What is it about?
Sigmund Freud's thesis on group psychology and other core concepts, including the id, ego and superego, are utilised to evaluate my existing research on the competing discourses, Child Protection Discourse (CPD) versus False Allegations Discourse (FAD), on uncorroborated allegations of child sexual, i.e. A said/B said cases.
Featured Image
Photo by Sebastian Svenson on Unsplash
Why is it important?
It is important to try to understand what drives individuals join an opposing group in response to claims of child sexual abuse that are not corroborated with any other form of evidence, i.e. A said/B said cases. Why do they not simply remain neutral or objective? What do individuals obtain from choosing the group or camp that they chose? What do they give up as individuals as a consequence of their choice? It is equally important to try to determine what, if anything, might be done to reduce the existing forms of injustice and harm that the competing groups on uncorroborated allegations of child sexual abuse currently inflict upon innocent victims on the opposing sides, i.e. genuine victims of child sexual abuse that are not believed and/or the wrongful conviction of innocent victims of false allegations.
Perspectives
I hope that this chapter is helpful in highlighting the perils of giving up individual responsibility for our thoughts and deeds done in our name, and with our consent, when we dive headlong into an opposing group, such as those that relate to uncorroborated allegations of child sexual abuse, which function along unconscious feelings and unrestrained passions and desires to belong; for belonging, and where rationality and truth have no bearing.
MICHAEL NAUGHTON
University of Bristol
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: A Freudian Analysis of the Competing Groups on Uncorroborated Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse, November 2024, Brill,
DOI: 10.1163/9789004713789_018.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
