You shouldn't assume that the child will be negatively affected by a lack of sexual attraction on behalf of someone who previously felt that way.

Attractions come and go for all sorts of reasons and no one has the power to predict whether any factor may cause a relationship to become closer or more distant.

First of all, though, many pedophiles (actually most by an overwhelming majority) are not exclusively attracted to others during prepubescence and as such may honestly seek for the physical relationship to continue long-term, making it no different from early-onset heterosexuality in that way, especially if it's mutual.

I've come to the opinion that a pedophile who intends to "let them down easy" when they reach a certain stage of development is acting immorally. They shouldn't get close to children with intentions to preemptively cut ties because she appears not as attractive to you personally.

You just don't get emotionally involved with someone on such a deep level (assuming it's genuine) and then stop caring... which is what you imply is inevitably the case?

Relationships do change over time and, given the nature of what happens between pedos and kids it's highly vulnerable to change due to circumstance. Sometimes some distancing occurs at various points (not as different from any other relationship), and it's not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes (I would argue much more often than the scenario you posit) it's because the kid stops being attracted / attached to the pedo, rather than the other way around. Or perhaps the family moves to another location. That can be sad for everyone.

But should we never become invested because we fear of eventually saying goodbye?

And, if saying goodbye does happen, whether temporarily or forever (who can know), does the temporary heartbreak of having lost something special outweigh every positive about the special thing over a whole duration?

The main fallacy in your line of thought on this matter: you pose MAPs as the sole "instigators", you pose children as helpless recipients and not contributors to the relationships in their own right, succumbing to the emotional whims of the pedo; when in my experience it is often in fact the other way around, the relationships between pedos and kids are uniquely equal in certain key ways that make it less of an issue than you imagine, and the MAPs are not instigators of action but feelers of emotions that inspire loving kindness whether they are reciprocal or not, but also when they are reciprocal can lead to the type of powerful bonds you describe, often through the exchange of body language and gesture, just as seen between two people of similar age.

Remember, it's the combination of mutual attraction, circumstance, and love that inspires a positive intimate relationship. Even if the sexual part of the attraction (which is just a fragment of an aspect of the big picture) fades somewhat over time, no other part has to necessarily become negatively impacted, especially not to the degree where the relationship could simply be "dropped" by either party. To assume an always negative outcome of an affair minus the sex means to suggest that the affair was only positive because of the sex, mutual chemistry, whatever... And although that's a notably unhealthy scenario I think you will see (if you pay attention to the qualities of these relationships we talk about other than the attraction which tends to inspire them) that none of us are really about that especially if the girls themselves are not!

In short, this is a common misconception.

~ Loom