I've been doing some thinking lately and have thought about whether or not pedophilia is a mental illness.

I personally believe that it is, and i think that inactive pedophiles (meaning ones who just have the thoughts and don't actually act on their fantasies) need to be treated instead of just being yelled at. I think they should be encouraged to get help, so they don't lose control of themselves and hurt a child.

So what do you guys think about this?


(I am in no way encouraging pedophilia AT ALL, EVER NEVER EVER. Do not take this as so. I'm simply proposing that being attracted to children is out of a persons control, and that it's an illness instead of just being a bad person. There ARE pedophiles who just want to be bad people and to hurt others, so not all of them are actually sick)

Well, currently they do not know much about the causes of such things. I genuinely agree that it is psychiatric illness and should be treated as such. The lack of control over such things is a psychiatric illness.

Certainly more research is needed, but research on criminals does run into very complicated ethical issues. If the test subject feels obligated to be part of the research this is a very bad situation, and if they are actually obligated, this is even worse.

Additionally, the use of psychology to treat pedophilia is clearly effective. From what I've heard, self-training methods are incredibly effective. By providing coping methods, combined with self training methods do work. I would not doubt that the impulse control issue is neurological and should be.

Self training methods such as substitute behavior, are known to work on anything that has the slightest psychological element. It works on minor things like tooth grinding, compulsive nose picking and chewing on pencils to major things like smoking, alcoholism, drug addiction, bad driving habits, and kleptomania.

I think it is. And it's not a crime in itself if not praticised in any way (not only attacking children, but taking or keeping photographs, or taking advantage in crowded places as so many people do in trains and such).
It must be a terrible source of distress for a well-meaning person, who recognizes that any sexual contact with a child is abuse, to only feel attracted to minors. Certainly they need help.
I'm not sure what would "cause" someone to be sexually attracted to an age group that they have already surpassed, though we all can come up with some good hypothesis, but then sexuality is a really strange thing. There are many manifestations of it that don't conform to adult/adult situations (let's not even go into gender preference, including denominations that go beyond man/woman, as I really don't think it's an issue or strange if it's between consenting adults). Some people feel genuinely attracted to objects, non-human animals, themselves, or even to nothing at all.

I don't disagree with anything said so far, except that I think it's critical, in this type of discussion, to clarify the difference between a minor and a pre-pubescent.

It's immoral (eta: subjectively, at least in most current modern societies) and illegal for an adult to have sex with a minor, but being attracted to a reproductively capable person with a body that's more adult than child-like is not pedophilia, simply because that person is under the legal age of consent.

A pedophile is one who's attracted to prepubescent children.

Last edited by Darby : 25th Jan 2013 at 10:22 PM.

If pedofilia is a mental illness then all other sexual deviations must be mental illnesses as well.

define "sexual deviations"

I'm going to assume that you are not referring to homosexuality as 'sexual deviation'. Bestiality and necrophilia are a sexual deviations to me, and they're mental illnesses alright. There's no doubt about that, not even as much doubt as there might be in considering pedophilia a mental illness.

I personally see pedophilia as some kind of a mental illness, even if it might be a bit weird to call it like that. If you're attracted to a 5-13 year old, you clearly have some problems up there, but since girls, at least, begin developing sexually and aesthetically at 13-14, men (women?) liking girls 14 or older can't really be labeled pedophiles.

There IS a difference between having a fetish and bestiality, pedophilia and necrophilia because animals cannot consent to anything sexual, ever. children cannot consent to sexual acts because they aren't developed enough and i don't know the last time you heard a dead body asking for some lovin, but it hasn't been very recent with me. Fetishes (i'm assuming you include these in "sexual deviation" but please correct me if im wrong) are usually wanted to be carried out on a consenting partner, and if you do NOT want your partner to consent, that's a mental issue.

Personally I'd define a sexual deviation as a sexual attraction directed to beings who can't give consent. With that definition, bestiality, necrophilia and pedophilia would all of them be sexual deviations. I strongly believe that these sexual deviations are a real mental illness/problems and should be treated to prevent sexual attacks.

You can't consent to someone being attracted to you or not. Whether they act upon it is a different story and that is where the legal system becomes helpful in protecting the vulnerable.

What standards are you using for considering pedophilia a mental illness?

EDIT: to clarify, I want to know what standards of "mental illness" you're using. And I'm asking anyone who has this viewpoint.

Last edited by hugbug993 : 26th Jan 2013 at 06:17 PM.

I do think all sexuality is in the mind, and those parameters can shift, either with time or through intervention. I find myself looking at young men up to about 25 years old in the same way as I would a teenage boy as I get older, maybe because I have sons near that age. Even though I know they are fully legal and capable of consent, they still give me the whole ick factor I get when thinking of paedophilia. Not as strong, but still there.

I only really noticed this when I was propositioned at work by a man/boy around 21 years old and I was horrified! It got me thinking about why, and although part of it was because I'm married, it mostly came from the age factor. I'd make a lousy cougar I think!

Maybe if I made a habit of thinking of that age group in that way it would change my opinion, maybe not, but in either case the change has happened. It would be better I believe if a potential paedophile could get help early to change themselves, without having to fight it on their own out of shame or the fear of being treated like a criminal.

On the other hand, if they actually go through with an act they should be jailed and given treatment in prison. Castration is my preference for a second offence though as I believe it shows they don't want to change.

Last edited by simonem : 28th Jan 2013 at 04:56 AM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
http://www.minddisorders.com/Ob-Ps/Pedophilia.html

Sometimes it can be a mental disorder. Sometimes it can be an individual who makes sick choices because he/she wants to. I don't think it falls solidly into only one category.

I'd tend to be sceptical about this, like crocobaura and hugbug. You cannot characterise sexual attraction or fantasy by whether or not consent is possible, firstly because there is no consent in attraction, and secondly because consent (or lack thereof) is not usually a factor in the attraction. Paedophiles are not attracted to non-consenting children; they are attracted to children, and separately, all children are non-consenting.

More importantly, mental illness is not a catch-all term for mental processes which are immoral; or which would, if acted on, be violent and inhuman. It's very difficult to come up with a clear definition of pathology in mental health, but one criterion which I've seen used often is debilitation. So, if a paedophile is dogged by unwanted sexual thoughts about children, and if they act on those thoughts in a way which causes real problems in the everyday lives of themselves or their families, that could be pathological. If a paedophile fantasises about children, but never feels any urge to act out their fantasies, watch child abuse videos or images, or share them (the fantasies) with others, and isn't troubled by their thoughts - I suspect, though it's all conjecture, that that would not be classed as a mental illness. Another issue might be delusion. Is a child abuser deluded, in that he thinks his five yearold victim loves him romantically, understands child rape and not only consents to it, but wants it as much as he does? Or does he know that his victim doesn't consent, but insists that he's not really hurting the child, so it's not really wrong? The former is probably indicative of mental illness; the latter is indicative of weak self-control and a willingness to make ludicrous excuses to oneself which, let's face it, is a characteristic of many perfectly healthy people.

Don't make the mistake of assuming that everyone who commits a horrendous, inhuman crime which we all struggle to understand, and which leaves you certain that they can't have any compassion or moral compass, is mentally ill. Mentally ill and fucked up can very often be two entirely separate things. That, after all, is why we have two kinds of prisons - prisons for the criminally insane, and prisons for regular old criminals. The fact that many convicts end up in the wrong one of these two institutions doesn't mean that the distinction isn't valid.

If you define mental illness as something that can be treated, then I don't think pedophilia is a mental illness as I don't believe the attraction itself can be treated. I don't believe sexual attraction is something that can be changed, it's far deeper than simply being psychological. Just like you can't turn a straight person gay or a gay person straight, you can't turn a pedo into a non-pedo.

A person's sexual attraction by itself is not a problem. It's lack of self-control that becomes a problem. A pedophile who acts out his fantasies on a child lacks self-control in a way similar to a straight man who rapes an adult woman.

Yes, I agree with you and with Whiterider and, ironically enough, I disagree with my previous post, haha. I expressed myself in a wrong way, I didn't mean that the attraction itself needs to be treated, but more what you said, help this people working in their self control so they don't harm anyone.

I think I'm not making myself clear about this topic, but I hope you understand what I mean.

It's ok - re-reading my own post I realised that I started out at "I'm sceptical" and finished at "The OP is wrong". A person who won't let their opinions develop shouldn't be in a debate. :P

(Though I do agree that paedophiles should get help with developing strong self-control mechanisms - I just believe that they should get that help whether they're mentally ill or not.)

The concept of mental illness is something of a societal construct - most people and experts would agree that delusions and hallucinations are signs of mental illness, along with obsessions and compulsions that cause the person to behave in a way that's destructive to themselves or others. Sexual attractions are in a more gray area - it's not that long ago that homosexuality was considered a mental illness by the psychiatric profession, while those who practiced it were considered criminals by the legal system - obviously because of the current ideas of morality rather than any medical evidence.

Personally, yes, I think sexual attraction to children is a mental disorder because the person who feels it can never have a healthy, consensual sexual relationship with a child. The degree of the disorder depends. A person who has an occasional fantasy while able to be in a fulfilling relationship with an adult doesn't really have a problem. Another person who obsesses about little kids constantly and has to fight their urges and is miserable because of it has a big problem and I'd call them mentally ill. And of course someone who gives in to those urges is also a criminal.

BTW, a sexual attraction to adolescents who are sexually developed but not adult is called ephebophilia. :D

What about the ones who sexually abuse a young child, but have a problem with someone sexually abusing an older child (around 12)?



TBH, I'm not really sure if I should make any more comments on this thread. This is a very personal topic (there is a very personal reason for this) for me, and I get very heated. Just thinking about the sexual abuse of a child, or someone who has thoughts about doing it is making my blood boil right now.

"Personally, yes, I think sexual attraction to children is a mental disorder because the person who feels it can never have a healthy, consensual sexual relationship with a child."

So, you're saying that if something prevents someone from having a healthy consensual relationship, it's a mental disorder?
Ladies, gentlemen, and others: Dissociative Identity Disorder is no longer a mental disorder!
The link is to the DeviantArt account of a multiple system which has two of the people in their head in a consensual relationship. Which is a very annoying sentence to write/read as a grammar nazi.

I assume what you're saying is that if it doesn't allow people to have a fulfilling life in all aspects that it should be considered a mental disorder. Which kind of begs the question of what's necessary to have a fulfilling life. Asexuals and aromantics get along fine without sex or romance, and even sexuals and romantics can as well. And there are also people who insist that spirituality is necessary for a fulfilling life, which is incredibly annoying to me as an atheist. For that matter, some people are fine with not having a body full-time.

I also have other reasons for hesitating about classifying it as a mental disorder. I've come across people who take other diagnoses and turn them into reasons why they don't have to act like decent human beings. So, instead of saying that "I did this, I'm responsible for it" it becomes "I have a mental disorder, I can't help it". Which kind of gives the impression that they're the victim when they made a choice to molest a child.

Plus, it's notoriously hard to get people to go into a psychologist's office to confirm that something's wrong with them. Turning it into a valid sexual orientation (albeit one you shouldn't act on) instead makes it more likely that they'll come out and get help with their self-control if they need it.

No, that's not what I meant. First of all, I used the term mental disorder rather than mental illness because of the stigma attached to mental illness. Maybe it's not a good term, maybe emotional problem would be better. Unfortunately a stigma tends to attach to any term that describes something that's not 'normal', whatever normal is.

I meant that if someone desires a relationship they can never have, they may have a problem. The type and degree of the problem depends. If they're madly in love with a movie star they'll never even meet, but have a normal, happy life, it's not a real problem at all. If they obsess about the movie star constantly for years and withdraw from other relationships and make themselves and their family miserable, they have a significant emotional problem. If they stalk the movie star and wind up in jail, they have a BIG problem.

Taking the examples you gave, if two personalities have a happy, consensual relationship inside one body, I'd call it unusual but not a problem in itself. (Multiple personality disorder is a whole other topic, though.) Asexual and aromantic people don't desire something they can't have. Not at all the same situation as pedophiles, who by definition desire relationships which are abusive, in which consent is impossible, and which are socially unacceptable to put it mildly.

I see your point about not classifying it as a mental illness because some people may use it as an excuse for their behavior, but IMO an issue like this should be decided on evidence, not on whether it's convenient for the legal system. As I said, it's a matter of opinion. I think it's a good deal more questionable to call it a valid sexual orientation, both for the reasons above and in fact IMO that would make people less likely to get treatment and more likely to use their 'valid' orientation to excuse their behavior.

If it's not a mental illness, I'd say that it's at least some sort of mental disorder. You can't really look upon it as a true sexual orientation and compare it to homosexuality either. Not just because it's a lot more dangerous and damaging, but because it actually is a deviation. Adult men and women are sexual beings. They are supposed to feel attraction to each other. Being attracted to your own gender may not be strictly biologically intended, but it's still an attraction towards sexually mature members of your own species. It's when people start feeling sexually aroused by things that are normally not considered erotic, because we're not naturally geared to look at them as potential spouses, that things start getting strange.

You're not supposed to feel sexually attracted to children. They are not fully developed, and lack the secondary gender characteristics that normally trigger physical attraction. You're not supposed to be sexually attracted to dogs. They are a different species we can't multiply with, and thus lack all the features that humans usually find "sexy". (Most "furry" art features anthros with a human torso, because that's sexier to most humans than a four-legged body.) You're not supposed to be attracted to corpses. They are dead, can't father or bear your children, and could be a possible source of disease. And that's just the purely naturalistic aspects. The ethics are a whole other can of worms.

I disagree that pedophilia cannot be treated, though there may be resistant cases as with other mental illnesses. I'll probably fail at expressing myself properly here so bear with my lack of communication skills.

There's something very distinctive in pedophilia that sounds like a trauma/development issue. Just like simomem said about her lack of cougarism - usually people feel romantically and sexually attracted to roughtly their same age group. I've read through some testimonials from pedophiles, and there was frequently this streak of inability to deal with adults, this vision of children as more carefree/uncomplicated/honest. That sounds like some emotional development issue, specially since so many of them are romantically attracted to prebuscents.

Now, I am a 24yo woman. When I was 15, dating a 16yo would suit me just fine. Nowadays I cringe at the thought of dating even a typical 18yo. Why? There is (usually) this abyss between levels of maturity between someone freshly out of highschool and someone getting into a master's degree (ok, I'm not, but soon!), who has worked, lived aloned, traveled, and just generally been through more situations and met more people (let's not go into how immature some adults are too). I wouldn't be emotionally fulfilling for me even if said 18yo would be my ideal of physically attractive. Even if intelligent and so on, there's still this barrier. Maybe when I'm 30 and Hypotethical Person is 24, the difference is less remarkable. But then, we'd be in the same age group. Hypothetical Person would have crossed the Teen Barrier and joined me in my level of bitterness - I mean, maturity.

Hence, wanting a real relationship with a frigging child, from where I stand, points at some really huge maturity issues.

ChaoticNeutral, you may be confusing sex and relationships. Lots of men have sex with prostitutes, but they rarely want a relationship with one. I doubt that anyone would say that's a mental illness.