In brief

• Victoria University of Wellington is researching ways to reduce stigma towards people with paedophilic tendencies.

• The researchers ask whether more educational modules reduce stigma more effectively than a single module.

• The study has sparked outrage, especially regarding the language used, with terms like “people with a sexual attraction to children” instead of “paedophiles,” raising public concern.

• Some question whether a publicly funded university should engage in such controversial studies.

Controversial research draws criticism

Victoria University of Wellington is conducting a study to explore whether education can reduce stigma towards individuals with paedophilic tendencies. 

The study, titled “Testing the Effect of Educational Modules for Reducing Stigma Towards People with a Sexual Attraction to Children,” is supervised by Associate Professor Hedwig Eisenbarth and researcher Courtney Spiller. 

It involves two surveys and four educational modules over ten days.

This research has been widely criticised on social media where it has even caught the attention of Canadian clinical psychologist Dr Jordan Peterson. These posters state that the study was approved by the university’s ethics committee, further intensifying public criticism.

Bob McCoskrie, CEO of Family First NZ, criticised the study, stating: “The stigma is there for a good reason. It’s a very healthy stigma which hopefully redirects the offender. But more importantly, the stigma is there to try and protect the victim.”

Disturbing survey questions

In simple terms, the study’s hypothesis is that by providing “educational modules,” participants may not only increase their knowledge but could also reduce their “stigmatising attitudes” toward “people with a sexual attraction to children.”

In other words, participants might view these individuals with less judgement by the end of the study.

The study also seeks to determine if more educational modules are more effective in reducing stigma compared to just one. As the study states, “the decrease in stigmatising attitudes… in the Multiple Intervention Modules Condition will be greater” than in the group that receives fewer lessons.

Survey questions raise concerns over softer stance on paedophilia

The study’s survey includes questions that have raised alarm for appearing to adopt a softer stance on individuals with paedophilic tendencies. 

For instance, participants are asked to agree or disagree with statements like “People are not responsible for their sexual preferences, but they are responsible for their behaviour” and “People with a sexual attraction to children should experience leniency when dealing with the legal system.”

These questions suggest an openness to understanding or even empathising with individuals attracted to children, a notion that many find deeply troubling. Critics, like McCoskrie, argue that terms like “people with a sexual attraction to children” are part of a broader effort to normalise paedophilia, which they see as dangerous.

Should taxpayer money fund such research?

The study argues that reducing stigma could mitigate negative consequences, such as mental health problems, and ideally reduce the risk of sexual offending by encouraging help-seeking behaviour.

Similarly, a 2018 Massey University study stated that: “Participants expressed a need for greater support options for minor-attracted persons and approaches to support that are not founded on stereotypical understandings of minor-attraction. This would recognise that minor-attracted persons who have not offended are not simply “potential offenders” but are human beings who can be prosocial and wish to be accepted in society.”  

University of New South Wales Professor Michael Salter has previously warned about the dangers of framing paedophilia as a misunderstood sexual orientation, saying, “The myopic focus of ‘MAPs’ scholarship on the supposed ‘stigma’ suffered by paedophiles has close parallels with the cognitive distortions of child sex offenders.”

The risk that this study could provoke public outrage and political trouble for the university is acute. It may lead to a loss of trust in Victoria University of Wellington as a publicly funded institution, especially among those who believe taxpayer money should be directed towards less controversial research.