ABSTRACT
This article presents a review of all types of child sexual abuse research ignored by Rind, Tromovitch, and Bauserman in their 1581998 meta-analylic study. Eight major findings are addressed. Altogether, these findings demonstrate the narrow focus of the Rind et al. meta-analysis. By restricting a supposedly broad meta-analysis to only some of the research and population in question, the conclusions Rind et al. drew regarding this complex topic (primarily, that adult-child sex is not necessarily harmful to children) are invalid. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <getinfo@haworthpressinc.com> Website: <https://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.)
