PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 12, 2026Child & Family Social Work1 citationsOpen Access

Financially Coerced ‘Self‐Produced’ Child Sexual Exploitation Material: Narratives of Accountability

View Full Paper
GBGenevieve BloxsomThe University of MelbourneGMGemma McKibbinThe University of MelbourneJDJim DavidsonBureau of Meteorology

Key Points

  • The aim is to explore how professionals construct narratives of accountability for children coerced into producing sexual exploitation material.
  • Conducted in-depth interviews with 21 professionals from child protection services, out-of-home care, and police.
  • Analyzed interview data using thematic analysis and applied a narrative lens to understand accountability perceptions.
  • Identified six categories of accountability related to perpetrators and the broader societal context.
  • Most professionals recognized the need for perpetrator accountability, presenting it as a counter narrative.
  • Instances of victim-blaming narratives emerged, showing inconsistencies in perceptions of accountability.
  • Discussions included the accountability of larger entities like Big Tech in contributing to the issue.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Perpetrators financially coerce children to ‘self‐produce’ child sexual exploitation material (CSEM). A harmful dominant narrative has historically blamed victims by framing this form of child sexual exploitation as ‘children engaging in sex work’ obfuscating the tactics of perpetrators. There is limited evidence about the way professionals who support these children construct accountability. This study aimed to explore professionals' constructions of accountability when supporting victims of financially coerced ‘self‐produced’ child sexual exploitation material. Participants ( n = 21) were professionals from statutory child protection ( n = 10), out‐of‐home care ( n = 10) and police ( n = 1) employed in Victoria, Australia. In‐depth 1‐h interviews generated data that were inductively thematically analysed, and a narrative lens was then applied. Six categories of accountability were identified that pointed to perpetrator accountability as a counter narrative supported by the majority of professionals. However, professionals ‘slipped’ back to a victim‐blaming narrative at times and also ‘lurched forward’ towards narratives that held other entities to account, such as Big Tech. These slippages—both forward and backwards—are discussed in terms of recognizing narratives of accountability that offer opportunities to progress CSE responses, conceptualizing a multi‐agency stakeholder response group broader than traditional child protection workers and police, as well as opportunities to challenge inaccurate assumptions about financially coerced CSEM.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bloxsom et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69db37254fe01fead37c5250https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.70193
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Challenges in investigating self-generated online child sexual abuse material2024 · 3 citations
  2. 2Child sexual abuse material and end-to-end encryption on social media platforms: an overview2022 · 16 citations
  3. 3Affordances, Social Media and the Criminogenic Nature of the Internet: Technology-Mediated Child Sexual Abuse2021 · 9 citations
  4. 4Listening to Young Children: Experts in Their Own Lives2005 · 132 citations
  5. 5Substance Abuse Amongst Adolescents: An Issue of Public Health Significance2022 · 60 citations