B. Rind, P. Tromovitch, and R. Bauserman (1998) reported a meta-analysis of
the relation between sexual abuse in childhood and adolescence and psychol
ogical functioning among college students. Several aspects of their work ha
ve proven to be highly controversial, including their assertion that the re
lation between child sexual abuse and adjustment is quite small and their q
uestioning of whether child sexual abuse should be labeled abuse in scienti
fic inquiry. In this commentary, the authors summarize the controversy that
has ensued, place it in a historical context, discuss the limitations of B
. Rind et al.'s findings, and critique the manner in which those findings a
re presented. The authors also argue for the appropriateness of the term ab
use and for scientific terminology that reflects rather than contradicts co
nsensual public morality.