Sibling sexual abuse: an introduction and critical discussion

We are delighted to present a collection of original empirical research and practice papers examining the under researched phenomenon of sibling sexual abuse for the Journal of Sexual Aggression. In our call for contributions to this special issue, we intentionally appealed for a broad range of submissions examining any perspective or approach to sibling sexual abuse. We received an impressive response, and our collection provides unique insight into the experiences of practitioners responding to sibling sexual abuse (see King-Hill et al., 2023); those impacted by sibling sexual abuse, including survivors, parents and families more broadly (see Lewin et al., 2023; Westergren et al., 2023; Winters & Jeglic, 2023); discussion of various treatment and service provision approaches, with case examples (see Ibrahim, 2023; Read, 2023; Yates & Allardyce, 2023); and the examination of sibling sexual abuse though family systems (see McCartan et al., 2023) and individual and care-giver characteristics (see Thomsen et al., 2023).

Given the complexities associated with sibling sexual abuse, and despite our extensive collection, we recognise that not all aspects of sibling sexual abuse could be included in this special issue. As a result, we have collaborated with 5WAVES, Inc., a newly formed online non-profit organisation dedicated to confronting and healing sibling sexual trauma, to offer additional recommendations and suggestions for future work and research in this important field. Our recommendations below serve to complement the rigorous research presented in the journal's special issue.

First, it is well documented that the nature and scale of sibling sexual abuse is not yet fully understood. Contributors in this special issue do well to highlight what is currently known in terms of estimated rates, and some of the characteristics of sibling sexual abuse, but we argue that much further work is needed. We recognise the challenges researchers face in establishing and accessing such data, not least because language and definition varies, but note that understanding population wide prevalence rates, rates of disclosure, reports, incidents, arrests, convictions/sentences, repeated behaviours and re-arrest/re-conviction data would significantly advance the field. Similarly, while the consequences of child sexual abuse are well documented, the impact of sibling sexual abuse is often minimised. We believe the intrafamilial nature of sexual abuse by a sibling results in additional consequences and complexities. These might surface not only for the child who has been harmed, but also for the child who caused harm and their parents/wider family members. Understanding the nature and scale of sibling sexual abuse might help direct appropriate funding and resources to prevention policy and practice, public health messaging, programme evaluation, and service provision.

Second, although disclosing any type of sexual abuse is fraught with difficulties, the complex family dynamics of intrafamilial abuse, including abuse by another sibling, heightens this challenge. Thus, a valuable area worthy of further examination is the process of disclosure. As our contributors note, many survivors do not disclose. Understanding what barriers to disclosure exist is important because – kept hidden – the potential to prolong harm is maintained. In addition to disclosure itself, the responses of others also require consideration. Disclosure responses by parents, other family members and professionals (e.g. health, education, social care and justice) are often negative and counterproductive. Thus, detailed consideration of the nature of these responses, the factors that influence these, and the impact they have on outcomes for survivors, children who harm, and the family system will help develop a clearer understanding of how best to respond effectively to disclosure.

Third, like all research and practice in which human behaviour is examined, inconsistencies in definition make comparison of data, assessment and provision of services difficult. This becomes a greater challenge if we fail to engage culturally sensitive research and practice. Therefore, we encourage future researchers to include clearer definitions in their work. For example, the term “sibling” has different meanings for different people. Indeed, differences exist within and between families and agencies, thus, we remind practitioners and researchers to be mindful of the challenges this brings. For the purpose of our special issue, we embraced the widest possible meaning of sibling, placing no limitations on its definition, but the clarity of this for future empirical scrutiny is essential. We endorse the broad definition provided by Yates and Allardyce (2021) in which siblings are described as “biological brothers and sisters, stepsiblings, half-siblings, adoptive siblings, foster siblings and social siblings – children not biologically or legally related but who have been brought up together or in close proximity and share an enduring bond” (p. 11). This definition recognises the complexity of many contemporary families. Equally, an agreed definition of sibling sexual abuse is also needed. Yates and Allardyce document sibling sexual abuse as a form of harmful sexual behaviour, which as described by Hackett et al. (2019) are sexual behaviours “expressed by children and young people under the age of 18 years old that are developmentally inappropriate, may be harmful towards self or others, or be abusive towards another child, young person or adult” (p. 13). While we encourage research designed to solely examine the phenomenon of sibling sexual abuse, we also note that when investigating any aspect of child sexual abuse, by simply including a sub-section capturing demographic details such as age and relationship of the person causing the harm means that valuable information and knowledge can be gleaned.

Fourth, like all sexual abuse, sibling sexual abuse has multi-level causes and risk factors. Policies that drive individual-level responses by practitioners are limited. Instead, broadening the focus to the whole family in response to SSA is needed. However, we must first understand these risk factors as they relate to each socio-ecological level. Individual level analysis, while important, must be considered in the context of relational, social, cultural and environmental level factors. Technology and social media, in particular, are emerging as critical contexts for understanding behaviour, as are the intersections between neurodiversity, culture, race, gender and harmful sexual behaviour (generally and within sibling sexual abuse). In the same way, we must understand what protective factors buffer families and children from sibling sexual abuse. Although it is unlikely individual risk or protective factors are causal in isolation, evidence of empirically meaningful factors ought to help policy makers and practitioners deploy appropriate resources to target key areas of need in both the prevention and response to sibling sexual abuse.

Finally, when responding to cases of child sexual abuse, multi-disciplinary responses are required. Practice continues, in the main, to be siloed. Unlike most extrafamilial child sexual abuse cases, significant help, support and treatment must extend beyond the person who has been harmed; instead, it must also reach multiple members of the immediate and sometimes extended family (who themselves may have additional vulnerabilities including their own experiences of victimisation). As such, we call for researchers to examine the provision of such services both following a disclosure of sibling sexual abuse, as well as help and support in the longer term. We call for greater examination of the efficacy of the variety of treatment options and consider “treatment effectiveness” from the perspective of child and adult survivors, children and adults who have caused harm, parents and family members of sibling sexual abuse, and the family unit itself. For practitioners working with children and families in which concerns of sibling sexual abuse are raised, we request they deploy strategies that respond to the needs of the whole family; inevitably requiring practitioners to embrace greater multi-disciplinary practice.

We, as guest editors of this special issue, are extremely grateful to the researchers, practitioners, and research participants for their unwavering dedication to this crucial body of work. The nature and scale of sibling sexual abuse is complex and multifaceted, and there is still much more that we have yet to fully understand. This special issue serves as an invaluable resource and offers a catalyst for critical discussion that we hope inspires future research and advancements in practice.

For more information on 5WAVES Inc. see https://www.5waves.org/

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).