Child pornography and the restitution revolution.

Source: (2013) The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 103(2): 343-406.

Victims of child pornography are now successfully seeking restitution
from defendants convicted of watching and trading their images.
Restitution in child pornography cases, however, represents a dramatic
departure from traditional concepts of restitution. This Article offers the
first critique of this restitution revolution. Traditional restitution is
grounded in notions of unjust enrichment and seeks to restore the economic
status quo between parties by requiring disgorgement of ill-gotten gains.
The restitution being ordered in increasing numbers of child pornography cases does not serve this purpose. Instead, child pornography victims are
receiving restitution simply for having their images viewed. This royaltytype
approach to restitution amounts to a criminal version of damages for
pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life. To justify this
transformation of restitution, courts have come to rely on several
commonly accepted, but flawed, theories about the impact of child
pornography. Because these theories are unsupported by social science or
law, they divert attention from remedies that could better alleviate the
harms of child pornography. Rather than encouraging victims to move
forward with their lives, restitution roots them in their abuse experience,
potentially causing additional psychological harm. Restitution in its new
form also allows the criminal justice system to be a state-sponsored vehicle
for personal vengeance. This Article calls for an end to the restitution
revolution and proposes several alternative approaches that better identify
and address the consequences of child pornography. (author’s abstract)