AS The National reported yesterday, Police Scotland has launched a new campaign targeting child sexual predators. It comes after new figures revealed that almost 1600 reports of online child sexual abuse were investigated between April 2018 and last month. Nearly a hundred of these were incidents involving grooming.

An increase in reported incidents is attributed to greater awareness of grooming, but also the fact far more children have access to technology.

The campaign has been developed with Stop It Now, a charity that aims to prevent child abuse by increasing awareness among parents and community members. It also works with offenders and would-be offenders. Together with Police Scotland, the organisation has developed a series of messages designed to tap into an offender’s “biggest fear” – getting caught.

Given the sheer volume of offences committed in a relatively short period, it’s encouraging to see the police taking action to tackle the problem head-on. That said, I’m troubled by the reported words from a senior officer regarding perpetrators. Namely, that they may not see the children as victims or themselves as abusers.

In Scotland, grooming has a precise meaning. It was introduced as an offence under the Protection of Children and Prevention of Sexual Offences Act 2005. The law describes grooming as the intentional development of a relationship with a young person under 16 to engender their trust and coerce them into a vulnerable situation where they can be sexually assaulted. This is why Assistant Chief Constable Gillian MacDonald’s assessment is troubling. The law is not vague about intention and such words, however well-meaning, distance perpetrators from the offences they commit. Abusers cleave to exonerating myths like this, which are contrary to the calculated way which children are sexually groomed online. In 2003, Dr Rachel O’Connell, a researcher with expertise in grooming and the internet, analysed the methods employed by abusers in grooming children.

In many ways, the process mirrors adult offline seduction. O’Connell identified how abusers choose their victims, via three criteria: accessibility, opportunity and vulnerability – the latter being the most important as it is this which is exploited manipulate the child. From her analysis, grooming moves through seven specific stages. It starts with the forming of friendship, then a relationship, during which time an abuser will seek to gain as much information about the child as possible which they can use to their advantage. An abuser will then risk-assess the situation with regard to the likelihood of anyone discovering their communications. From there, they will steer the conversation to make the child feel special and understood, leading them to believe they have a best friend and confidant. Then once the mutual trust is established, the sexual aspect of the conversation begins, where a child is pressed to divulge intimate information to the abuser.

It’s at this point an abuser will likely encourage the child to create sexual images for them and may then seek to enact sexual fantasies with the child. There is a considerable investment of time made by a perpetrator to get a child to the stage that they are willing to do as they are asked. Where in this process is the end result not absolutely clear?

The final stage characteristic of the process is damage limitation by the adult, where they will praise the child as a means of mitigating the risk of their exchange being divulged to a trusted third party, such a parent, friend or teacher. They might use phrases like “I love you” or “this is our secret”.

As you can see, there is nothing accidental about this. Online child grooming is a deeply calculated activity. It is deliberate, and it seems highly doubtful that any right-minded adult could honestly consider their behaviour acceptable set against the social landscape and the sexual mores of the UK.

No-one asks a minor for sexual content without knowing it is wrong.

The police campaign will run online for four weeks. The messaging features an emoji and the words “Targeting kids online for sex?” alongside a number of slogans such as: “How will it affect your family?” and “Who would employ you?”, “Get ready to kiss your freedom goodbye”. What a perpetrator stands to lose if they continue to offend is seen to be the most effective deterrent.

There is one grievous omission from this and that is the victim. The campaign focuses on the costs to the abuser. Their partners might leave them, they might get fired. It’s all about them, echoing the power dynamic central to the abuse itself.

From a behaviour-change campaign approach, I understand why they’ve taken this approach – as human beings we are wired to be twitchy about loss, be it of money, status or power. But all this campaign does is underline what the stakes are, emphasising how important it is not to get caught, rather than focusing on why child abuse is such a heinous crime.

Is it really solving anything long-term, or do these messages simply act as a temporary deterrent to illegal behaviour? At least if the predator gets caught, you can do something about it. This campaign risks pushing them further into the shadows, finding ever-more creative ways to manipulate their victims and hide the evidence of their crimes.

When it comes to child abuse, our focus should be on the victims. We must understand the cumulative social cost. Studies have shown that children who are abused are more likely to participate in crime and to be victimised again in the course of their lives.

They are more likely to suffer from mental health issues such anxiety and depression, PTSD, dissociation, eating disorders, shame and guilt, sexual and relationship problems and suicide.

Given the potential scale of trauma caused by grooming, it doesn’t seem right to foreground the concerns of the perpetrator in a deterrent campaign.

I hope I’m wrong, and that the campaign is a success, although I am sceptical that anyone will see it and reach out to seek help. By using messaging that focuses on what a predator stands to lose, it airbrushes over the devastating consequences of child sexual abuse for victims and their families, making abuser more likely to think of new ways to protect themselves. Abusers absolutely should stop it now – but because they understand the impact of their actions, not to save their own skins.