LITERATURE REVIEW
2.6 Reactions to disclosure
"First they 'deny you,' then they 'discredit you,' and then they organise the family 'against you'"
(Staller & Nelson-Gardell, 2005:1424).
Most child rape victims do not experience their trauma in isolation - disclosure of the rape incident(s) allows their family and friends to feel the after shock of their trauma (Regehr, 1990).
Often the immediate family is relied upon to provide the necessary emotional and social support to the child rape victim in the aftermath of disclosure. However, this support must take place in the wake of the family's own traumatic reactions (Burton, 2005). Significant others may be
uncertain as to how to react to victims, and may present with a range of behaviours that include withdrawal, criticism, ineffective help, excessive help or inappropriate help, as well as guilt and feelings of ambivalence toward the child (Lewis, 1997). Therefore, even when child victims do decide to disclose and bring the rape experience(s) to light, there is no guarantee that the
disclosure recipient will regard the incident in the same light. As Summit wrote, "any child trying to cope with a sexualized relationship with an adult faces an uncertain and highly variable response from whatever personal or professional resources are enlisted for help" (1983, cited in Bona, 2006:7).
Bona (1996) classified three types of reactions to disclosure. A 'positive supportive reaction' was defined by the child finding that he/she was believed and treated sympathetically, and that the abuser was held unequivocally responsible (Bona, 1996). A 'negative punitive reaction' was defined by the child feeling that he/she was not believed, or that he/she was blamed (at least partly) for the rape, and 'no apparent reaction' was defined as a lack of any emotional or
practical response to the disclosure, despite the child believing that he/she had communicated the fact that the rape had taken place (Bona, 1996). For the majority of children interviewed across studies, primary reasons for not disclosing were that they feared a negative response (Ullman, 2003).
Estimates of the extent of non-supportive reactions in child sexual abuse disclosure range from 9% to 52% (Arata, 1998; Berliner & Conte, 1995; Roesler & Wind, 1994; Sauzier, 1989, cited in Akal, 2005). Paine and Hansen (2002) note that nearly 1 child in 10 who disclosed their sexual victimization reported their disclosure was received with disbelief. Bolen (2002) maintains that even when the confidant is a non-offending caregiver/other adult, the extent of non-supportive reactions remains considerable (approximately 25%). Moreover, less than half (44%) of the non- offending caregivers in Bolen and Lamb's (2004) study responded to their child's disclosure in a fully supportive manner, while only 33% were partially supportive. In the London Family Court Clinic Study (1995), parents in 68% of the cases were supportive, 20% ambivalent, 7% rejecting, 7% took the abuser's side against the child, parents of 5% entirely disbelieved the allegation and in 4% of the cases the two parents had ambivalent responses. The majority of children in
Berliner and Conte's (1995) study characterised the initial reaction as supportive (54%).
Shock/surprise accounted for 26% of the reactions, while 15% reported that the reaction was one of sadness, 11% anger, and 8% disbelief (Berliner & Conte, 1995). In Hershkowitz et al.'s (2007) study 37% of children received supportive reactions to disclosure and 63% unsupportive
reactions. Children who reported being sexually victimised by familiar offender (known to the family, but not a family member) were more likely to face unsupportive parental reactions (89%) than children who reported being sexually victimised by a stranger (25%) (Hershkowitz et al., 2007).
It is noteworthy that in Hershkowitz et al.'s (2007) study, parents were less supportive when their children were victims of serious crimes (92%), and were less supportive when their children were victims of repeated incidents (93%) (as opposed to 37%) for victims of a single incident).
Moreover, 81% of the children who delayed disclosing had unsupportive parental reactions when they did disclose, as compared to children who immediately disclosed (47%) (Hershkowitz et al., 2007). Lewis (1997) found that respondents attributed significantly more blame to 15-year old victims than to either 7- or 11-year-old victims. Research has shown that younger children are more likely to be believed than older children in part because it is assumed that they would not be falsifying their accounts of sexual victimisation (London Family Court Clinic, 1995). Ullman (2003) found that disclosures to friends were likely to be associated with the most positive
reactions of all possible support sources, with parental reactions being less positive than those of other support sources, even controlling for age and gender of the victim disclosing. In addition, Ullman (2003) found that male victims receive less father, parent and sister support, and less family protection after disclosure than females. Ullman (2003) found that correlates of unsupportive responses to disclosure include: older age of child victims, more severe sexual victimisation (more incidents, longer duration), longer delay to disclosure, intrafamilial rape, mother living with or being financially dependent on the perpetrator, and perpetrator denial of the sexual assault.
Children face not only the burden of revealing a frightening and emotional secret, they often face both the disbelief and inaction of their confidantes. Summit (1983) maintains that child rape victims often face secondary trauma in the process of disclosure, if they are subjected to disbelief, rejection, and blame from adults. This form of abandonment by the adults (most crucial to the
child's protection and recovery) may result in feelings of alienation, pain, rage, self-blame, and re-victimization (Summit 1983). In 17% of cases in Collings et al.'s (2005) study the child's initial disclosure did not lead to reporting, because the child was not believed (9%) or because the caregiver took no action (8%). Furthermore, the literature shows that children disclosing intrafamilial rape are most likely to disclose to either their parents or to a non-offending parent.
In cases of intrafamilial victimisation, non-offending parents are often forced to respond in some way by either stopping the abuse or confronting the perpetrator (for example, if the perpetrator is either the father, grandfather or some other male family member) (Ullman, 2003). However, for many children disclosure is met with a negative reaction. The child finds that they are blamed, and thereafter encouraged to keep the rape a secret. According to Akal (2005), non-supportive reactions to disclosure can be further sub-divided into two discreet categories: 'primary non- supportiveness' (situations involving indirect disclosure by the child or accidental detection and where caregivers/parents/significant adults do not intervene despite compelling information that the child may have been sexually assaulted) and 'secondary non-supportiveness' (when
caregivers/parents/significant adults do not intervene and there has been unequivocal purposeful disclosure by the child, eyewitness detection or medical evidence).
Positive reactions to disclosure in the literature include: belief, validation (saying one is also a survivor), not being blamed/being told it is not one's fault, socio-emotional support (holding the victim, protectiveness), facilitating talking about the effects of child rape, listening, asking helpful questions, having an accepting attitude about the rape and the victim's reactions, and instrumental support (confronting the perpetrator, making sure the rape does not reoccur) (Ullman, 2003). Negative responses include: disbelief, denying, blame, invalidation, belittling, rejection, disgust, hostility, exploitation/victimisation, minimisation, ignoring the disclosure, egocentric responses, accusing the victim of lying, punishing or beating the victim, parental rejection, neglect, indifference, anger, and avoiding talking or listening (Ullman, 2003). The way a recipient reacts to purposeful, partial, accidental or indirect disclosures may be critical to whether a child will tell further. Thus, when disclosures are made, not only is the initial reaction important, but so to is the response of adults who subsequently learn of the information and interact with the child (Bona, 1996).