8. EU DIRECTIVE PROPOSAL 2010
Child pornography
(iii) any material that visually depicts any
person appearing to be a child --
(iv) realistic images of a child -- regardless of
the actual existence of such child –
child = under 18 years
11. TIGHTENING UP
Expanding the scope of child porn
more convictions
collecting political goodwill
No proof of effectiveness in prevention
Research and therapy experiences suggest
the opposite!
12. CHALLENGES: criminology
Use of pornography exploded in western
countries no increase in sex crimes
(Diamond 2009-2010)
Child pornography legal in Chech, Denmark
and Japan for a period of time
sex crimes against children decrease
(Jozifkova, Weiss, Diamond 2010)
13. CHALLENGES: forensic psychiatry
Internet child porn offenders and actual child
molesters have usually different paths to the
crimes
Use of child pornography doesn’t predict
actual sex crimes, antisocial behavior does
(Fedoroff/IALMH 2011)
IALMH = International Academy for Law and Mental Health
14. CHALLENGES: preventive therapy
Permission and acceptance are the basic
elements of sexual counselling
(PLISSIT-model)
Sexual preferences cannot be erased,
controlling them requires positive ways of
realisation
(Nissinen/Sexpo Foundation)
Child pornography can be a substitute for
actualising pedophilic fantasies
(Jozifkova 2010; Neutze/IALMH 2011)
15. CONCLUSIONS
Proposed EU-directive seeks to criminalise
fantasies
draconian and confusing
violates sexual rights
hampers crime prevention
Softer approach could work better
preventive therapy instead of
punishment
seeking help made easier
frees resources
16. QUESTIONS
Can non-harmful realisation methods
(i.e. fictional child porn) be tools for crime
prevention?
Should we loosen up child porn legislation if
it helps in crime prevention?