Benjamin Britten and paedophilia

I read an interesting review in the TLS of a book called Britten's Children by John Bridcut. It's about Britten and his serial infatuations with boys of about thirteen years of age. It seems that these relationships were "chaste", but at the same time most of the boys were aware that Britten was in love with them. The boys - now middle-aged men - interviewed in the book all testified that the relationships were beneficial experiences. To quote from the reviewer: "Britten's [infatuations] were motivated by love, which may have been to a large extent narcissistic - and, as John Bridcut's books reveals, often ended with an abrupt withdrawal of attention when the boy grew up - but which was fundamentally benign."

So Britten was a paedophile - he didn't act sexually on his impulses, but he did emotionally, to the extent that the boys themselves understood what was going on. The reviewer (and it seems the boys themselves) view this as benign. I'm guessing in this age of huge anxiety about paedophilia a lot of people would think otherwise. What do people think? For example, if one of the boys had told his parents what was going on, what should the parents have done, if anything?

In the same vein, my own brother (now married with two kids) had a similar relationship with a history teacher, who showed special interest in him, lent him books, drove him to cricket matches etc. The only "sexual" contact was that the teacher occasionally put his hand on my brother's thigh (my brother was around 12 at the time I think). But my brother knew more or less what was going on. I think now he'd probably describe the relationship as at least not harmful, maybe beneficial.