Dr Michael Davis1,2,3
1Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia, 2Department of Psychiatry, Monash University, Australia, 3Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne, Australia
Biography:
Dr Michael Davis is a is a Consultant Forensic Clinical Psychologist in full-time practice. He has adjunct appointments at Monash, Melbourne, and Swinburne Universities and is a consultant to the Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health (Forensicare). Dr Davis’ practice is divided between forensic assessment tasks and providing behavioural investigative advice to police agencies. He has consulted with police across three continents and is the only mental health professional in Australia to be elected to the International Criminal Investigative Analysis Fellowship (ICIAF). He also serves as an Instructor to the Behavioral Analysis Unit of the FBI in the United States.
Paraphilic disorders are important constructs in forensic mental health practice. Sexual deviance is the most potent risk factor for sexual reoffending and also constitutes an important treatment target and responsivity factor. Paedophilic Disorder, involving a sexual preference for pre-pubescent children, is well established as a paraphilic disorder. However, Hebephilia, involving a sexual preference for pubescent children, has been a topic of considerable debate in recent decades. A combined Paedohebephilic Disorder was proposed for DSM-5 in 2013, but was heavily criticised. Indeed, some described hebephilia as a “fictitious diagnosis” and others considered a sexual interest in pubescent children to be normative. Ultimately hebephilia was not included in the DSM-5 or the subsequent ICD-11. This presentation will review the construct of hebephilia and consider it alongside other chronophilias such as paedophilia and ephebophilia. Previous criticisms will be considered in the context of recent empirical research results. It will be concluded that there are considerable overlaps between hebephilic and paedophilic sexual interests, such that hebephilia should be appropriately viewed as a paraphilic disorder. Recommendations for research and practice will be described, including a greater focus on Tanner stages of development than victim age, and an appreciation of the sexual response gradient model when differentiating those with truly paraphilic hebephilia from those with a teleiophilic or ephebophilic preference who sexually victimise pubescent or pre-pubescent children.