DOJ-OGR-00006817.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
ise 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 452-1 Filed 11/12/21 Page 25of
Dietz 31
not mention the misuse of the term in civil litigation. Where a victim is suing
an employer or organization in connection with the sexual abuse of a minor
by an employee or volunteer, it has become commonplace for the victim’s
advocate to argue that the failure to detect “grooming” was negligent on the
part of the employer or organization. If their use of the term “grooming”
always encompassed excessive focus on a particular child, time alone with
the child, or inappropriate touching, this usage might not be problematic, but
when “grooming” is applied to such common and desirable behaviors as
being kind or attentive or helpful or caring, there is considerable risk of mis-
leading the fact finder into believing that these latter behaviors are well-
established predictors of child sexual abuse when there is no evidence
whatsoever that they can help discriminate between good employees and vol-
unteers, on the one hand, and risky employees and volunteers, on the other
hand. In the litigation context, efforts to expand the concept of “grooming” to
encompass desirable behaviors that are not associated with elevated risk is
misleading, particularly when coupled with the presumption or suggestion
that “grooming” always reflects an intent or plan to offend or, worse, that an
offense can be proved by the fact that the accused engaged in “grooming.”
Seduction
Although I agree with Lanning (2018) that the term “seduction” is preferable
to the term “grooming,” at least when there is an opportunity to explain how
similar the seduction of a child is to the seduction of an age-appropriate part-
ner, there is ample historical reason to be cautious about the use of the term
“seduction” in this context without further explanation. This is because of
two archaic usages of “seduction” in the older literature.
Archaic Usage #1: Seduction as a Euphemism for the Offense
One of the archaic usages of “seduction,” found often in the older scientific
literature, is as a vague euphemism for any occurrence of child sexual abuse
or an event that may have been sexually simulating to the child, as in these
passages:
e “[A] shock of some kind is held responsible for the neurosis—an
attack by an animal, a threat of castration, a seduction, an actual view-
ing of parental coitus...” (Isaacs, 1928, p. 193).
e “... I wondered whether the precocity of these fantasies and their
frequency might not be due to actual seduction that the child had expe-
rienced... .” (Rank, 1942, p. 56).
DOJ-OGR-00006817
Extracted Information
Dates
Document Details
| Filename | DOJ-OGR-00006817.jpg |
| File Size | 639.1 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 94.6% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 2,583 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-03 17:14:46.390135 |