Os árbitros do desejo e os enteados da natureza: controvérsias e ontologias sobre a categoria pedofilia em torno do DSM - 5

• Autor(a) principal: Oliveira, Denise Cabral Carlos de
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: [e-mail]
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UERJ
• Texto Completo: http://www.bdtd.uerj.br/handle/1/19240
• topic: Pedophilia; DSM; Paraphilias; Controversies; MAPs; Pedofilia; DSM; Parafilias; Controvérsias; MAPs; CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::SAUDE COLETIVA

Pedophilia is a category originated in psychiatry in the late 19th century to describe a species of the so-called sexual perversions or deviations, nowdays paraphilias, which conceptualizes the sexual attraction by adults of pre-pubertal children. It turned the object of legal prohibition and punition, linked to the category of “child sexual abuse”, and of extreme social rejection, that shaped one of the moral/sexual panics since the last decades of the 20th century, in Brasil since the early 2000 years. Nevertheless, it’s noticeable to verify that the category, its definitions and features, and the scientific and political ensuing practices (of research, therapeutic, legal) are the object of a large literature and intense academic, clinical and forensic controversies in many central countries of Europe and North America. The thesis intends to outline recent controversies on the psychiatric diagnosis “pedophilia” around the revision of the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders – DSM - of the American Psychiatric Association and the elaboration of the DSM-5, published in 2013, through a sample of papers of acting authors in the proposals of the revision of the diagnosis, which express various epistemologies, ontologies and deontologies in dispute. The themes of the controversies under analysis are the change of the diagnosis to “pedohebephilia”, the tenure or removal of paraphilias and pedophilia from the Manual and its nature as a sexual “orientation”, “interest” or “preference”. The figuring voices in the controversies include psychiatrists, sexologists, psychologists, historians and an organization of “minor-attracted people” (MAPs), new designation used by a branch of the pedophile activism. The delineation of the controversies is made through their institutional, political, moral, ethical and clinical frames, outlining noteworthy disputes in these positions and a consensus around the “combat” and prevention of child sexual abuse, strong category in almost the whole of the formulations. In spite of this, there is an ideological and political dissent on if psychiatry should be a frame to handle a crime, if this one is a juridical and penal problem and not a medical one, in a criticism of the extension of diagnostic entities for moral and political ends to comply with public opinion and the apparatus of Justice. Forensic psychiatry is a prevailing and decisive field, though not the only one, in the maintenance of the category as a medical diagnosis. On the other hand, the struggles, active in the controversies and activism, over the de-stigmatization of this condition of sexuality, its distinction from sexual violence and for the establishment of a full citinzenship for MAPs, including the respect of their rights of assistance in mental health services, are addressed.