Pastuszak and N Gupta, Section Editors)

Contemporary Review of BPH Medical and Surgical Treatments on Sexual Function