Child Sexual Abuse Hysteria - Perpetrators


Home / Focus on People / Dr John Read / Read: Exaggeration of abuse statistics /

How does John Read exaggerate his claims?







Waikato Times
May 29, 1998

Letter to the Editor
Columnist under fire for view on incest
by Dr John Read
Senior lecturer, psychology department, Auckland University


Warwick Roger's attempt (May 21) to discredit the successful week of incest awareness reveals more about his fears and prejudices than about the facts of the matter.

To resort to the "lesbian-driven, anti-men" slur is not a meaningful contribution to the important debate about the prevalence of incest in New Zealand. Yes, the figures are disturbing and can, it seems, result in some disturbed reactions. Mr Roger prefers a definition of incest ("intercourse between a parent and child, brother and sister or grandparent") which excludes having objects thrust into the vagina or anus, being forced to perform oral sex, being forced to watch adult sex, etc.

In this way he reinforces his own need to believe incest is rare. New Zealand studies of international repute (published in Lancet and British Journal of Psychiatry) have established that about one in three women have been sexually abused before 16 and that roughly half of that abuse occurs within the family.

The facts will not go away, because he doesn't like them. They represent an awful indictment on our ability to keep children safe.

His denial of reality is part of a long tradition of an understandable but pathetically inadequate response to the horror of the reality. (Abridged)





Waikato Times
June 6, 1998

Letter to the Editor
Incest awareness
by Robert Walker 
(Hamilton)


In his letter attacking Warwick Roger's article on incest awareness (May 29), Dr John Read says Roger "prefers a definition of incest (`intercourse between a parent and child, brother and sister or grandparent') which excludes having objects thrust into the vagina or anus, being forced to perform oral sex, being forced to watch adult sex, etc. In this way he reinforces his own need to believe incest is rare."

Dr Read seems unaware that the definition Mr Roger prefers is the legal one. The doctor believes the definition includes, or should include, a whole string of other offences, which would, of course, boost the incest figures.

To adapt his own words, in this way he reinforces his own need to believe incest is widespread.