Ekstafamilyal ve intrafamilyal ensest İstismarın retrospektif karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Giriş: DSÖ verilerine göre, her üç yetişkin kadından biri ve her beş yetişkin erkekten biri, çocukluk veya ergenlik döneminde cinsel istismarın bir veya diğer biçimine maruz kalmıştır ve bu istismarların büyük çoğunluğu aile içi olmuştur. Bu bağlamda bu çalışmanın amacı, aile içi ve aile dışı olmak üzere iki ensest türü arasındaki sosyodemografik ve klinik farklılıkları tanımlamak ve bu farklılıkların tedavi ve rehabilitasyon sürecine etkisini değerlendirmektir. Materyal ve Method: 2015-2021 yılları arasında Çocuk Esirgeme ve İzleme Merkezi'ne sunulan 113 aile içi istismar vakasının verileri geriye dönük olarak incelenmiş ve değerlendirilmiştir; sonuçlar ve farklılıklar tablolar ve grafikler halinde sunuldu; ve p < 0,005'i karşılayan değerler istatistiksel olarak anlamlı kabul edildi. Bulgular: 113 olgunun 98'i çalışmaya dahil edildi ve kadın/erkek oranı 10.1 olarak bulundu. Mağdurların yaş ortalaması 12.65 + 3.753, erkeklerin yaşı 8.44 + 4.586, kadınların yaşı 13.07 + 3.418 idi. Tartışma ve Sonuç: Aile içi ensest grubunda istismara maruz kalma süresi ve tekrarlayan istismar öyküsü, aile dışı ensest grubuna göre daha uzun ve daha sıktı.

Keywords

• cinsel istismar
• ensest
• aile içi şiddet

Retrospective comparison of extrafamilial and intrafamilial incest abuse

Abstract

Aims: As per WHO data, one out of every three adult women and one out of every five adult men have been exposed to one or the other form of sexual abuse in their childhood or adolescence and the great majority of these abuses have been intrafamilial. In this context, the aim of the present study is to define the sociodemographic and clinical differences between two forms of incest, intra-familial and ekstra-familial, and evaluate the effect of these differences on the treatment and rehabilitation process. Methods: Data from 113 cases of incest abuse presented to the Trabzon Child Monitoring Centre between 2015 and 2021 were examined and evaluated retrospectively; the results and differences were presented in tables and charts; and the values that satisfied p<0.005 were considered to be statistically significant. Results: Of 113 cases, 98 were included in the study, and the female/male ratio was found to be 10.1. The mean age of the victims was 12.65+3.753 years, whereas that of males was 8.44+4.586 years, with that of the females being 13.07+3.418 years. Conclusion: The duration of exposure to abuse and history of recurrent abuse in the intra-familial incest group was longer and more frequent when compared with the extra-familial incest group.

Keywords

• Sexual abuse
• incest
• domestic violence

References

1. WHO. Preventing Child Maltreatment. A Guide to taking action and Generating Evidence Genova 2006.
2. İbiloglu AO, Atli A, Oto R, Ozkan M. Multifaceted glance on childhood sexual abuse and incest. Current Approaches in Psychiatry. 2018;10(1):84-98. http:// doi:10.18863/pgy.336520
3. Valle R, Bernabé-Ortiz A, Gálvez-Buccollini JA, Gutiérrez C, Martins SS. Intrafamilial and extrafamilial sexual assault and its association with alcohol consumption. Rev Saude Publica. 2018;52:86. doi:10.11606/S1518-8787.2018052000539
4. Justice B, Justice R. The broken taboo: sex in the family. Human Sciences Press New York 1979.
5. Faller KC. The role relationship between victim and perpetrator as a predictor of characteristics of intrafamilial sexual abuse. Child Adolesc Soc Work. 1989;(6):217-229. doi: 10.1007/BF00755849
6. Pullman LE, Sawatsky ML, Babchishin KM, McPhail V, Seto MC. Differences between biolojical and sociolegal icest offenders: a meta-analysis. Agrr Violent Behav. 2017;34(3):228-237. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2017.01.003
7. WHO. Violence Against Women Key Facts 2017. Available at: www.who.int/newsroom/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against women. Access date: 22/08/2020
8. Seto MC. Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: theory, assessment and intervention, 2nd ed. Washington DC American Psychological Association 2018.

9. Ports KA, Ford DC, Merrick MT. Adverse childhood experiences and sexual victimization in adulthood. Child Abuse Neglect. 2016;51(1):313-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.08.017
10. Jewkes R, Sen P, Garcia-Moren C. Sexual violence World report on violence and health Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization 2002;149-81
11. Kenny MC, McEachern AG. Racial, ethnic, and cultural factors of childhood sexual abuse: a selected review of the literature. Clin Psychol Rev. 2000;20(7):905–922. doi: 10.1016/S0272-7358 (99)00022-7
12. Çavlin A, Koyuncu E, Kardam F, Sungur A. Encest in Turkey. J Sociologic Res. 2010;13(1):1-29
13. Finkelhor D. The international epidemiology of child sexual abuse. Child Abuse Neglect. 1994;18(5):409–417. doi: 10.1016 /0145-2134(94)90026-4
14. Gorey KM, Leslie DR. The prevalence of child sexual abuse: integrative review adjustment for potential response and measurement biases. Child Abuse Negl. 1997;21(4):391–398. doi: 10.1016/S0145-2134(96)00180-9
15. Aydın B et al. Child Sexual Abuse in Turkey: An Analysis of 1002 Cases. J Forensic Sci. 2015;60(1):61-65. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.12566
16. Gunduz T, Karbeyaz K. Evaluation of the adjudicated incest cases in Turkey: difficulties in notification of incestuous relationships. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(2):438-443. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029. 2010.01662.x
17. Makasa I, Health LJ. A retrospective study of sexual offences in Zambia. J Forensic Legal Med. 2018;54(1):23-33. doi:10.1016/j.jflm.2017.12.009
18. Yıldırım A et al. Evaluation of social and demographic characteristics of incest cases in a university hospital in Turkey. Med Sci Monit. 2014; 20: 693–697. doi:10.12659/MSM.890361
19. Akbaş S, Aydın B, Dündar C, Turla A. Relations between depression and PTSB and perceived social support in female child victims of incest. J Anatolian Psychiatr. 2016;17(4):300-308.
20. Stroebel SS, Kuo SY, O’Keefe SL, Beard KW, Swindell S, Kommor MJ. Risk factors for father-daughter incest: data from an anonymous computerized survey. Sex Abuse. 2013;25(6):583-605. doi:10.1177/1079063212470706
21. Sariola H, Uutela A. The prevalence and context of incest abuse in Finland. Child Abuse Negl. 1996;20(9):843-850. doi:10.1016/0145-2134(96)00072-5
22. Putnam FW. Ten-year research update review: child sexual abuse. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2003;42(3):269-278. doi:10.1097/00004583-200303000-00006
23. Yılmaz R, Eryılmaz A. Bülent Ecevit Üniversitesi hastanesinde değerlendirilen ensest olgularının sosyodemografik özellikleri. Bull Legal Med. 2016;21(3):167-171. doi: 10.17986/blm.2016323750
24. Finkel KC. Sexual abuse and incest. What can you do?. Can Fam Physician. 1994;40:935-944.