Epstein Secrets

n of a universal definition of sexual grooming. 3502-034 Page 7 of 13 EFTA_00001691 EFTA00157032 8 e G. M. WINTERS ET AL. Of note, Bennett and O'Donohue (2014) highlighted the conceptual and measurement issues associated with the construct of sexual grooming of children. The authors outline valuable

rooming, which can be problematic given that sexual grooming strategies can change between different offenders and varying contexts. As Bennett and O'Donohue (2014) noted, a definition must be specific, but not overly inclusive, in order to 3502-034 Page 5 of 13 EFIA_00001689 EFTA00157030 6 G. M. WI

oming behaviors as solely pre-offense actions thereby limiting the scope of sexual grooming tactics employed by offenders (e.g., Brackenridge 2001; Howitt and Sheldon 2007). Therefore, a definition of sexual grooming should note that maintenance behaviors may be enacted after the sexual abuse has occur

and victim. Some of the prior definitions have narrowly defined the type of offender or victim involved in the sexual grooming process. For example, Howitt (1995) used the term "pedophile," which typically refers to individuals who are primarily or exclusively sexually attracted to prepubescent childre

raditionally not included as a part of the research method in the social sciences and also because it involves the inherent complexity of language (O'Donohue, 2013). Here, conceptual analysis of the grooming construct is necessary in the research process, as it is a salient example where the complexity o

W. ODonobue TABLE 1 General Definitions of Grooming Author(s) Definition of Grooming (taken directly from reference) Sgroi (1982) Salter (1995) Howitt (1995) Labors (1997) Gallagher (1999) Brackenridge (2001) Gillespie (2002) Berson (2003) O'Connell (2003) Spiegel (2003) Craven, Brown, an

e environment and significant others 3.Grooming the child McAlinclen (2006) I. Personal 2. Familial 3. Institutional Wyre (1987)as discussed in Howitt I. Extrafamilial (1995) 2. Intrafamilial definitions share some key similarities, many behaviors may he classified as grooming under some defini

raditionally not included as a part of the research method in the social sciences and also because it involves the inherent complexity of language (O'Donohue, 2013). Here, conceptual analysis of the grooming construct is necessary in the research process, as it is a salient example where the complexity o

er life (Berliner & Conte, 1990; Leberg, 1997). The abuser builds the child's trust (Christiansen & Blake, 1990; Leberg, 1997; Wyre, 1987, cited in Howitt, 1995; van Dam, 2001), makes him or her feel good (Warner, 2000) and then starts to violate boundaries (Christiansen & Blake, 1990; van Dam, 2001).

kinds of definitional features are pro- posed. For example, one definition mentions "betrayal" (Salter, 1995) while another references "courtship" (Howitt, 1995). Some proposed definitions give concrete examples of grooming (Gallagher, 1999; Sgroi, 1982), while others try to give abstract properties t