A child sits alone in a gym hallway, evoking child sexual abuse risk factors tied to weak supervision.

The Hidden Conditions that Leave Children Vulnerable to Abuse

Beyond offenders, research points to enabling conditions that make abuse easier to commit and hide.

Ever since working at the University of Illinois on research with Nicole Allen, a national expert in family violence, I have kept returning to the same question: What would it take to prevent the abuse of children and women—not only to punish it after the fact, but to reduce the conditions that allow it to keep recurring?

Several years ago, Public Square Magazine provided initial funding for a research team to gather published studies that get at the roots of this question. Our small team reviewed thousands of studies to identify those focused specifically on risk factors making children more vulnerable to sexual abuse by parents, other relatives, or older teenagers.

These studies from around the world also examine the assault of children ages six to twelve and teenagers in various contexts, including competitive sports clubs, youth-serving nonprofits, churches, and schools, with dating violence also receiving much more attention in recent decades.

For many years, scholarship emphasized individual offenders and individual victims—perpetrator motives, disorders, and victim-level correlates. In more recent decades, researchers have increasingly examined the broader context around abuse: family stability, supervision, peer dynamics, institutional oversight, and community accountability—what some studies call “enabling factors” that make abuse easier to commit and harder to detect.

Last summer, I completed this in-depth review of approximately 500 abuse studies (285 involving adults, 215 involving youth), publishing summary versions of results focused on children and adult victims in the Deseret News, with the full-length, 60-page version released later that fall.  

This three-part series synthesizes findings from that deep dive into the risk factor research focused on the sexual abuse of young people. Part one outlines five recurring patterns that show up across countries and contexts—patterns that tend to increase vulnerability to child sexual abuse by weakening stability, supervision, and community safeguards.

Fragile Economic Well-Being 

Consistently, studies demonstrate that children growing up in families and neighborhoods with limited economic resources are more likely to experience sexual victimization—a risk that appears to grow as poverty deepens (parents unemployed, families going without food, living in substandard housing, adolescents forced to work).

The opposite is also true. For instance, youth whose fathers were employed were “about four times less likely to experience sexual abuse than respondents whose fathers were unemployed,” according to one Nigerian study from 2017.

Limited Educational Opportunities

Children with lower levels of education are more vulnerable to victimization—especially those who drop out completely. As Canadian researchers summarized in a 2007 review, “adolescents who have no intention of pursuing postsecondary schooling or who have not obtained their high school diploma are at greater risk of being victims of sexual and physical violence.”

By comparison, when children grow up where education is encouraged and valued, they are less likely to be sexually victimized. This shows up first in analyses of parental education level—with studies from Africa to Brazil to the U.S. showing that boys and girls whose parents have more education are also more likely to be protected against victimization (with risk consistently increasing as parental education declines).

Children’s own higher education level also decreases this risk, starting with just being in school at all. This is especially true if the schools are smaller, if the child feels comfortable at the school, and if they are doing well academically.

Growing Up Without Both Parents in a Loving Relationship

Following parental separation, divorce, or death, a child naturally experiences more residential instability and often significantly less parental supervision. That frequently includes a greater likelihood of being in close, regular contact with other older men who are “not the biological father.”

Children living with both parents are less likely to be victimized.

Studies frequently show that living with only one parent, whether father or mother, raises the risk of sexual victimization. Divorced parents, according to a 2023 Haitian analysis, are “strongly associated with higher odds of sexual victimization.” One U.S. research team observed in 2009 that “living with a non-intact family” is among the “most robust correlates of any abuse history.”

Consistently, children with incarcerated fathers also were 5.5 times more likely to experience child sexual abuse in one New Zealand analysis. Even higher risk comes when children live with neither of their parents, such as living with friends or another relative; living in foster care or other institutions; or especially if they are homeless and on the streets.

By contrast, multiple studies found that children living with both parents are less likely to be victimized—with the same Nigerian analysis finding children living in these homes “two times less likely to experience sexual abuse.”

Although most sexual abuse happens within homes, studies repeatedly show that children growing up with married parents are less likely to be abused in any way, including sexually. This is especially true when that marital relationship is cooperative and healthy—with “parental togetherness” and “harmony” identified in the Nigerian study as “protective factors that buffer children from sexual abuse.”

No such marital protections exist, however, in the presence of significant amounts of conflict and other kinds of emotional and physical aggression in the marriage and home generally. Another African study found a 2.5-fold increased risk of children being sexually abused when they experienced conflict between parents—a result that aligns with some U.S. data.

Low Quality of the Parent-Child Relationship

While you would expect negative parent-child relationships within any abusive context, there is repeated evidence that poor relationships with a mother and father also precede and predict abuse of various kinds, including sexual violence.

Available studies look specifically at vulnerability to victimization connected to a “lack of closeness” with a parent and “low warmth” relationships within a “rigid” family climate. Children whose parents display harsh, authoritarian parenting behavior are also at greater risk of being sexually victimized.

“Frequent parental monitoring” is connected with less sexual violence.


Also at risk are children whose parents exhibit “laxness of monitoring” and overall neglect. U.S. and Finnish researchers report that “adolescents who had older friends and parents who did not monitor their social relationships were at greater risk of sexual abuse.”

One Canadian study of abusive coaches observed how they often admitted to persuading mothers and fathers to “relinquish some or all parental control” to themselves—with the researchers acknowledging that “for the abused athlete, the bond of trust established between him or herself and the perpetrator is often a substitute for a weak relationship with a parent.”

By contrast, studies in Africa and the U.S. found, unsurprisingly, that “high” and “frequent parental monitoring” is connected with less sexual violence against children and teens. This is also true for positive, warm, healing relationships between parents and children overall.

Spotty Community Accountability

To the extent any community has allowed isolated access to children historically, this has sadly been shown to raise the risk of victimization. That includes abuse connected with ‘unguarded access to children’ by religious leaders, ‘unsupervised coaches,’ rogue law enforcement officers, predatory physicians, leaders of boys’ and girls’ clubs, and other organizations where perpetrators can seek out ‘volunteer work with organizations through which they can meet children.’

One study of 41 serial perpetrators found that 57 percent reported having picked their profession either partly or specifically in order to access children. Such privileged, close contact with youth is often taken for granted within special trusted roles—clergy, coach, teacher, mentor, counselor, camp staff, and scout leader.

Healthy peer groups make such a difference.

This is one reason that children whose families have healthy and ongoing social connections are less likely to be sexually victimized. And it’s why thorough accountability and supervision at the community level reduce the risk of abuse—something many kinds of communities have made progress on in recent decades.

This is also why healthy peer groups make such a difference, and why negative friend and sibling relationships increase the risk of children being sexually abused. That includes settings where older adolescents have “unsupervised opportunity with younger victims.”

In the absence of this kind of proactive, robust community supervision, what’s clear is that isolation of any kind appears to be quickly exploited by adult and older teenage perpetrators. Australian researchers report that sibling sexual abuse is “the most common form of intra-familial child sexual abuse”—an outcome that is more likely among “step-siblings and half-siblings,” when compared with full siblings.

Five groups of young people, in particular, experience higher levels of sexual violence: (1) girls; (2) younger children; (3) youth who identify as sexual/gender minorities; (4) children who have experienced abuse previously; and (5) children with disabilities—all of whom consistently show higher risk for sexual victimization.

In part two, we turn to patterns tied more directly to mental health, risk behaviors, substances, and the evidence on faith and religiosity—factors that can either amplify vulnerability or strengthen protection depending on how they play out in real communities.

If you or someone you love has experienced sexual assault of any kind and needs additional support in the U.S., contact the National Sexual Assault Hotline (1-800-656-HOPE)—with virtual and text-based options available. This is a confidential networking service in the U.S. that helps connect victims with local agencies that can offer therapeutic support across the country. Similar kinds of hotlines exist in many countries around the world.

About the author

Jacob Z. Hess

Jacob Hess is a staff writer and Latter-day Saint Voices editor at Deseret News and publishes longer-form pieces at PublishPeace.net. He co-authored "You're Not as Crazy as I Thought, But You're Still Wrong" and “The Power of Stillness: Mindful Living for Latter-day Saints.” He has a Ph.D. in clinical-community psychology from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
On Key

You Might Also Like

“You’re Cordially Invited” Movie Review 2025

“You’re Cordially Invited” is a movie about terrible behavior before a wedding. In an intriguing riff on the premise, the brides are the ones on their best behavior. When Jim (Will Ferrell) calls the venue where he and his late wife were married to schedule the wedding of his daughter, the desk agent confirms,. However, her pen runs out of ink, and she falls over dead before she can replace it. So when Margot (Reese Witherspoon) calls to book the venue located on the property her grandmother used to live on for her sister’s wedding, the event is double booked. A year later, when both wedding parties arrive on the same day, explosions ensue. The screenplay tracks the goodwill between the parties cratering until it hits its nadir with Will Ferrell capturing an alligator, taking it back to the inn, and now that he’s hit rock bottom, deciding he shouldn’t actually release the gator into the other wedding reception. Phew! Character growth achieved, and crisis averted. Performances and Direction In terms of feel, quality, and laughs, I’d put this somewhere between “Bride Wars,” the clunker with Kate Hudson and Anne Hathaway also fighting over a wedding venue, and “The Proposal” the serviceable feel-good that places the relationship in a broader family dynamic. The players here are all high quality. Will Ferrell and Reese Witherspoon are professionals putting on a good show, and they have more chemistry then I would have guessed. Jimmy Tatro who plays one of the grooms, Keyla Monterroso Mejia who plays one of the bridesmaids/wedding planners, and Vinny Thomas, who plays Margot’s assistant, all bring energy and life to the script. And it’s clear that it’s being helmed by a steady hand, Nicholas Stoller, who has built a career on raunchy middle-of-the-road comedies of decreasing quality. And I’d say, of his films, this one is really only better than “Storks” or maybe “Neighbors 2.”  Weak Writing and Cultural Commentary The movie lacks any real zest or inspiration. It’s not unfunny, I just can’t imagine remembering any of the jokes in a few days. And while the film spends a lot of time trying to make fun of woke-scolds, the film also seems too scared of them for these jokes to ever really work.   The bigger problem is that the entire film is drenched in profanity. It’s as though someone wrote a perfectly fine middle-of-the-road rom-com. The studio said it needed to be ten minutes longer, so they decided to add ten minutes of F words.  They are pointless and degrading, and makes what is otherwise a fine if uninspiring film one that is decidedly worth avoiding.  The film is also a bit of a window into how culture views marriage, and it’s not all inspiring. The film concludes that a couple who dated for several years through college, and is happy moving in together across the country, with stable jobs, are better off getting their marriage annulled because marriage is just such a big step.  This film also continues the trend of promoting family reconciliation by processing psychological trauma, by blaming whatever generation is older than whoever wrote the movie. It’s long been a trope to blame the parents, but now we’re reconciling with the parents by blaming the grandparents. “Encanto” did it well, but the new variation of the trope is already starting to wear thin. I think the only people who will truly love this film are those who buy in to the Witherspoon-Ferrell chemistry so much they are willing to watch it go anywhere. I wouldn’t watch this movie with children.  One and a half out of five stars. “You’re Cordially Invited” releases on Amazon Prime on January 30, 2025. Related Articles  In Pursuit of the Perfect Family Movie Heretic in Real Life: A Missionary’s True Story of Survival and Faith Is There Anyone Who Shouldn’t Watch “Rule Breakers”? Public Square Magazine Film of the Year: Corpus Christi 

Dune: Part Two

I can’t wait to watch Dune: Part Two with my kids. Dune: Part Two is so good it lodges itself (and retroactively lifts its predecessor) into the pantheon of great epic movie trilogies. Depending on whether or not the third and final installment can stick the landing, I suspect it will be spoken of in the same breath as Lord of The Rings, The Dark Knight, and Star Wars.   Like the first two of those trilogies, however, the film is not right for young children. Dune deals with serious themes such as drug use, religion, violence, colonialism, gender, and terrorism. It does so in a way that avoids the overly simplistic explanations appropriate for younger kids, but that is honest and thought-provoking. The film provides easy access to difficult conversations with teens while telling a thrilling story, and adults will leave feeling satisfied and contemplative about some of the film’s broader implications.  The film picks up in the aftermath of the Harkonnen’s capture of Arrakis from House Atreides, and Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) taking a place among the local Freman. For a part two, the film is remarkably well contained with a clear beginning, middle, and end. I wouldn’t recommend coming into this film without watching the first, but if you did, you would certainly enjoy the story on its own merits.  For Latter-day Saints, the film’s most poignant themes revolve around the nature and abuse of power. Among the Fremen, Paul is believed to be the Mahdi, a Messianic figure they expect will return them to control of their lands. Paul is torn between seeking vengeance for the defeat of his family and moving on by integrating into the Fremen society. The faction of Fremen who view Paul as the Mahdi complicates this by holding out the opportunity for the power he needs to seek out revenge. The ethics of how Paul wields that potential power are among the most potent themes of the film, one sure to be further explored in the trilogy’s final installment. The director, Denis Villeneuve, is in top form here. His shots are each expertly crafted art pieces on their own merits. They lend weight to the themes he’s exploring, and he weaves them together like a composer weaving together the themes of a symphony. He even includes an extended black-and-white motif that just works. You don’t even question it.  The script is well paced. It never lags like sometimes happened in the first installment, but also gives plenty of space for its beats to breathe. It’s never confusing, but also doesn’t feel the need to over explain to its audience. Just as in the first film, the sci-fi is absurd—dragonfly-like helicopters, giant worms, and magic yelling. But the imagination here makes them feel completely authentic. You can’t help but buy in. Perhaps the most fun new element—riding the sandworms—is so thoughtfully considered it feels obvious, quite a feet for a film that wants you to buy the reality of riding a worm.    Chalamet leads a stellar cast here that has added Florence Pugh, Christopher Walken, and Austen Butler. Butler in particular inhabits the grotesque Harkonnens in a way that feels both terrifying and authentic. As for the returning cast, Javier Bardem, Rebecca Ferguson, and Stellan Skarsgård are standouts. A lot of weight is put on Zendaya in this film and she is substantially up to the task. Dune: Part Two is a great story wrapped in a world class sensory experience executed by artisans at the top of their craft. It is certainly not a film for kids, but I imagine many parents connecting to their teens over it, and I would heartily endorse it to them. Five out of five stars.