Epstein Secrets

tors influencing CSA disclosure have served the field well but are no longer current. Important contributions on CSA disclosures include Paine and Hansen's (2002) original review covering the liter- ature largely from the premillennium era, followed by London, Bruck, Ceci, and Shuman's (2005) subseque

the current review. Given the persistence of delayed disclosures with research showing a large number of survivors only dis- closing in adulthood (Collin-Vezina et al., 2015; Easton, 2013; Ilunter, 2011; McElvaney, 2015; Smith et al., 2000), these issues should be a concern for practitioners, policy makers, and t

tors influencing CSA disclosure have served the field well but are no longer current. Important contributions on CSA disclosures include Paine and Hansen's (2002) original review covering the liter- ature largely from the premillennium era, followed by London, Bruck, Ceci, and Shuman's (2005) subseque

the current review. Given the persistence of delayed disclosures with research showing a large number of survivors only dis- closing in adulthood (Collin-Vezina et al., 2015; Easton, 2013; Hunter, 2011; McElvaney, 2015; Smith et al., 2000), these issues should be a concern for practitioners, policy makers, and th

tors influencing CSA disclosure have served the field well but are no longer current. Important contributions on CSA disclosures include Paine and Hansen's (2002) original review covering the liter- ature largely from the premillennium era, followed by London, Bruck, Ceci, and Shuman's (2005) subseque

sonal factors of child victims, knowledge construction has shifted to fuller social— ecological, person-in-environment explanations (Alaggia, 2010; Collin-Vezina et al., 2015; Easton et al., 2014; Hunter, 2011; Ungar, Tutty, McConnell, Barter, & Fairholm, 2009b). Social-ecological explanations open up more opportun