International Journal of Coercion, Abuse, and Manipulation Volume 3 2022 60
had found. Adam, Bob, and Carl discussed experiences
related to gender-norm barriers, stigma related to
homosexuality, and confusion about sexual orientation
(Artime et al., 2014 Easton et al., 2019 Geddes et al.,
2013 Giglio et al., 2011 Mahalik et al., 2003 O’Leary
&Barber, 2008 Turchik et al., 2016). The participants
expressed fears related to the victim to-offender
narrative (Price-Robertson, 2012). They also described
wrestling with conceptualizing their experiences as
sexual abuse. Awareness of these barriers should cause
a reevaluation of some of the assessment tools we use in
clinical practice. For example, assessment instruments
that focus primarily on symptoms of trauma rather
than types of trauma are problematic because these
types of assessments do not acknowledge the specific
experiences of the individual (Martin &Silverstone,
2013). In contrast, other assessments ask explicitly
about “traumatic sexual experiences.” This approach is
problematic in that these assessments would evoke an
affirmative answer only if the individual conceptualized
their sexual experiences as traumatic.
A more effective means to evoke disclosure may be
to engage the individual in the development of a life
timeline, in which the person identifies their sexual
experiences in their own language and describes the
experience as they understand it. Doing this avoids
stigmatizing language from which the survivor
may recoil. The timeline method allows survivors
to describe their subjective interpretation of their
experiences and also provides enough detail that
the clinician can understand whether the acts met an
objective definition of CSA even if the survivor does
not recognize it as such.
The Relational Nature of Disclosure
As they evolve, prior conceptualizations of disclosure
continue in the paradigm that the disclosure experience
is unidirectional that is, the survivor of CSA gives
information to the one to whom the sexual abuse is
disclosed, who is a passive receiver of the information.
The adult male survivors interviewed, however, also
experienced disclosing their experiences as a relational
reality. While these men told their stories of abuse,
they were sensitive to cues from those to whom they
disclosed that either evoked or prevented further
disclosure from them.
The relational nature of the disclosure experiences of
these survivors evidenced a desire for deep, affirming
connections with another person. These survivors
were able to find that connection with others who had
experienced abuse, even if the abuse was not directly
parallel to their own. They disclosed to have someone
understand the experience as they understood it
themselves. They longed for the presence of another
who would not shrink away from the depths of their
pain.
Survivors’ Autonomy in Treatment
The value of autonomy was profound in the experiences
of these survivors. All abuse is about power and control.
The perpetrator uses the abusive behavior to control the
target of the abuse. When mental health professionals
take control over the treatment process after a CSA
survivor discloses, this action further disempowers the
survivor. This approach could inadvertently lead to a
deepening of the trauma and accidental reinforcement
of the messages the perpetrator of the abuse directed
at the survivor during the active period of abuse.
Any action a mental health professional takes after
disclosure on behalf of the survivor who disclosed
should be taken only with the survivor’s permission.
Victims of abuse are conditioned to accept the power
of others. Abusers’ conditioning of their victims means
that victims may acquiesce to a course of action that they
do not want to pursue because they are conditioned
to submit to the power of the other. A significant part
of treatment lies in helping victims regain their own
sense of self-agency. Empowering survivors who have
disclosed abuse is key to their recovery, and any action
that undermines that autonomy, even if it is well-
meaning and taken on the survivors’ behalf, should be
avoided. Mental health professionals must be conscious
of this reality when working with clients who are abuse
victims, even when asking their permission to pursue
some course of action.
Limitations
This study was limited because of the difficulty in
accessing the population of adult male survivors of
CSA. We used multiple means to invite participants
but after 9 months of various methods to invite
potential participants, only four had responded. The
had found. Adam, Bob, and Carl discussed experiences
related to gender-norm barriers, stigma related to
homosexuality, and confusion about sexual orientation
(Artime et al., 2014 Easton et al., 2019 Geddes et al.,
2013 Giglio et al., 2011 Mahalik et al., 2003 O’Leary
&Barber, 2008 Turchik et al., 2016). The participants
expressed fears related to the victim to-offender
narrative (Price-Robertson, 2012). They also described
wrestling with conceptualizing their experiences as
sexual abuse. Awareness of these barriers should cause
a reevaluation of some of the assessment tools we use in
clinical practice. For example, assessment instruments
that focus primarily on symptoms of trauma rather
than types of trauma are problematic because these
types of assessments do not acknowledge the specific
experiences of the individual (Martin &Silverstone,
2013). In contrast, other assessments ask explicitly
about “traumatic sexual experiences.” This approach is
problematic in that these assessments would evoke an
affirmative answer only if the individual conceptualized
their sexual experiences as traumatic.
A more effective means to evoke disclosure may be
to engage the individual in the development of a life
timeline, in which the person identifies their sexual
experiences in their own language and describes the
experience as they understand it. Doing this avoids
stigmatizing language from which the survivor
may recoil. The timeline method allows survivors
to describe their subjective interpretation of their
experiences and also provides enough detail that
the clinician can understand whether the acts met an
objective definition of CSA even if the survivor does
not recognize it as such.
The Relational Nature of Disclosure
As they evolve, prior conceptualizations of disclosure
continue in the paradigm that the disclosure experience
is unidirectional that is, the survivor of CSA gives
information to the one to whom the sexual abuse is
disclosed, who is a passive receiver of the information.
The adult male survivors interviewed, however, also
experienced disclosing their experiences as a relational
reality. While these men told their stories of abuse,
they were sensitive to cues from those to whom they
disclosed that either evoked or prevented further
disclosure from them.
The relational nature of the disclosure experiences of
these survivors evidenced a desire for deep, affirming
connections with another person. These survivors
were able to find that connection with others who had
experienced abuse, even if the abuse was not directly
parallel to their own. They disclosed to have someone
understand the experience as they understood it
themselves. They longed for the presence of another
who would not shrink away from the depths of their
pain.
Survivors’ Autonomy in Treatment
The value of autonomy was profound in the experiences
of these survivors. All abuse is about power and control.
The perpetrator uses the abusive behavior to control the
target of the abuse. When mental health professionals
take control over the treatment process after a CSA
survivor discloses, this action further disempowers the
survivor. This approach could inadvertently lead to a
deepening of the trauma and accidental reinforcement
of the messages the perpetrator of the abuse directed
at the survivor during the active period of abuse.
Any action a mental health professional takes after
disclosure on behalf of the survivor who disclosed
should be taken only with the survivor’s permission.
Victims of abuse are conditioned to accept the power
of others. Abusers’ conditioning of their victims means
that victims may acquiesce to a course of action that they
do not want to pursue because they are conditioned
to submit to the power of the other. A significant part
of treatment lies in helping victims regain their own
sense of self-agency. Empowering survivors who have
disclosed abuse is key to their recovery, and any action
that undermines that autonomy, even if it is well-
meaning and taken on the survivors’ behalf, should be
avoided. Mental health professionals must be conscious
of this reality when working with clients who are abuse
victims, even when asking their permission to pursue
some course of action.
Limitations
This study was limited because of the difficulty in
accessing the population of adult male survivors of
CSA. We used multiple means to invite participants
but after 9 months of various methods to invite
potential participants, only four had responded. The
