Gap Analysis of Services for Victims and Survivors of Online Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in Canada

Findings

Literature Review

The rapid proliferation of new digital technologies has given rise to increased sexual exploitation of children online. Online CSEA manifests in many forms including accessing, possessing, producing, and/or distributing technology-facilitated sexual abuse materials by those who have a sexual interest in children. As demonstrated by Dr. Martin’s previous research with child and youth service providers (Martin, 2013; Martin, 2014; Martin 2015; Martin, 2016; Martin & Alaggia, 2013), many do not know how to adapt their current practices to address specific features of technology-facilitated child sexual abuse due to the lack of research and theory about the complex practice issues involved (British Association of Social Workers, 2013; Martin, 2014; Martin, 2016; Martin, Brady, Kwhali, Brown, Crowe & Matouskova, 2014; Rimer, 2008; von Weiler, Haardt-Becker & Schulte, 2010).

Online CSEA has been broadly conceptualized as the sexual abuse and exploitation of children on the internetin three principal forms:

  1. child luring and sexual solicitation,
  2. child prostitution and child trafficking, and
  3. recording and distributing images of sexual abuse online.

Child luring and sexual solicitation may be defined as the use of the internet to initiate or enhance contact with children to groom and entice them to engage in sexual activities or sexual conversations online or offline with the perpetrator (Gámez-Guadix, Almendros, Calvete & De Santisteban, 2018; Kloess, Beech & Harkins, 2014; Madigan et al., 2018; Slane, 2011; Wolak, Mitchell & Finkelhor, 2006; Wurtele & Kenny, 2016), which may result in sexual extortion of the child victim (Acar, 2016).

Child prostitution and child trafficking involves using the internet for the purposes of advertising and acquiring child victims, often involving exchange of sex or sexual acts for drugs, food, shelter, protection, other basics of life, and/or money (Acar, 2016; Muir, 2005).

Recording and distributing images of sexual abuse online refers to the creation and distribution of sexual visual recordings (video with/without audio, photographs, live-streaming) of children and youth (Carr, 2003; Dodge & Spencer, 2018; Jones & Skogrand, 2006; Martin, 2014, 2015; McGlynn, Rackley & Haughton, 2017; Muir, 2005; Wolak, Finkelhor & Mitchell, 2005).

Estimates of the prevalence of online CSEA are dependent upon knowledge and/or available means to facilitate reporting of problematic or negative online experiences (Kloess, Beech & Harkins, 2014). In 2016, C3P published a report analyzing data collected from tips that were submitted to Cybertip.ca, Canada’s national tip line for reporting online CSEA. In total, 152,000 reports were reviewed and 43,762 unique images classified as child pornography were examined. Of these images, 78% were of prepubescent children and more than 53% of abuse acts against those under age 12 years involved explicit sexual activity/assaults and extreme sexual assaults. Most ofthe extreme assaults were perpetrated against children younger than 8 years of age.

Previous research has revealed that the perpetrators of online CSEA are most frequently either family members (37%) or acquaintances of the family (36%) (Martin, 2014; Martin & Alaggia, 2013; Mitchell, Finkelhor & Wolak, 2005; Slane, 2009). Online CSEA has the defining characteristic that the digitally recorded images are accessible online, so they are potentially permanent and therefore involve the subsequent and continuous exploitation of the child victim (Martin & Alaggia, 2013).

The literature review revealed gaps in research related to treatment, education, training, and supervision practices for service providers who are responsible for working with victims of online CSEA. Specifically, there is a serious lack of documented research and knowledge, particularly related to clinical treatment and specialized support services (Canadian Centre for Child Protection, 2016; Leonard, 2010; Martin 2015; Martin, 2016; Martin & Alaggia, 2013; Palmer, 2015; von Weiler, Haardt-Becker & Schulte, 2010). It is also vital to develop responses that are specific to whether the child has been sexually exploited online or offline; whether the victim has or believes they have consented to the acts that amount to exploitation; whether the victim has generated their own images; and situations of online CSEA that involve no physical contact. The effects of online CSEA may differ between children and adolescents. Therefore, specific responses should also be developed based on the child’s age and stage of development (Martin, 2014; Palmer, 2015).

The literature review revealed gaps in psychological treatment aimed at facilitating disclosure for victims of online CSEA. It also revealed the need for studies that implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of education and training for those providing support and treatment for victims of online CSEA. This should include enhanced understanding of the differential harms and risks, and studies evaluating effective clinical supervision practices in these cases.

Effective response to online CSEA requires strong collaboration across service providers (Canadian Centre for Child Protection, 2016; Slane, et al, 2018). Policy development and training should be profession-specific and role-sensitive as well as cross-disciplinary (Slane et al., 2018). Training should also focus on the effects of online CSEA, particularly images and audio of abuse, on service providers (Martin & Alaggia, 2013). A recently published article by Gewirtz-Meydan, Lahav, Walsh, and Finkelhor (2019) stressed the need to identify and treat children who experience online CSEA in part because younger survivors suffer higher levels of psychopathology in adulthood. They state that “immediate therapy is preferable considering the impact that emotional responses during the crime and shortly after have on mental health outcomes.” They recommend that clinicians address victims’ maladaptive reactions and use appropriate approaches to treat each reaction. The authors further suggest that “special techniques to decrease the feeling of embarrassment among [online CSEA] survivors should be designed and utilized.”

Protection from abuse is considered a fundamental human right for all children. Although general awareness of the phenomenon of online CSEA has increased substantially, the ability to respond effectively continues to be hindered by gaps in knowledge, theory, and research (Martin, 2014; Slane et al., 2018). Nonetheless, resources and support should be provided to connect, integrate, and update the work that currently takes place for child victims and survivors of sexual crimes; to build capacity among service providers and institute evidence-based practices in response to victims; and, to provide an essential foundation for sustained, collaborative research, training, and cross-sectoral knowledge exchange (Martin & Alaggia, 2013; Slane et al., 2018). Research involving child victims of online CSEA is vital to advancing these goals.

Web Scan

An in-depth web scan was also conducted, focusing on organizations that deliver programs and services to victims and survivors of online CSEA across Canada. The scan began with web searches of keywords for each province and territory (e.g., “online sexual exploitation [province],” “child sexual exploitation Canada,” and “internet exploitation [province]”). Next, three previous reports on organizations providing victim services were investigated to find the websites of the organizations: Environmental Scan and Gap Analysis: Online and Technology Facilitated Child Sexual Exploitation (Gelder, Gingras & Associates, 2016) produced for Public Safety Canada; Victim Services in Canada 2018 report by the Research and Statistics Division of the Department of Justice, Canada; and the online Victim Services Directory hosted on the Department of Justice Canada’s website. The websites of each organization were examined to identify which population the service was intended for and whether the services offered were specific to victims and/or survivors of online CSEA. In some instances, a key word search was conducted within the website to identify mentions of online CSEA, and some organizations were contacted by email to clarify the services offered by specific programs. Overall, the web scan confirmed that a multitude of organizations are currently dedicated to providing resources and information to address sexual victimization, although almost none are specific to online CSEA.

C3P offers a range of resources related to online CSEA, although their most long-standing and prominent services are focused on investigations (e.g., Cybertip.ca, the national tip line), and more recently on removing online images (e.g. Project Arachnid). These are important programs that help combat online CSEA, but they are beyond the focus of this study because they are notdirect victim services.

Boost CYAC 1 is the only organization that administers a support and referral program specific to victims of online CSEAthrough the Internet Child Exploitation (ICE) Counselling Program. This program, established and funded by the Ontario Victim Services Secretariat at the Ministry of the Attorney General, provides referral and funding for immediate short-term counselling to victims of online CSEA and their families, as well as the families of some accused perpetrators. Other ICE programs are provided in police services across Canada, but these are dedicated to investigating online CSEA crimes and do not provide support services to victims. Other websites of victim services provider organizations included “online/internet child sexual exploitation” or “child abuse images online” on their lists of crimes for which they provide services to victims, but apart from Boost CYAC, there was no indication of any specialized supports or treatment options pertaining to online CSEA.

The web scan did not reveal any previously unknown providers of specialized support ortreatment for victims and survivors of online CSEA, but it reinforced the important role that community sexual assault centres play in providing services for those affected by sexual abuse. The websites of many sexual assault centres across Canada include online exploitation, luring, grooming, being shown sexual images, and being coerced into providing sexual images as examples of sexual abuse. The web scan did not indicate that any specialized support or treatment services were offered, only that victims of online CSEA are among those eligible for the general services available to sexual assault victims and survivors.

Interview Findings

Representatives from 17 service provider organizations across Canada were interviewed. All interviewees were asked the same 12 questions (see Appendices A and B) to collect their insights and perspectives regarding programs and support services for victims and survivors of online CSEA, including gaps in services as well as promising practices. The interview questions covered the following topics:

The following sections discuss the general findings (see Appendix C for summaries for each participating province and territory). The responses provided by Boost CYAC and C3P have been singled out where appropriate because these two organizations had a much more specific focus on online CSEA than any of the others.

When asked about specialized support services for online CSEA, most interviewees referred to general services for victims of crime offered by their organizations. When interviewees did address specialized services, they were often referring to support and treatment services related to sexual assault and abuse, or more specifically child sexual abuse, but not online CSEA. When interviewees had experience with online CSEA, this was mostly related to cases of luring, peer-to-peer image exchange, or human trafficking more generally. Most interviewees were unable to identify services that specifically addressed the online aspects of the crimes, or how these services differ for victims ofsexual crimes that did not involve an online component. Most interviewees from provincial victim services and CYACs relied on a conventional understanding of child sexual abuse or offline sexual exploitation and related support services when answering questions.

Available services

Most interviewees referred to the general structure of support services available for allvictims of crime, or all victims of crimes that qualify for counselling (e.g., violent crime), and sometimes more narrowly sexual crimes, or more specifically child sexual abuse. Families of child victims are generally supported through the same services as those focused on the child victim (in other words, families do not receive separate support services). Adult survivors are mostly only eligible for services if they are involved in an active court case related to historical CSEA.

The findings suggest that most support services provided by provincial victim services organizations provide referrals to organizations (including CYACs) that in turn provide servicesbased on general trauma treatment approaches for child sexual abuse that are not specific to online CSEA. Interviewees were unable to identify any interventions, supports, or treatment methods that address the differential aspects of online CSEA. This is not to suggest that the vast experience of the organizations that provide trauma treatment, and in particular many specialized approaches that respond to sexual assault and abuse, are not relevant to online CSEA. However, the lack of evidence-based approaches that are specific to online CSEA represents a gap.

Provincial victim services organizations and CYACs across Canada provide victims, survivors, and their families with referrals to other agencies or individual counsellors to address their treatment needs. However, these counselling services are limited. Although general trauma-informed therapies are helpful and widely available to victims and their families, additional and sometimes different needs of online CSEA survivors may not be addressed.

Some provide a range of services and information resources specifically for victims of online CSEA and their families. However, service providers in Canada are unable to provide research-based, evaluated treatment programs that address the complex needs of victims and survivors of online CSEA because none currently exist. In Ontario, Boost maintains a roster of counsellors providing general treatment via the ICE Counselling Program. Short-term program funding is available to online CSEA victims immediately in recognition of the need for prompt supports, therefore, wait times are minimal. Counsellors on the roster provide treatment through this funding model, often using a trauma-informed lens. However, there are no counsellors identified as having expertise related specifically to the complex needs of this type of abuse. Further, while there is currently no waitlist for services for cases of online CSEA,more funding is needed because referrals are steadily increasing.

C3P provides resources and referral services regarding online CSEA, including:

When contacted by a victim, C3P reported that they connect the individual to the appropriate resources in their own community (e.g., police, child welfare, counselling, legal representation in the US system). However, it is unclear whether C3P has any contacts with more specialized counselling services, given that such services are rare in Canada. Referrals are likely to more general counselling services.

C3P also assists in the preparation of community impact statements (CIS) for consideration by the sentencing judge. CISs describe the harm or loss that an offence has caused to a community. C3P uses data collected through Cybertip.ca, the International Survivor Survey, and Phoenix 11 to compose CISs describing the impact of these crimes on victims, especially those related to offences connected to the possession of child pornography.

C3P also has specific resources for teens who have had intimate images distributed among peers (what they call self/peer exploitation). It operates a site called Needhelpnow.ca, which is designed to help teens stop the spread of sexual pictures or videos and provides resources for finding support services. The site provides practical steps for contacting service providers to have images taken down, as well as information about the importance of emotional support and how to engage supports, and information on certain Criminal Code offences. The site advises youth to contact Cybertip.ca for further information and assistance when dealing with this type of online CSEA. The site also contains resources for parents and other trusted adults who are assisting youth involved in these types of instances, such as the Resource Guide for Families: Addressing Self/Peer Exploitation.

C3P organizes several groups composed of victims and their families primarily for advocacy purposes, with the aim of providing input to policy, resources, and future research into appropriate supports for survivors of online CSEA. It has also established a survivor moms group. This group is not specific to non-offending parents of victims of online CSEA, but serves as a voice to influence changes in support services for non-offending parents affected by child sexual abuse crimes more generally. Some of its activities include providing input on needed resources, feedback on the family survey (see below), and creating and recording survivor moms community impact statements.

C3P has conducted or is conducting surveys of:

  1. adult survivors of online CSEA(an ongoing online International Survivor’s Survey);
  2. survivor family members (although this survey is not specific to online CSEA). C3P states that the purpose of these surveys is to collect experiences that can inform advocacy efforts and contribute to CISs.

Overall, while available services and information resources are commendable, gaps remain for victims and survivors of online CSEA and their families, and more could be done to ensure they receive effective and timely specialized supports.

Gaps in services

Although most services available to support victims are more general rather than specific to online CSEA, there are also gaps in general service provision– for example, lack of access to long-term counselling; lack of counsellors in some communities; lack of communication between service providers; and lack of funds to support professional development and training.

Provincial funding for counselling services varies. Some interviewees noted that victims of online CSEA do not always qualify for available counselling, because some provinces do not fund victim counselling for “non-contact” offences. Online luring or sexual image exchange does not always involve contact by a perpetrator. In Quebec, these are not considered violent crimes and so are not eligible for funding for counselling. This is a gap in service provision, as the availability of funded counselling support for non-contact online CSEA varies depending on where a victim resides.

There is also a need for training for counsellors to learn about how best to respond to cases of online CSEA. Victims are currently referred to counsellors who most likely do not have experience with online CSEA, although they usually have experience with treating cases of sexual abuse. Online CSEA prevalence is a growing and increasingly requires familiarity with specific aspects of online CSEA, as well as best practices for treatment.

Boost CYAC acknowledged the gap in program and treatment evaluation for online CSEA, stating, “people are doing treatment and counselling and we don't know if it is working. CBT [Cognitive Behavioural Therapy] was the gold standard but now there are changes with that. How do you do training that you can feel comfortable with, without an evidence base?”

Some interviewees said they rarely see cases of online CSEA, if any, and so were unaware of the impact on victims and survivors and consequently how to provide support services. As a result, they indicated that acquiring specialized expertise was not a priority for them. It is unclear whether this reported lack of online CSEA cases can be attributed to service providers not asking about the possible involvement of technology when they respond to cases of child sexual abuse. However, when interviewees were asked about gaps in services specific to online CSEA, they frequently stated that children and youth may not be disclosing for a variety of reasons, including the strong self-protective need to deny the existence of images, or fearing who may view the images, even in a support capacity.

Some interviewees referred to knowledge gaps rather than service gaps. For example, some wanted more information about how to help victims get images taken down, and some felt that their lack of knowledge about the technology involved in online CSEA was a barrier to their ability to acquire the expertise to better serve these clients.

Training

When asked about training, many interviewees commented on conferences or presentationsthat they had attended where the specific features and harms of online CSEA were discussed (e.g., conference hosted by C3P, webinars provided by Boost CYAC). These types of resources do not provide training in how to address the specific harms of online CSEA in the course of providing supports for victims, such as court preparation and counselling. Although these resources serve as a good starting point by providing information about the process of victimization via online CSEA or the unique harms suffered by these victims, they are unlikely to result in improved support services or treatment responses. Boost CYAC noted that clinicians are willing to take on clients who are victims of online CSEA, but that it is “unclear whether or how they transfer their skills and knowledge into the ICE [Internet Child Exploitation] realm.”

Many interviewees were aware of the lack of specific professional development training available to best support, and especially to provide clinical services for, victims of online CSEA. Quality training is available for best practices for working with victims of sexual assault and abuse, but little to none focuses on online CSEA. Training resources about sexual abuse supports would be important to include, but none of the interviewees mentioned an online CSEA aspect currently being included. Training specific to online CSEA is typically offered as a separate topic, and many clinicians do not seek this specialized training due to limited time and funding for professional development. These findings suggest that integration of online CSEA training into sexual assault training – once the evidence base has been established – might inform more service providers about best practices.

C3Pprovides web-based knowledge mobilization resources that address online CSEA in sector-specific ways (i.e., child welfare/social work, legal, law enforcement, therapists, educators, medical/healthcare providers). However, these resources are not sufficient to support online CSEA victims.

Gaps remain in the development and provision of evidence-based approaches to respond, support, and especially provide treatment for, online CSEA victims, which would inform the kind of training most needed by service providers.

Partnering with other agencies and organization

Robust partnerships have emerged within and between organizations that provide support for victims of crime. These may be local and/or national; some are structured and some have developed organically over time. For example, Boost CYAC hosts annual meetings of CYACs from across Canada, and the network of CYACs is getting stronger over time. The multidisciplinary partnerships within CYACs are commendable and effective in providing important support services for young victims, and should form the backbone for delivering specialized supports for young victims of online CSEA.

All interviewees indicated that their agencies work in partnership with other organizations and make referrals to other community organizations or counsellors. Most mentioned working with other organizations that provide services for victims of sexual assault (e.g., rape crisis centres) and some noted organizations that specificallywork with victims of human trafficking. It was suggested that these well-established sites of support should be enhanced by incorporating evidence-based practices related to the online aspects of sexual assault and human trafficking.

Networking and partnering are common and are strengths in the provision of victim services. Therefore, once evidence-based training and best practices are established, their dissemination among service providers, especially CYACs, should naturally follow. All interviewees noted that they do their best to work collaboratively and share what they know about working with victims of online CSEA, but also that their knowledge is limited and no system is currently in place to help them collect and share experiences aboutproviding services – especially counselling – to these victims. As a result, many interviewees were not confident that they were providing the most appropriate supports, nor were they confident about making referrals to the most appropriate counsellors.

Promising practices

Overall, interviewees provided little insight into promising practices specific to providing support to victims of online CSEA. Most were aware of a range of approaches to deal with trauma, but stated repeatedly that they were not aware of specific practices addressing online CSEA.

Boost CYAC identified some promising directions for further development of support services, such as emerging interest about how to support non-offending parents in cases of online CSEA, especially in cases where an offender is convicted of child pornography possession offences, but still has access to their own children. They also mentioned increasing attention to the need for treatment specifically for female offenders in cases of online CSEA, and for services to treat the victims and survivors of online grooming.

C3P identified its own projects as promising practices. For example, C3P is collecting data from adult survivors and victims’ families through surveys and advocacy groups, and this could potentially inform the development of more evidence-based treatment methods and help improve services for survivors of online CSEA.

Unique challenges

When asked about the unique challenges of providing specialized services for victims of online CSEA, interviewees repeated many of the challenges discussed above in terms of services and training. Some stressed that the difficulties they face in providing victim services are especially acute when it comes to providing support for victims of online CSEA. For example, they noted that providing services in rural communities is challenging and involves obstacles such as the lack of qualified counsellors and long travel distances to access support services. Some noted that such challenges are especially difficult to overcome with regard to online CSEA, for which qualified counsellors are rare in the best of circumstances.

Some referred to the complexity of certain cases, such as those involving victims in multiple jurisdictions, and the challenges related to providing services to a victim where the trial is being held elsewhere. Others referred to victim blaming as a hindrance to accessing supports, noting that victims of luring, for instance, are often assumed to have willingly participated to some degree in the creation of the sexual images, which also poses additional barriers to disclosure and support-seeking when victims blame themselves for their victimization. There are also common messages in internet safety materials intended to deter sharing sexual images among peers by stressing that exchanging sexual images of minors is a crime. This can inhibit victim disclosure because “kids are scared of being charged.”

Several interviewees were concerned that current well-established approaches to providing mental health supports for victims of crime (e.g., trauma-informed CBT) do notadequately address the specific needs of victims of online CSEA. Several interviewees reported the lack of mentorship and supervision for counsellors and a few mentioned the absence of peer support for practitioners trying to do this work. Boost CYAC stated that appropriate responses to victims of online CSEA require knowledge-sharing among professional peers, effective supervision and mentorship of counsellors interested in doing this work, and that this would hopefully lead to stronger evidence-based treatment guidelines.

C3P provided a long list of challenges unique to providing services to victims of online CSEA and their families, including the following additions to the ones already listed above:

All of these challenges point to the need for further research and evaluation into best practices for providing support to victims of online CSEA.