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

Conclusion

The findings of this study support the need for an updated and modernized national strategy to address online CSEA. Participants of the Public Safety consultation in March 2018 noted persistent challenges with meeting the specific needs of these victims and their families. Given the results of this gap analysis, it is reasonable to conclude that services, agencies, and the field itself appear stuck, in large part due to these same challenges. Without an evidence base, few specialized support services are tailored to the needs of victims and survivors of online CSEA, because service providers continue to use the approaches they have employed for victims of crime more generally, especially sexual crimes. The agencies that offer resources that are tailored to address online CSEA – Boost CYAC and C3P – acknowledge that they have been developed on a thin evidence base and hope to encourage their expansion.

Service providers who have a strong grounding in providing services to victims of sexual crimes, and especially child sexual abuse, would benefit from training and mentorship that could instil confidence in their ability to provide the needed supportive and therapeutic services unique to the potential harms to victims of online CSEA and their families. Knowledge and understanding of these harms are the first step in determining the most effective treatment approaches (Martin, 2015), in that these harms subject victims and adult survivors to a new level of victimization that must be addressed outside of typical trauma approaches (Martin, 2016). Further, long-term support services would benefit from research and evaluation. For example as preparation for court services, or current practices such as showing images to victims in a forensic interview and videotaping child interviews in cases of online CSEA (Martin, 2014; Martin & Alaggia, 2013; Palmer, 2005). Providing services that effectively address unique harms is paramount in helping victims and survivors lead healthy and productive lives.

The findings also reveal that more effective training methods may help build capacity within and across organizations to ensure effective responses to online CSEA. Most interviewees felt that mere information-sharing is insufficient because there is no evidence-based research backing up how to convert information into best practices and protocols. For example, although CYAC staff members reported attending webinars and conference presentations on features of online CSEA offending and the impact on victims, they subsequently returned to their usual approaches to practice. What they had learned via the webinars and conferences did not ‘stick’ because attendees were left without guidance about how to meaningfully integrate this information into their practices and protocols. Most interviewees also noted that they have limited budgets for training, so training related to other more commonly encountered issues in providing victim support take precedence. In short, disseminating information about the features of online CSEA is a starting point, but is insufficient.

The methods of counselling and other supports currently provided to victims of online CSEA and their families should be evaluated for their effectiveness. The findings of this project indicate a need for capacity-building within agencies. This could be implemented through the CYAC network for child victims and their families, as well as through the sexual assault survivors support network for adult survivors. These multi-disciplinary networks are already building a strong evidence base of best practices for their areas of expertise, and could extend these means of evaluating their approaches to online CSEA.

The findings also revealed the continued gap in funding for concrete evaluations of existing and new treatment and intervention approaches. This includes evaluations of how best to connect the extensive expertise and training available in Canada regarding trauma, especially trauma associated with sexual assault and other sexual abuse, and the specific differential needs of online CSEA victims. For example, Prince Edward Island has a long-standing multi-sectoral Child Sexual Abuse Advisory Committee that provides ongoing feedback on intervention models and response protocols for child sexual abuse. This work is promising and could be mobilized to further address online CSEA.

An updated national strategy could include the development of more effective local structures for providing education, training, supervision, mentorship, and ongoing professional development in the specialized area of clinical practice for online CSEA. Sustainable funding could also be used for clinical supervisors and counselling service providers to undergo continued professional development specific to online CSEA. The national strategy has the potential to provide multiple sites for genuine specialized leading-edge training. However, professional development should not merely consist of conveying information; it should include ongoing guidance about how to best implement practices from clinical leaders in evidence-based practices. The evidence base should be established through rigorous academic standards of evaluation that comply with well-established methods of data gathering and analysis, as well as ethical research protocol obligations. Ideally, this research would be conducted via an interdisciplinary approach that engages the cross-sectoral professional expertise involved in providing services to victims of online CSEA.

There is a need for more Canadian clinical leaders. Some clinicians in the field have successfully provided services to victims of online CSEA. It would be helpful for them to be identified and share their experiences with researchers who can help test and further evaluate their successes (and analyze their failures). Once these Canadian clinical leaders are established, they could train clinical supervisors in the many service provider organizations across Canada, who in turn could be tasked with training, mentoring, and providing case supervision for their staff as they work through specific cases. It would be valuable to build capacity on the ground, where multiple sites of expertise can be leveraged across existing knowledge-sharing networks.

Mentoring and supervision are prevalent within and between service provider agencies, and should be mobilized to implement best practices. When clinical leaders are unavailable, engagement with professional supports would help build capacity across organizations: successes, ambivalences, and failures can build an evidence base regarding what works and what does not. Mentoring can also be fostered via ongoing networking supports where service providers specifically share and evaluate approaches to providing support for victims, especially treatment options; this would be especially important for counsellors who may be working as sole practitioners in smaller communities.

These methods of training would foster capacity within and across agencies, and help rural service providers have access to mentorship networks. Many rural service providers indicated that they do not see many (or any) cases of online CSEA, which may be more a sign that children and youth are not disclosing online CSEA, rather than that it is not happening. Therefore, increasing awareness of the additional and unique aspects of providing support to online CSEA victims could include ways of reaching out to these service providers.

It is suggested that further evaluations would be valuable to identify the most appropriate supports for online CSEA victims within the general support services currently provided by provincial and territorial victim services. For example, research suggests that standard practices like videotaping child testimony may require modification for victims of online CSEA (Gewirtz-Meydan et al., 2018; Martin, 2013; Palmer, 2005; von Weiler et al., 2010). Some interviewees also referred to the need for more training for Crown counsel and judges to help them work more sensitively with victims of online CSEA. For example, previous research has revealed that showing victims images of themselves from an offender’s collection is an especially harmful practice and should be avoided (Martin, 2014; Palmer, 2005).

This gap analysis did not include interviews with staff from sexual assault centres to explore whether any specialized treatments and support options specific to online CSEA are available; this would be a good next avenue of inquiry. As with CYACs, it is worthwhile to explore the potential for sexual assault centres to administer services that adequately address the needs of youth victims and adult survivors of online CSEA, given the established and verified successes of such centres in providing support for victims of sexual assault more generally.

The limited empirical knowledge regarding online CSEA means that those who are serving victims, survivors and their families have an incomplete understanding of the immediate, short-term, or long-term implications for their clients. The ongoing rapid development and proliferation of technology will always present challenges for the investigation and prosecution of online CSEA. However, researchers, evaluators, victim services and other human services providers can measure and share what works and what does not, so that the field can move more concretely toward the goal of providing effective responses to victims, survivors, and families in cases of online CSEA.