Showing posts with label child sexual abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label child sexual abuse. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

CUSTODY CASES Protecting Children from Sexual Abuse

Why Aren't the Children Protected?

By Arlaine Rockey, Attorney at Law [1]

When allegations of child sexual abuse arise during a custody case, unfortunately, the professionals who are involved often look first to question the motives and veracity of the protective parent rather than to what they can do to protect the child. Most people think that making allegations of sexual abuse is a sure way for the protective parent to win the custody case. Nothing could be further from the truth.

There is a backlash in full force in our legal system against protective parents. "Protective parents" are those acting to protect their children from abuse, be it physical or sexual. Protective parents are, much more often than not, mothers. The Fathers Rights Movement has been built on the myth that evil mothers have lodged false allegations of sexual or physical abuse or domestic violence against millions of fathers just to deprive and alienate them from their children.

All states have laws that make it mandatory that people who suspect child abuse or neglect must report it to Child Protective Services (CPS). CPS then must investigate. If there is a custody case ongoing, it is customary for CPS to be highly skeptical of sexual abuse allegations. Perhaps worried about being pawns, CPS generally just doesn't want to get involved. This aversion, unless there is clear medical evidence of or the child's clear disclosure of sexual abuse, often manifests itself in the allegations being unsubstantiated, which makes the CPS investigator a nice witness for the abuser.

Thousands, if not millions, of dollars have been paid to psychologists all over this country who perform court-ordered custody evaluations that label protective parents, sometimes slyly using the key words without the title, as perpetrators of Richard Gardner's bogus Parental Alienation Syndrome ("PAS"), and who even misdiagnose them with real mental problems like Borderline Personality Disorder or Munchausen's Syndrome. These custody evaluations, and their recommendations, are used to force protective parents into unfavorable custody settlements or to fully divest them of custody, doing the unthinkable, giving custody to the abuser.

Misled or desperate protective parents too often consent to the court appointment of a Guardian ad litem (""GAL""), often an attorney, for the children. It sounds like a great idea. Give the children their own attorney who will investigate the case and advocate for the children's best interests. However, all too frequently these attorneys, often well-meaning volunteers, are not experienced in handling cases involving abuse or domestic violence. When faced with abusers who are well-spoken and financially secure wearers of suits and ties, GALs, much like judges, find it hard to believe that these professionals could possibly be abusers. Too many mothers in their desperation to protect their children act a little crazy. They generally make a lot less money than their ex-husbands, which also apparently means they offer less security for their children. If the GALs do not believe the abuse allegations, these protective parents are at risk of having the GAL recommend that the fathers get custody. Like the custody evaluations, GAL recommendations also are used to force protective parents into unfavorable custody settlements or to fully divest them of custody, again, doing the unthinkable, giving custody to the abuser.

This reality sounds unbelievable, even crazy, but it is happening all over this country. Why is it happening? Some people swear that judges and lawyers are being paid under the table to take children from protective parents. Others say that federal child support enforcement money, used in part to give legal advice to fathers, is being misused to influence and possibly pay lawyers and judges, maybe even psychologists, who help fathers win custody. Perhaps the reason is a lack of training of judges, lawyers, GALs, psychologists, and Child Protective Services workers about how to investigate sexual abuse allegations and about the characteristics of the abused and the abusers. Maybe it is because sexual abuse is so despicable, that people just do not want to believe it really happens. Whatever the reasons, protective parents fighting to protect their children now are stuck with this reality, and the best thing they can do is try to find an attorney highly experienced with these issues and navigate the minefield.

Navigating the Minefield[2]

As a protective parent, I tell my clients that you cannot afford to risk more problems by being an activist to change the world during your case. After your case is over, there will be plenty of time to do the important work of organizing coalitions, seeking publicity about damaging judges and unjust outcomes, and trying to change the law and the reality. Right now, while seeking a support group is a good idea, you need to focus on what you can do to maximize the chances for success in your custody case.

Custody cases involving sexual abuse allegations become very expensive. Although there is a chance, if you prevail in your custody case, that the opposing party might be ordered to pay or reimburse your attorney's fees, generally you are going to have to advance your litigation costs, and possibly risk having to pay attorney's fees to the opposing party should you lose. Not only do you have to pay for an attorney, unless you are lucky enough to find a legal aid attorney to take your case, you also will have to pay for other costs such as expert witnesses, psychological evaluations, copies of medical records, and depositions. Underlying everything suggested in this article is the supposition that you can find the money to pay all litigation costs either yourself or through your family, friends, credit cards or loans.

Your goal is to protect your child or children[3] from being sexually abused. In a custody case, this translates into the abuser hopefully at least getting supervised visitation if not therapeutic visitation or none at all for a while. The sooner you can get a court order limiting the abusers access to the child the better. Most states have laws allowing the Court to enter an emergency temporary custody order to protect the child from abuse, and also there is usually the option to apply for a domestic violence temporary restraining order to protect the child from sexual abuse. Deciding which immediate option to use should be discussed, as with all the other possibilities mentioned in this article, with your attorney. It is best to go to Court as soon as possible for a temporary order either stopping visitation or making it supervised until the sexual abuse allegations can be investigated by CPS, doctors, and a forensic psychologist.

Chronological History

To prepare for your case you should create a detailed chronological history of all of the things that have occurred that might be evidence of sexual abuse to give to your attorney.[4] This history should include anything that might be relevant to the possible sexual abuse, such as:

  • Sexual acting out with a sibling or another child or adult
  • Use of a toy or object in a sexual manner
  • Repeated irritation around private parts
  • Disclosures (child telling you or someone else about the abuse)
  • Venereal disease, yeast infections, urinary tract infections
  • Dates of visits or time spent alone, including at night, with the alleged abuser
  • Complaints of pain urinating or using bathroom
  • Enuresis or encopresis after being potty trained
  • Self-mutilation (cutting, hair pulling etc.)
  • Discharge from vagina or in underwear
  • Blood or tears around vagina or anus
  • Night terrors
  • Saying or doing things that show a more advanced knowledge of sex
  • Masturbation (although most masturbating in children is normal behavior)
  • Abuser shows child favoritism, gives child gifts

Also write down other relevant information such as:

  • List of all people who have access to the child (possible abusers)
  • List of all witnesses who might have heard or have seen the child say or do something unusual, and all caretakers, with their names, addresses and telephone numbers

Make chronological history of any physical abuse of child, siblings, or yourself from abuser.

  • Write about abuser's history, including any history of being abused, of any other people in his family who were abused or abusers, any criminal record, history of alcohol or drug abuse, names and addresses of his former wives or girlfriends.
  • Use of child pornography by the abuser

Document, Document, Document

Throughout your case, you need to document, document, document. Take photos of any injuries and of anything else you can document, for example, the child dressed by abuser in provocative, or age-inappropriate clothing.

Keep all physical evidence, which is anything you can touch, such as soiled underwear (put it in a zip lock bag), objects child has used sexually, provocative or nude photographs that the abuser has taken of the child, pictures the child has drawn that seem sexual, and stories or letters the child has written that are relevant.[5] Request all medical records from your child's pediatrician and hospitalizations if any visits had any relevance. Get complete copies of your child's school files to see if there is anything helpful in there. After consulting with your attorney about the legality in your state, tape conversations between you and the abuser, particularly during the exchange of the child for visitations and phone calls. If legal in your state, and generally it is not legal, tape conversations between the abuser and your child. You can also discuss with your attorney secretly videotaping some of your child's sexual acting out behaviors. Communicate with the abuser during the pendency of the case in writing as much as possible (email is a great alternative) so that you can use it in evidence at trial. You also should confide in at least one, preferably two friends, not just family members, about the things that are going on as they happen, soon after they happen, when you are upset about things because later these people will be able to testify and corroborate what you said happened and because there is a hearsay exception for excited utterances that will allow them to testify to what you told them.

Doctors & Therapists

Take your child to the doctor if there is any complaint from your child about pain in the private parts or some other evidence of sexual abuse, such as sperm or a discharge in the child's underwear, or if the child tells you something that makes you think that the child has been sexually abused. It is critical that you take your child to a doctor or a therapist soon after the child tells you or another person anything about the sexual abuse so that you (or the other person) will later be able to testify to what the child said at trial. Remember, if there is physical evidence on the child, not to bathe the child first and to take any relevant clothing in a zip lock to show the doctor. It is far better to take your child to the emergency room of your city's public hospital right away than the child's pediatrician. Most emergency rooms have doctors who are trained to handle sexual abuse examinations and most ER rooms have special social workers who will make the call to CPS to report it, which looks better than the report coming from you, especially if you are in an ongoing custody case. When you go to the doctor, be sure to tell the doctor everything the child told you. You can afterwards take your child to her/his pediatrician for a follow-up and to let the pediatrician know what has been happening. Again tell the pediatrician what your child told you. These statements will be written in the doctor's and hospital records and can later be used as evidence as there is a hearsay exception for statements in aid of treatment. The child's statements that prompted you to take the child to the ER or doctor also can come into evidence under this same hearsay exception. It is impossible to get the child's statements into evidence without a hearsay exception. It is also a good idea to put your child in therapy or to encourage your child to speak with the school counselor so that there are other third parties who can later testify to what the child has said.

How You Play the Game

Most people think that only things that occurred prior to the custody case being filed are important in the final custody decision, but that is mistaken. Custody cases can easily last for a year or more. What happens and how you conduct yourself during the pendency of the court case is very important to the outcome. I tell my clients that their case is like a chess game, and it really matters how you play the game. You need to be on guard throughout the pendency of the case. It should go without saying that you need to make sure that you are squeaky clean because you never know if there is a private investigator watching you or whether you might have bad luck and get caught driving drunk or smoking pot. You also should not have persons of the opposite sex who are not related to you spend the night or live with you if at all possible. If your child or children are sexually acting out, you should clearly tell them that that behavior is not acceptable and then redirect them. You can talk with your child's therapist as to how to handle this situation without shaming your child and about teaching your child about boundaries, but to avoid being criticized at trial, you need to clearly tell your children that the sexually acting out behavior is inappropriate. You also need to make sure your children are supervised closely and do not allow them to sleep in the same room together. You want to avoid giving the abuser opportunities to turn the tables and focus the case on you instead of him.

Combating Allegations of Parental Alienation (PAS)

A very important piece and one of the most difficult things for protective parents to do is to allow the child to go to visits with the abuser during the pendency of the case, especially if the abuser has been granted unsupervised visitation pending the trial. However, it is absolutely critical to follow the Court's Orders. If you withhold visitation and are found in contempt of court, you could risk losing custody of your child to the abuser. It is equally important to appear to encourage your child's relationship with the abuser during the pendency of the case because if you do not, it will be used against you. One of the biggest factors in custody cases is that judges want to give custody to the parent who will encourage the child's relationship with the other parent. Obviously, this sounds crazy when you are convinced that the other parent is sexually abusing your child, but you have to be ever mindful of it and actually do things that will prove that you have encouraged the child's relationship with the other parent, despite what you believe. When a protective parent talks badly about the abusive parent, allows others to do so, or does other things to make the child fear or hate the abuser, then the protective parent is in danger of being labeled as having alienated the child from the other parent. Of course, one of the most critical factors in proving parental alienation is that the child actually has expressed or otherwise exhibited hatred or fear of the abusive parent. These cases can make a protective parent a bit crazy because it should be perfectly normal for a sexually abused child to fear or hate the abuser, but it is more likely that the child actually loves the abusive parent.[6] Moreover, if evidence of alienation is shown in the custody (psychological) evaluation or any other evidence (including the abuser's own testimony) at trial, it will be used against the protective parent and could work to give the abuser custody of the child. It sounds crazy to do nice things for the abuser, but it will help you in your case and fend off any attempt by him to say you have alienated the child from him.

Here are some ways to create evidence that you are NOT alienating your child from the abuser. With all of these, you need to take photographs of the items or make copies of them to keep for evidence:

  • Have the child make gifts and/or cards for the abuser (birthday & all holidays)
  • Make sure the child calls the abuser at least every other evening, preferably from a cell phone so you will have a record of the telephone number called
  • In writing (email is fine) inform the abuser in advance of all regular doctor and dental appointments, and teacher's conferences, and invite him to attend (unless you have a domestic violence restraining order against him), and if he does not attend, send him an email letting him know what happened and what the doctor said or recommended
  • Make copies of all school report cards, progress reports, notes from teachers, and examples of the child's school work and send these to the abuser with a cover letter saying please find X enclosed. Keep copies of your letters and keep the originals or copies of the things you have sent.
  • Send the abuser school pictures, even a few extra for his family, again with a cover letter, and keep a copy for yourself.
  • Be polite and professional in all your communications with the abuser. Remember, everything you say can and will be used against you. He is probably taping your every call.

Cooperate with Child Protective Services

You have to cooperate with CPS in their investigation. If you do not cooperate, you risk CPS turning on you and perhaps charging you with neglect for failure to protect your child. Your attorney should give CPS information that might tend to prove that the sexual abuse has occurred, but do not count on CPS substantiating the sexual abuse. It is best that your attorney try to stay on speaking terms with the CPS investigator(s) because CPS has absolutely no duty to tell anyone what is going on in the investigation and really should not tell anyone what is going on in it, but sometimes CPS will discuss the investigation, most likely with the protective parent and that parent's attorney. It is more likely that CPS will say that the sexual abuse did not occur or that it cannot say whether or not it occurred. Sometimes unsubstantiation happens when there is no direct statement (""disclosure"") by the child saying that the abuser sexually abused the child (for example, touched the child inappropriately or had sexual relations with the child) or no medical evidence. Even if CPS unsubstantiates, the CPS records and investigators still can be helpful to prove that the sexual abuse actually occurred. It may be that both sides call CPS as a witness at trial. Your attorney can turn the CPS witness around to help prove some of the little pieces of the puzzle even if CPS unsubstantiates.

Domestic Violence

It is not unusual for sexual abuse to occur in the context of a battering relationship where the abuser might sexually and even physically abuse the child and also physically and sometimes sexually abuse the mother, who is the protective parent in the custody case. Depending on how long the domestic violence, which I am defining as physical abuse by the abuser against the mother, has been happening, it might have been more difficult for the protective parent to get away from the relationship in order to protect herself and the child. Domestic violence in the context of a child custody case is a complicated topic for another discussion, but suffice it to say that you can also obtain a domestic violence protection or restraining order to protect yourself and the child from the abuse, and that most custody laws now include at least as a factor that the Court should also consider evidence of domestic violence. Some states have a presumption that a perpetrator of domestic violence should not get custody. In trying to get supervised visitation for the abuser in your custody case, sometimes it is easier to prove domestic violence and its effects on the children or physical abuse of the children rather than sexual abuse of the child. So, your attorney needs to attack the case from all angles to achieve the goal of supervised visitation for the abuser.

The Guardian ad Litem

I'm a child advocate, but my advice to you is not to ask for or agree to the appointment of a Guardian ad Litem ("GAL") to represent your child in the custody case. The basic reason for this advice is that a GAL just creates one more variable that you cannot control in your case. My other main reason is that all too often GALs, besides usually not having training in sexual abuse cases, also seem to gravitate toward the parent who appears more stable financially and emotionally ... and in a sexual abuse custody case, that usually turns out to be the abuser. Furthermore, for the case to be settled, the GAL will also have to agree to the settlement. So, if you can avoid having a GAL, do so.

If you end up with a GAL anyway, then you have to cooperate with the GAL and provide information to the GAL. My best suggestion is to treat the GAL the way you would treat a CPS investigator, with caution. Your attorney and you are going to have to keep on the GAL's good side because, just as with recommendations from a custody evaluation, the GAL's recommendations are going to carry a lot of weight with the judge. Your attorney should try to get the GAL's recommendations in writing so that the GAL has to commit to them and so your attorney has advance warning of them. Once the GAL's recommendations come down, you and your attorney need to consider settling the case before trial. Yet, you don't have to roll over if the settlement is not going to protect your child. On the bright side, you might want to consider that even if the GAL's recommendations are not favorable to your position, you can look at them as the worst case scenario for an outcome in the case and negotiate from there.

If you cannot reach a favorable settlement at that juncture, your attorney may be in the unenviable position of fighting against the GAL's recommendations at trial or of trying to win over the GAL. Neither is easy to do. You can actually depose the GAL and call the GAL as a witness at trial, but you are going to need a very experienced custody attorney to be successful, mostly because the Court looks at the GAL as a neutral person with no preconceived biases, and your attorney is going to have to show that the GAL is basically either inept or biased.

The Custody Evaluation

One of the most common tactics in complex custody cases is to ask the Court to appoint a forensic psychologist to perform a custody evaluation, which will supposedly answer some questions and then give recommendations as to what custody and visitation arrangement would be in the children's best interests. Quite often judges rubberstamp the custody evaluation recommendations; so, custody evaluations are muy importante and should be requested and consented to only with extreme caution. Choosing the psychologist is critical. Find a psychologist, preferably three because you will have to negotiate which one to choose, who has experience in sexual abuse, either in evaluation and treatment of victims or perpetrators. You also should investigate to make sure the potential psychologists are not aligned with the Father's Rights Movement. It makes more sense in a sexual abuse case, to have a psychological evaluation done of the child / victim by an expert in child sexual abuse, instead of a regular custody evaluation of everyone; however, if you cannot obtain the former, you need to try your best to get a sexual abuse expert to do the custody evaluation.

Before the Order appointing the custody evaluator is entered, your attorney needs to formulate questions for the evaluator to be included in the Order to focus the evaluation. The questions should address the issues in the case, including asking if the child has been sexually abused and if so, is the alleged abuser (father) the perpetrator. The questions should also address domestic violence and child physical abuse if those are also issues in the case. Then, there are the general questions always included such as what custody and visitation parenting arrangement would best promote the child's best interests. Your attorney should make sure that the questions are carefully drafted so that it is clear that the existence of sexual or physical abuse or domestic violence are determined first as threshold issues before going to general best interest issues; otherwise, the sexual and other abuse issues could be minimized. Be warned that most custody evaluators recommend a form of shared parenting or joint custody, with one parent having primary custody and the other having secondary custody.

Once the custody evaluation Order is entered, your attorney needs to act swiftly to make sure that the evaluator gets copies of, or is alerted to, all the court documents as well as all other relevant documentation, such as CPS records, medical records, school records etc. Your attorney will need to decide what information to give the evaluator because everything you give the psychologist will eventually be given to the abuser. The evaluator may have a questionnaire for you to fill out about your family history and your parenting techniques, etcetera. Again, make sure your attorney reviews everything you write before you submit it to the psychologist. The psychologist will probably meet with you for an introduction and then give you a battery of psychological tests to show whether you have any DSM-IV diagnoses and how you view your child. The psychologist should also give you the Sexual Behavior Inventory test that asks you the frequency in the last six months of a variety of sexualized and normal behaviors in your child or children. The psychologist will meet individually with you and then with the abuser and will observe you with the children and then the other parent with the children.

The psychologist should also meet with or interview the child, although some say they do not want to subject the child to yet another interview. With your attorney's approval as to the legality in your state, you might want to secretly tape your interviews with the psychologist in case there are discrepancies in what you reported when the custody evaluation is finished. You should be careful as to what you say to the psychologist, but at the same time, you have to be honest and remember that on the tests, some questions that are slighty negative about yourself are asked and it is normal to admit certain negative things about oneself. If you deny these things that most people would just admit, it will make you look strange, like you are trying to make yourself appear better than you are. You need to answer honestly and try not to make yourself look better or worse because that finding on the tests is just as, perhaps more, damaging as having a mental disorder because it goes to your credibility.

After the custody evaluation is finished, you and your attorney need to review it, first to see if the psychologist got the facts straight. If there is a glaring problem, your attorney can write letter to the psychologist setting out the discrepancies. Your attorney also should take a deposition of the custody evaluator if the outcome is not favorable to your position. Your attorney should investigate the custody evaluator's background, including his or her resume, books or articles written, conferences at which he or she presented , and any affiliations with certain groups that would show a bias, such as father's rights groups. Your attorney should subpoena the custody evaluator's complete file and review its contents, preferably prior to, or at the deposition, including all "collateral" statements, which are those given by people who you and the abuser named as supportive witnesses, all statements and questionnaires of, and interview notes about, you and the abuser, which may include audio or video tapes, and the results of all mental health examinations. Your attorney should be skilled and meticulous about deposing the custody evaluator in order to find out in advance how the custody evaluator will testify at trial and what holes there are in the custody evaluation.

Hiring a Sexual Abuse Expert

If the psychologist who did the custody evaluation did not adequately address the issue of sexual abuse or found that there was no sexual abuse, depending on the recommendations in the custody evaluation, you might want to hire another psychologist who is an expert in child sexual abuse to critique the custody evaluation and to do another evaluation solely on the issue of sexual abuse. You need to understand that your child's therapist cannot be this evaluator of sexual abuse because it would be a violation of the psychologists'' code of ethics because it is considered acting in a dual role. You need to have a separate psychologist to be your sexual abuse expert to evaluate and form a professional opinion as to whether the sexual abuse occurred. You should definitely have this psychologist interview the child. If your attorney wants your sexual abuse expert to be able to interview the alleged perpetrator, your attorney will probably have to file a motion in the case; however that is a tactical move and must be taken with caution. Do not expect the Court to allow it once a custody evaluation has already been done, which is why it's best to choose a custody evaluator who has experience in sexual abuse in the first place. Furthermore, you need to know that there is no mental test that can tell for sure if someone is a sex abuser. Sexual abuse is proven from a constellation of evidence. Even if you hire a sexual abuse expert, there is no guarantee that the expert is going to arrive at the conclusion that you desire; so, you might not want to tip your hand that you have such an expert until you have to do so. You can expect the other side to want to depose your sexual abuse expert, and you will have to pay to obtain a copy of that deposition even though you did not take it.

The Abuser's Testimony

Your attorney will also want to request discovery from the alleged perpetrator and to take his deposition. You want to have the abuser's version of the facts on the record as soon as possible before he knows what sort of evidence you have. A strategy your attorney might seriously want to consider, in addition to taking the abuser's deposition, is calling the abuser as your first witness at trial. This strategy takes away the opportunity for the abuser to change his story according to how other witnesses testify at trial. Since the custody case is a civil trial, if the abuser takes the Fifth[7] and refuses to testify, the Court can infer that he is in fact guilty of the thing for which he took the Fifth.

The Child's Testimony

There are many ways to get the child victim's statements into evidence at trial without having the child testify at trial. Some have been discussed above, such as the child's statements made to doctors or therapists in aid of treatment or the child's statements made to parents or other caretakers who then take the child to a doctor or a therapist based upon what the child said. Another exception to the hearsay rule is an excited utterance, which means that if the child says something at or soon after the time that something traumatic happens and the child is upset at the time it is said, then the child's statement can be testified to by someone who heard what the child said.

Depending on the facts of your sexual abuse case, you might need to have the child victim testify. To minimize trauma for the child, you and the alleged perpetrator could agree to allow the judge to talk to the child in Chambers alone. However, a better strategy is to ask that just the lawyers and the judge be present and that the courtroom be cleared with even the parents having to leave. This method allows your attorney to direct the questioning on direct examination and also insures that the testimony is on the record, which is important in case your case ends up being appealed.

Other Witnesses at Trial

There are many other witnesses that can be called for trial depending on the time allowed for testimony. Some of these I call professional witnesses: doctors, psychologists, therapists, police officers, teachers, and CPS investigators for example. If there are medical records, sometimes these can come into evidence either by consent or with only brief testimony from the records custodian unless something needs to be explained, in which case you may need to subpoena the doctor. If there is actual medical evidence of sexual abuse, for example, tears or a sexually transmitted disease, you may need to have the doctor testify and explain how that medical evidence would tend to show that sexual abuse occurred. You might also need medical personnel if the child's statements in aid of treatment are not written clearly in the medical records.

You should not forget that you also have to present basic evidence that you are a fit parent and that it is in the child's best interests to be in your custody. Besides all the evidence above, you should choose two or three non-relative witnesses who have witnessed you taking care of the child and who will testify that you are an excellent mother. Friends, neighbors, your child's friend's parents, babysitters, daycare providers, housekeepers, and sometimes church members are possible witnesses. For each possible witness, you should write down for your attorney what you expect that witness to say, the witness' name, address and telephone numbers. Your attorney may want you to contact these witnesses first. A lot of times when it gets right down to court time, people do not want to get involved. Remember, a subpoena can be used to force someone to testify and also to get someone an excuse for work, but if that person is adamant about not testifying, you should probably look somewhere else. to help you in a crunch with your child is very important. You should choose at least one relative to testify, preferably a grandmother or aunt to tell about how your family supports you and has been and will be there for you. It is especially important when there are allegations of sexual abuse if you are asking for supervised visitation for the abuser because having any child basically 24/7 is stressful. All parents need help every so often.

Your Testimony

You probably do not want to hear this bit of news, but your testimony is probably the most important testimony in your custody trial. The reason is that, first of all, when it comes to sexual abuse allegations, you are probably the only witness who can prove most of your case. Your credibility, meaning believability, is absolutely key. You also have to appear to be loving, smart, concerned, and nurturing, and moreover, not appear to be vindictive, lying, manipulative or evil. Mothers still have a more difficult time in custody cases than fathers when the fathers contest custody.

Here are some examples: If a father changes diapers and bathes children, he is viewed as a saint. He gets extra credit. If a mother does it, she gets no points because that is her job. If a mother works full time, or god forbid, overtime, she is viewed as having abandoned her motherly duties. If she has a boyfriend, she is a slut. Throw sexual abuse allegations in the mix and mothers are viewed all the more skeptically by the Court and every other professional involved in the case prior to and at trial.

Your attorney should review your testimony with you prior to trial. You should review your chronological history before you testify. Dates are very important. If you cannot remember a date when you are testifying, do not guess at a specific date, either say you cannot recall or give a general timeframe. Details are very important. You need to paint a picture for the judge so that the judge can see what you're describing as if she or he is watching a movie. You should think of all your five senses while you are testifying and describing what happened. Tell the judge what you saw, heard, felt, smelled or tasted. Take yourself back to the moment you are describing. The more detailed your testimony is, the more believable it will be.

Living with the Law

In the beginning of this article, I outlined some possible reasons why sexually abused children are not protected by the Courts. Sometimes, every so often, judges do get it. Sometimes children are protected. However, you need to also know that there are gradations of protection. The judge might totally stop the abuser's visitation until the abuser gets some help. The judge might give the children therapeutic visitation with the abuser, which generally entails going to therapy together once a week, or the judge might give the abuser visitation supervised by someone else. You can even ask the judge to order the abuser to pay a person from a nanny service to supervise the visits if there is no one else available.

Unfortunately, when there is therapeutic or supervised visitation, the abuser is probably going to try to impress the supervisor so that he can come back to Court with a motion to modify his visitation to try to get unsupervised visitation. You need to be aware that just because the trial is over, it does not mean that the case is over. These types of cases can drag on for years. Courts have jurisdiction (the power to hear the case) over children in custody cases until the child turns eighteen or until one parent dies or has his or her parental rights terminated, whichever occurs first.

If supervised visitation is not going well or if the abuser refuses to attend the visitation for several months and you have a finding of physical or sexual abuse by the Court, you may want to consider filing a Petition to Terminate the abuser's parental rights ("TPR"). In many states, if the abuser does not pay child support for a long period of time, that is also a legal ground, or reason, to TPR. The burden of proof in a TPR hearing is more difficult than in a regular custody case, and not only do you have to prove that there is at least one legal reason to TPR, but the Court also has to find that it is in the child's best interests that the abuser's parental rights are terminated. However, it does happen, and if you have that opportunity, you might want to take it because then you have sole control over the abuser's access to the children in the future.

If you lose your custody case, you need to know that it is rare for a custody case to be overturned on appeal. The reason is because Courts do not want to move children around from home to home. The policy of all Courts is to have permanency for children; so, the appellate courts give the trial judges wide latitude, also known as broad discretion, in formulating custody orders. In each state, there are two levels of Appellate Courts. Generally, the first level is called the Court of Appeals, and the second level is the state Supreme Court. Rarely, you can appeal to the United States Supreme Court if you lose in your state Supreme Court. When you appeal your case, you do not get to put on new evidence or testimony. The only time to present evidence or testimony is at your custody trial itself. For your appeal, the appellate court looks at the transcript of the trial, the court documents filed in the case, and the evidence presented. The only reason you can appeal your case is a legal mistake made by the trial judge, either at trial or in the custody order. You cannot just appeal because you lost your case. If there is no legal mistake, there is no ground for appeal. Sometimes there are only minor mistakes that would not change the outcome of the custody trial, called ""harmless errors."" If the appellate court finds that the errors of the trial judge were harmless errors or that the trial judge did not abuse his or her discretion, then the trial judge's custody order will not be overturned on appeal.

If you are unable to protect your child by way of your custody case, you can consider any criminal charges that might be able to be brought against the abuser, even for other things that the abuser has done wrong. You should consult your attorney to help you evaluate this situation, and if appropriate, contact the authorities. Remember that generally a defendant will get more prison time in Federal Court than in state court. Federal criminal law generally applies to things people do wrong that do or can cross state lines, like sending threats through the mail or crossing a state line to violate a domestic violence restraining order.

There is an underground network that tries to protect children from sexual abuse[8]; however, if you go underground with your child, you will most likely be committing a felony, and if your child is found, then the abuser will stand a good chance of gaining permanent custody of your child, and you may well end up in prison. Furthermore, life underground is incredibly stressful, and it robs your child of the childhood you wanted your child to have.

A more realistic option might be to make sure your child stays in therapy so that she or he will be more likely to disclose any future abuse to the therapist. Teach your child about good touches and bad touches, boundaries and private parts.[9] Do not allow your child to be alone with other children if your child has acted out sexually. Continue to document evidence without letting your child or the abuser know that you are doing so. Remember, disclosure is sometimes a process. Hang in there, get some support from others in your situation and be vigilant. If there is a significant change in circumstances, which could be new evidence of sexual abuse, you can file a motion to modify your custody order.

If you and your attorney have done everything you can think of to prepare and to try your case, then you will be able to live with the outcome a little better, no matter what it is. You want to minimize the ""what ifs."" Sexual abuse is hard to prove, especially where there is no disclosure by the child, no medical evidence and no confession by the abuser. Yet, having these top three pieces of proof is rare. You need to be realistic when you begin your case. However, you must do all that you can to protect your children now before this case is over because after the permanent custody trial is over, you cannot go back and bring up evidence that occurred prior to that trial. You have to bring it all out now or that evidence will be lost.

[1]This article may not be reproduced or republished anywhere without the author's written permission.

[2]This article is general legal information only. It is not legal advice for your case. You should talk to an attorney about your specific case before you implement any of these strategies.

[3]If one child is being sexually abused, all your children, to whom the abuser has access, are at risk of being sexually abused.

[4]Do not give this information to anyone else before you check with your attorney first. In fact, you should consult with your attorney about everything you do and say to anyone else involved in the case to make sure you are doing the right thing for your case.

[5]Something is relevant if it tends to prove that some fact (like that the sexual abuse occurred) is more or less likely to be true.

[6]There will be time for healing after the custody case is over. You can ask the Judge to order the abuser into therapy with the child, in which hopefully the abuser will get to the point where he will acknowledge to the child that he did something wrong. You also can discuss healing with your child's individual therapist. But, during your custody case, the top priority is to protect your child, and to do that, you must win.

[7]""Taking the Fifth"" refers to taking advantage of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that says that a person does not have to testify against himself regarding any crime he might have committed.

[8]This underground has been profiled on TV programs such as ""Dateline"

[9]In doing all this though, you need to be sure not to allow your child to become alienated from the abuser (unless the abuser chooses not to visit, in which case, consider TPR as soon as possible) and to follow the suggestions above for ways to continue to have evidence that you are including the abuser so that he cannot turn the tables on you and try to get custody from you based upon parental alienation.


Arlaine Rockey, Attorney at Law
http://www.attorneyauthor.com

Original Article

The Root of Child Abuse: Anger

Professor Harry J. Gaynor, Ph.D.
President, National Burn Victim Foundation
Member, The American Academy of Experts in Traumatic Stress'
Board of Scientific and Professional Advisors

While this paper focuses on child abuse by burning, it covers other areas of violence: children killing their parents, teachers, schoolmates. The danger signals that disturbed minds send and the anger signs may not be recognized or taken seriously by family members, friends, teachers, or neighbors, until tragedy strikes.

Child abuse by burning is one of the most difficult of injuries to identify properly and to investigate. The search for solutions has been varied, sometime haphazardly and based on innate guesswork, unfounded preconceptions and myths with little, if any, scientific input.

Of 1,356 cases of suspected child abuse reported to the National Burn Victim Foundation (NBVF) between 1975 and 1996, spontaneous acts of violence against children were involved in 176 cases (14%). In 168 of those cases (97%), the parent or guardian caring for the child was known to have an aggressive response behavior. In four cases, the perpetrator was identified as passive. There were four cases of premeditated acts of violence. Of the abusers, males totaled 79 (45%) and females 97 (55%). Two cases were homicides by burning.

Cases involving ignorance and/or willful neglect totaled 466 (35%) of the 1,356 cases. It was determined that accidents accounted for 712 (53%) of the suspicious burn incidents. I could find no data to support the opinion of some medical professionals that major burn insults or the severity of the injury occurred mostly in abuse incidents. Major, moderate and minor burns occurred in all areas of abuse, neglect and accident. Scalding burns totaled 952 (70%) while hot surface contact burns totaled 253 (19%). Other causes of skin irritation wrongfully identified as burns were diarrhea (68), insect bites (39), Ritter's disease (9) and allergies (35).

The aggressive response person is generally reported to be preoccupied with self, displays selfish behavior, and does not give adequate attention to the needs of others. That person displays a lack of concern for the impact anger will have on the recipient. Violent, aggressive response behavior includes verbal and physical attacks on others, labeling others, putting others down, teasing, humiliation of others and sometimes blatant sarcasm. Seen as a person with a short fuse, the aggressive response person may possess not only a quick temper but also a nasty disposition and may act impulsively. Any one or combination of these traits is a "red flag" when searching for a motive in cases of child abuse by burning, or any act of physical violence.

On the other hand, the passive person is aware of hostile anger but keeps it down. If problems persist over time, a blowup or emotional breakdown can be expected. The passive behavior person may avoid the problem, use the "silent treatment," display apathy, use subtle sarcasm, forget things, and does not give adequate attention to personal needs.

When there is a mystery as to how a child was burned and there appears to be no motive, that is the time to explore, in depth, whether the person responsible for the child at the time of the incident is known to possess an aggressive response behavior. A common error is to assume prematurely that the character of the adult is impeccable. An articulate, glib person is capable of covering up a quick temper; that person can and does demonstrate remorse when appropriate. During an investigation, friends, family and associates generally will express an opinion as to whether an adult has a quick temper. If that is established, then a psychological profile follows to identify the adults strengths and weaknesses and determination of whether that individual fits the mold of an aggressive, quick-tempered person.

The Bible addressed "anger" in Proverbs 14, verse 17: "A quick tempered man does foolish things." Verse 18 says, "A hot tempered man stirs up dissension." Proverbs 22, verse 24, says, "Do not make friends with a hot tempered man, do not associate with one easily angered." The hot-tempered man (or woman) flying off at the drop of a hat, was as socially unacceptable then as he (or she) is today.

While the Bible references "angry men," men today have not cornered the market on anger--women can be just as angry in today's violent society. Women, in an act of anger, generally strike out at a single person. Aggressive males can extend their acts of anger and may vent their rage on a larger scale of violence.

Reported child abuse, physical and emotional, in the United States is like a "runaway train," whose engineer fails to see the danger signals along the way. Reports of child abuse are soaring to new heights year after year. Education and training of physicians and investigators in forensics is needed. The need for higher standards of training is tremendous. Violence seen in movies and on home television is turning this countrys youth into believing that aggressive, dangerous anger is an acceptable social behavior. However, we know that aggressive anger results in violent crime. Public service television station have an opportunity to educate their viewers on the subject of violence. We live in a sensationalized society thirsting and bent on sensationalism; it is sensationalism that sells newspapers and draws record numbers of viewers to movie theaters and television programs in which violence is glorified.

Teenage violence is becoming a national crisis. Some sections of the country are beginning to talk about martial law and curfews on youth. Some areas enforce curfews. Further, it seems children and teenagers have no fear of consequences for bad behavior. Students in grade school and high school are beating teachers, stabbing and shooting fellow students and sneaking guns into school. Surely we can anticipate more future teenage violence and the "runaway train" will continue to gain speed into the next generations and beyond. Today's angry youth are destined to become future child abusers. God help us, we must stop that train, now!

Children are the victims of adult anger, not adult inability to control anger, but their unwillingness to change poor behavior. Behavior is changeable. The innocent, trusting infant or small child often becomes a target when there is a domestic disagreement or an outside threatening situation. Some adults' expectations of children are far beyond a childs ability to respond. When the child acts according to his/her age and does not respond to the aggressive adults' expectations, a spontaneous act of violence may occur. In the 172 cases previously mentioned, the child was alone with an abusive adult when burned. Child abusers know that what they are doing to an infant or child is wrong and do not want any witnesses to their bad behavior.

Many child protection programs have failed to identify the basic root of child abuse. Now children are being told to report their parents or guardians to their teachers if they believe they are being abused. Parents from all life styles are now being threatened by their children when they attempt to correct their childrens attitude or behavior. Children are not small adults - they are different, physiologically, biologically and psychologically. Can children really ascertain the difference between abuse and appropriate parental discipline? Remember, Hitler invaded the minds of children, twisting their minds and turning the children against their parents, and he was successful. Could the unthinkable happen in America? It already has. Many parents today hesitate to discipline their child for fear of being accused of child abuse.

Is all anger bad? No, anger is a feeling, and adults and children need to deal with feelings. It is reasonable to be angry when aroused by injustice or something unworthy. The assertive person thinks rationally, acts prudently, feels constructively and stands up firmly for personal convictions in a manner that respects anothers dignity (see Andrew Savicky's, Ph.D. 1990 publication, A World Without Tears). Fortunately, most parents are able to recognize the potential danger in a situation and take steps to remedy it. Most parents have tales to tell of times when they could have crossed the line and harmed a child. If the equation had been weighted with more negative factors, had the incident been just right, the outcome could well have been different.

Violence is not new in our society; however, violence against children when the parent(s) is/are under emotionally stressful circumstances can be identified with a measure of predictability. Most parents are able to exhibit restraint, to walk away when they are angry, or to stop short of striking the child, thus sparing the child from becoming an innocent target for violence.

Certain risk factors that appear in abused children when one or both parents have aggressive/passive personalities include the following: unwanted pregnancy, premature birth, failure of the infant to thrive, disappointment to parent(s) (e.g., sex, birth defect, appearance), hyperactive behavior, a "difficult" child, difficult to nurture, special care needed for the "sickly" child, economic burden, etc.

It is rare that the first act of violence on a child is a thermal insult. The abused, burned child has experienced other acts of violence: excessive slapping, pinching, belt strap and/or buckle on lower legs, arms and back and/or chest areas, hair yanking, pin sticks and then the ultimate most painful - burning.

While the configuration of the burn injury and the thermal source are important when investigating suspicious burns, the history of how the incident occurred is equally important. A forensically supported conclusion must be attained prior to judgement on the suspects character.

Medical professionals receive little (if any) training in medical school to render a professional opinion in a case of child abuse by burning. The physicians in hospital emergency departments or in burn units are often too pressed by time and workload to make a judgement as to whether a burned child was abused, neglected or the victim of an accident. They rarely if ever have all the facts needed to render a professional judgement. Further, during the emergency stage, they are subject to emotionally-packed stories, some second and third hand. Once a doctor states "abuse" or "suspicious," rarely is this opinion challenged.

The physician or nurse is expected to know the answer and thus render an innate opinion or the popular word "suspicious" is used - a term which implies a factor of guilt. During the initial treatment of a burn, many times a wrong decision is made that has far-reaching repercussions and devastating results. Families can become torn apart, with the familys lifestyle disrupted and some times damaged beyond repair.

The cost of investigating reported suspicious incidents of child abuse/neglect, social services, foster care for children, and subsequent legal matters involving prosecutors, public defenders, private attorneys, and the whole process of a trial runs into hundreds of millions of dollars annually. No price can be placed on a person wrongfully stigmatized, falsely charged and tried as a child abuser. Even if found innocent they will always be suspect in the minds of others.

Children in growing numbers are threatening to report their parents as child abusers when a parent attempts to impose proper discipline. A staff physician tells how his 8-year-old son was watching too much television and his room was a mess. The father instructed his son, "No TV and I want to see your room straightened up when I come home tonight." When the father arrived home, the son was watching TV and the room was still a mess. As he began to scold his son loudly, the 8-year-old jumped off the chair, pointed his finger at his father and said, "Dad, if you continue to holler at me, I will tell my teacher, and she will call the police to arrest you for child abuse."

Little girls in school are being told, "Dont sit on a mans lap if you feel uncomfortable." What does that mean? When a small childs father says, "Come, sit on Daddys lap and Ill read you a story," how will she react? Will she make excuses again and again and fear that some terrible thing will happen to her if she sits on a mans lap? What about grandad and Santa Claus, they are men. Children have been lied to by adults; consider the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, the Wicked Witch flying on a broomstick and many other adult fantasies. As children mature they learn that they have been lied to and lying becomes an acceptable tool for them to use.

A single working mother was having a problem with her 11-year-old son. He was hanging out with older boys and using vulgar language. She grounded him and hid their portable TV. He failed to come home after school. The mother was frantic waiting for him. Finally, around 10:30 p.m. he arrived home in a car and sneaked into the dark apartment. The mother started to scold him. He responded by calling her vulgar names. She took his pants down and gave him two "whacks" with a belt and sent him to bed. The next day two police officers came to her place of work and placed her under arrest. She was charged with child abuse and jailed.

A young father hated to change his 3-month-old daughters diapers. One morning while his wife was at work, as he was removing the babys diaper, she began to cry. The father put the baby in the kitchen sink and turned on the hot water to wash off the babys bottom. Knowing the water was too hot, he used the sprayer located at the kitchen sink and burned the babys buttocks and groin area. The baby received deep second degree burns. The incident was termed accidental according to attending physicians. Eight years later, this father was suspected of sexually abusing the same child. He was known to have a violent temper. The case against him for burning his baby daughter was re-opened and he was found guilty of child abuse by burning.

The following data (from the National Child Abuse Protection Agency) demonstrates the national annual reported suspected child abuse cases:

1960 64,000 cases of suspected child abuse reported in the U.S.

1970 72,000 cases reported.

1975 Law changed to protect accusers from civil suit.

1980 1,100,000 cases reported, 15 times the number reported in 1970.

1990 2,400,000 cases reported. 33 times the number reported in 1970.

1993 3,000,000 cases reported. 42 times the number reported in 1970.

1996 4,000,000 estimated cases (final number not available).

1997 It is estimated that the number of reported cases of child abuse will likely double by 1999.

Anger can cause conflict and conflict is a normal part of close relationships. Anger can provide an opportunity for a better understanding of another person. When someone cares enough to take the time to resolve a conflict, that person demonstrates caring. Conflicts can occur because of the differences between individuals. Relationships do not have to be destroyed because of those differences. Rather, recognizing the differences and viewing them in mature, responsible, positive ways instead of being fearful or unwilling to work through differences gives credence to the positive side of anger. Every person must learn to recognize the positive and negative effects of anger. Few people take the time to observe their actions when under stress or when their behavior is openly challenged. Road rage is an example of an aggressive person's spontaneous act of anger, to strike out and assert dominance over another driver.

Ideally, good anger was a sense given to an individual as a tool to condemn injustice and help build relationships. In pure form, anger is an emotional signal that alerts a person that something needs to be changed. It obviously was intended to be a positive motivator to be used in giving one another feedback about how life can be lived more productively. Bad behavior must be understood and realized that it has consequences. Bad behavior can be changed... it must be changed, or there can be no hope for a more socially civilized society in the future. To do nothing but complain about "kids today" will surely leave them unprepared to respond to the challenges the future will bring.

The failure of society, teaching institutions and government leadership to aggressively address the "root" cause of adult and youth violence will assure the "runaway train" will continue on its journey, leaving a trail of death, disfigurement and emotional scars lasting a life-time.

Pre-teens on a shooting spree kill classmates and a teacher. A 12 year-old is charged with sexually assaulting an 11 year-old girl in school. Children are threatening to report their parent(s) as child abusers when the parents attempt to appropriately discipline them. Time is running out.

It is foreseeable that violence by children on other children, teenage violence on their parents, teachers, schoolmates and even strangers will continue like the runaway train in reporting child abuse, failing to heed the children's cry for help. Societys leadership has failed Americas children. Society will pay a staggering price for its "failure to lead" in teaching children that bad behavior has consequences. It seems that no one today wants to take responsibility for their acts and/or omission of acts but blames the "system" or someone else for their indiscretions.

Anger Management programs, which offer assistance for habitually angry adults, are becoming a growing resource for adults who need treatment for aggressive personality traits. Road rage drivers, male and female alike, may receive tickets for being overly aggressive with their vehicles. Instead of fines they will have to attend Anger Management programs. This is only a beginning but it focuses on adults already addicted to bad behavior. Unfortunately, we are a crisis response society and fall short on innovation solutions of preventative methodologies to teach children in schools, churches and in the home that bad anger is an unacceptable trait in a civilized society.

©1998 by The American Academy of Experts in Traumatic Stress, Inc.

Original Article

The Effects of Sexual Abuse

By Kathleen Megan

February 23, 1997 - Hartford Courant
Copyright the Hartford Courant, reprinted with permission

The single most hurtful comment that relatives frequently make to older victims of childhood sexual abuse is: "Gee, it happened such a long time ago, just get over it."

"We all wish it could be that easy, but it's not," said David Clohessy, president of the Chicago-based Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests.

Like scar tissue, the effects of sexual abuse never go away, experts say, continuing to influence victims in various ways, such as by contributing to drug and alcohol abuse, low self-esteem, divorce and distrust.

And, when a priest sexually abuses a child, the effects can be particularly devastating. "The most trusted person imaginable suddenly does something that feels terribly wrong and creepy," said Clohessy, who as an adolescent was sexually abused by a priest. "It's a shocking kind of shattering experience."

Leslie Lothstein, who is director of psychology at the Institute of Living in Hartford and has treated victims of sexual abuse by members of the clergy, said that sexual abuse by a Catholic priest has its own "unique dynamic," because Catholics see their priests as having a direct link to God -- as possessing God-like powers.

A devout Catholic who is sexually abused by a priest thus may experience a kind of betrayal that can be especially intense.

"Many of the patients I've seen in therapy who became sexually involved [with a priest] talked about 'soul murder,' " said Lothstein. "They felt as if something had been taken deeply inside of them in which the body wasn't hurt as much as the soul.

"You will hear them say, it was like having sex with Jesus." Laurie Pearlman, a psychologist at the Traumatic Stress Institute in South Windsor, said such abuse is not only "a betrayal by a parent figure," but a robbery of "the spiritual security that another child might be able to find in a belief in God."

Lothstein said he considers it a "miracle" that former members of the Legionaries of Christ were willing to go public with allegations of sexual abuse, particularly considering the power and influence of Catholicism in Mexico. "It's not only religious, but political," Lothstein said, comparing it with the power of the Islamic religion in Muslim nations.

"These men have enormous courage. Their names will be known in Mexico. Many won't believe them. They won't accept the idea."

Abuse of Children

Sexual abuse can forever alter a young child's view of the world.

"To be used as an object to satisfy someone else's need is a profound violation of the self," said Pearlman. "It's not an act that is over and done with."

It will color all of a child's relationships, Pearlman said. A child is left asking, "Whom can I trust? Can I trust myself? Am I a worthy person or just an object to be used by others? Am I valuable? Can I control what happens to me?"

It's as if, Clohessy said, a force as fundamental as "gravity stopped all of a sudden" and the victim is left worrying forever about when "gravity is going to stop again."

Without any answers or an adult to help, a child may store the experience away as a secret, becoming "withdrawn, depressed or acting out, causing trouble at home or school," said Pearlman.

A child is likely to be left with strong feelings of anger, fear, shame, hurt and disappointment.

A boy's experience often involves a man as perpetrator, raising questions about homosexuality. Pearlman said boys are more likely to react with feelings of humiliation that may result in their becoming bullies.

Girls are more likely to act out against themselves, she said, perhaps winding up with mental health problems.

As they grow up, such children may abuse alcohol or other drugs as "a way of numbing out their feelings," said Pearlman. Or they may injure themselves.
It is also very common for such children to be sexually abused again, perhaps because they have not "really been helped to learn to recognize safe relations," said Pearlman.

In severe cases, victims may sacrifice their cognitive abilities in order to conceal and continue the secret of what happened to them. Such people may have disordered feelings, losing track of time and days.

A Long-Kept Secret

Often children will keep abuse a secret because they don't have the language to describe it, or they don't think anyone will believe them. This was especially true until recent years, when childhood sexual abuse has become more openly discussed.

Childhood victims are also often frightened into keeping the secret by the perpetrator, who may have threatened to harm the child or those dear to him if he tells anyone about what happened.

If the perpetrator is a priest, there are further difficulties in telling anyone.

Lothstein said, "Most of the people I know who talk about early parochial education" say that if a nun or priest punished them, their parents believed the child deserved it. Most children realized that if they ever accused a priest of something so heinous as sexual abuse, their parents would not believe them or would blame them.

Many children do believe they are somehow at least partially to blame for the abuse and, because of the shame, will not come forward.

A victim may also be less likely to divulge what happened if he or she has had trouble with grades, behavior problems or other difficulties -- some of which are likely attributable to the abuse. They fear they will not be believed because of their checkered pasts.

Survivors of trauma frequently require a lot of time to come to understand what happened to them and to be able to communicate it. Many survivors of the Holocaust, Lothstein said, "spent 10 years without ever saying what happened to them... . The information must come out slowly and be paced.

Otherwise they can be overwhelmed by it."

Going Public

A decision to tell people about sexual abuse or to confront a perpetrator can be healing, experts say. However, coming to terms with what happened long ago can be threatening, because it may result in the rearranging of one's entire worldview.
A reconsideration of one's career, marriage and family are all likely to occur. In some cases, divorce results as a spouse can't live with a partner's pain and becomes frustrated at not being able to do anything about it.

"The stakes are so high," said Clohessy. "You are taking on your church, your family, making your family vulnerable, taking the most shameful secret and putting it out there for everyone to see."

On the other hand, going public or confronting a perpetrator can for the first time imbue the victim with power.

But in the short term, said Clohessy, who did eventually confront the priest who abused him, such disclosure "brings up all the terrible feelings that we've worked for years and years to suppress. Most survivors will say in their heads, 'Yes, I know I'm doing the right thing,' but inside they are torn apart."

Victims of sexual abuse may hope that "wishing or drinking or praying" will make the pain go away, but "none of those things works. Two things really help," he said. "Going to therapy and telling somebody."

Original Article

Verbal Beatings Hurt as Much as Sexual Abuse

By William J. Cromie

Sticks and stones may break my bones,
But names will never hurt me. …

That often repeated children’s rhyme is wrong, according to Harvard University psychiatrists. Scolding, swearing, yelling, blaming, insulting, threatening, ridiculing, demeaning, and criticizing can be as harmful as physical abuse, sexual abuse outside the home, or witnessing physical abuse at home, notes a report in the April issue of the Harvard Mental Health Letter.

The report suggests that, when verbal abuse is constant and severe, it creates a risk of post-traumatic stress disorder, the same type of psychological collapse experienced by combat troops in Iraq. The research on which the report is based points out that children who are the target of frequent verbal mistreatment exhibit higher rates of physical aggression, delinquency, and social problems than other children.

Many studies tie physical and sexual abuse to lasting effects on the brain and behavior, but emotional mistreatment has not received the same focus. “Exposure to verbal aggression has received little attention as a specific form of abuse,” notes Martin Teicher, associate professor of psychiatry at McLean Hospital, a Harvard-affiliated psychiatric facility. “This despite the fact that one national study found that 63 percent of American parents reported one or more instances of verbal aggression, such as swearing at and insulting their child.”

Other researchers have associated childhood verbal abuse with a significantly higher risk of developing unstable, angry personalities, narcissistic behavior, obsessive-compulsive disorders, and paranoia. “Verbal abuse may also have more lasting consequences than other forms of abuse, because it’s often more continuous,” says Teicher. “And in combination with physical abuse and neglect [it] may produce the most dire outcome. However, child protective service agencies, doctors, and lawyers are most concerned about the impact and prevention of physical or sexual abuse.”

This situation prodded Teicher and three colleagues — Jacqueline Samson, Ann Polcari, and Cynthia McGreenery — to do a study comparing the impact of childhood verbal abuse in both the presence and absence of physical and sexual abuse and exposure to family violence.

Badgering vs. battering
They recruited 554 young people, aged 18 to 22 years, who responded to advertisements. About half were women and most were white. They all filled out questionnaires about unhappy childhoods and verbal abuse.

Typical of the respondents was Angela, an 18-year-old college freshman who enrolled in the study after seeing a subway car advertisement for people who had an unhappy childhood. “This is the first time I have thought about these things in years,” she said, “and the first time I have talked about it.”

Verbal abuse, the researchers found, had as great an effect as physical or nondomestic sexual mistreatment. Verbal aggression alone turns out to be a particularly strong risk factor for depression, anger-hostility, and dissociation disorders. The latter involve cutting off a particular mental function from the rest of the mind. In one type of dissociation, the person can’t recall part of his or her personal history. Other types involve hallucinations, feeling unreal or unstable, unconsciously converting painful emotions into physical symptoms, and multiple personalities.

“Our findings raise the possibility that exposure to verbal aggression may affect the development of certain vulnerable brain regions in susceptible individuals,” Teicher’s group warns. “Alternatively, such exposure in childhood may put into force a powerful negative model for interpersonal relationships.” Possible consequences could include insecure attachments to others, negative feelings about oneself in relation to others, poor social functioning, and lowered self-esteem and coping strategies. Worse, says, Teicher, “such possibilities are not mutually exclusive.”

As yet unpublished research by Teicher shows that, indeed, exposure to verbal abuse does affect certain areas of the brain. These areas are associated with changes in verbal IQ and symptoms of depression, dissociation, and anxiety.

Violence at home
The effects of verbal abuse were worse than witnessing serious domestic violence and as serious as sexual abuse outside the home, but not as bad as sexual abuse by a family member. Of 54 people in the study who witnessed domestic violence, 35 saw their mothers being threatened or assaulted. Twenty-three witnessed brothers and sisters being physically mistreated. Thirteen of these attacks involved severe beatings.

It is possible, the team points out, “that exposure to domestic emotional, physical, or sexual abuse is greatest in families with mental illness. Thus, genetic factors could contribute to the higher symptom scores we found in subjects exposed to domestic abuse.”

On the other hand, they note that the overall degree of psychological problems they found is probably lower for their college-educated, mainly upper middle-class subjects than it would be for the population in general.

The take-home message is that occasional harsh or angry words are not going to traumatize a child for life. However, frequent verbal bashing could be as bad as sticks and stones that break their bones.

Original Article

Investigating Child Sexual Abuse Allegations: Do Experts Agree on Anything?

Susan J. Sachsenmaier

Historical Synopsis

In the late 19th century, Sigmund Freud found that many of the adult patients he treated reported childhood sexual abuse, which Freud found to be causally related to these patients' symptoms of psychological distress. Overwhelming contention from both scientific and political leaders led Freud to eventually withdraw his findings in this area, although he remained equivocal in later writings. The latter half of the 20th century saw a return to a focus on childhood sex abuse as the etiology of later distress and dysfunction. Fueled by the proliferation of scientific evidence, child advocates refused to back down when confronted by skeptics, and staunchly maintained the attitude that "children don't lie; if it hadn't happened, they couldn't report it." An attempt to make up for decades of ignorance and rejection of children's stories of abuse led to an unfettered and unexamined acceptance of every child's story of abuse as true. By the close of the 1980s, the negative repercussions of this attitude were obvious. Now infamous cases such as California v. Buckey (the McMartin Preschool case, 1990) and New Jersey v. Michaels (1993) highlight the trauma and tragedy that can and do result from children's stories being uncritically accepted as valid. The State of Montana saw its own version with Montana v Harts (1993).

For a relatively brief period of time, the argument seemed to revolve around whether children would deliberately lie about a personal experience of sexual abuse. An abundance of research has now disassembled the question when it is stated this way. It has been learned and amply documented that the issue of TRUTH when applied to children's statements is multidimensional. The focus on how children's statements might differ from adults' statements has compelled a scientific return to an understanding of child development in moral, cognitive, emotional and social spheres. Many volumes have recently appeared on the suggestibility of children, the creation of false or distorted memories, motivation, and other aspects of truth-telling, all of which attempt to explain why some children's reports of sexual abuse are not true, even though the child may appear to be sincere. (See Ceci & Bruck, 1995; Doris, 1991; Goodman & Bottoms, 1993; Perry & Wrightsman, 1991).

Statement of the Problem

While some scientists have focused on the main question of how to figure out if a child's story is true, others have focused on the formulation of investigative techniques that are less likely to facilitate the false authentication of invalid reports, and on the internal dynamics involved in a child's production of an invalid report. Still others have focused on the social phenomenon characterized by the public's response to the tremendous rise in the incidence of reported child sex abuse. Due at least in part to the vulnerability of children and the sense of responsibility associated with the need to protect them from harm, it may be the case that people involved in that process overreact to allegations of sexual abuse. This overreaction has been termed "moral panic" by some writers (Edwards & Lohman, 1994). The moral aspect of this phenomenon derives from the sexual component, which is highly charged in our society, as well as from the already charged situation which exists when the protection of children is at issue. It could be reasonable argued that protection of children from harm, particularly sexual abuse, is the moral imperative our society has adopted as the most important. In the arena of child sexual abuse allegations there is, therefore, a particular opportunity for the desire to exhibit "good intentions" to overshadow the need for objective, consistent, and ongoing dynamic tension which exists societally with regards to the question of whether child sexual abuse occurs and, if so, how prevalent it is. This debate also goes on in the realms of law, psychology, and throughout the child protective services network. To the extent that moral panic creates a generic prejudice against those merely accused of child sexual abuse (Vidmar, 1997), it must be accounted for in any competent investigation of allegations. When practitioners are called upon to provide investigative and evaluative procedures in child sexual abuse cases, they are often at a loss as to how to proceed. They may be placed in a double bind, wanting to help, but not knowing how to proceed in a way that is defensible in court. Practitioners may be concerned that treating a false allegation as true can be as traumatizing to non-abused children (who may become convinced through suggestive interviewing that they have been abused), as is treating a true allegation as false (and accusing truly abused children of lying). The literature has unfortunately focused on the disagreements among experts over the various techniques available, rather than on any core similarities.

As experts independently developed then published formats, guidelines or techniques for conducting the best possible investigation into allegations of child sex abuse, scientific debate over the pros and cons of each major offering proliferated, until it began to seem to the novitiate that there was no agreement at all. Several experts have offered what they considered to be scientifically acceptable procedures for determining the validity of child sex abuse allegations. Paramount are a) Gardner's (1992) True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse and (1995) Protocols for the Sex-Abuse Evaluation; b) Greenberg's (1990) Conducting Unbiased Sexual Abuse Evaluations; c) Boat and Everson's (1986) Structured Interview for Using Anatomical Dolls; d) Hindman's (1987) Sixteen Steps Toward Legally Sound Sexual Abuse Investigations; and e) Raskin and Esplin's (1991) Statement Validity Analysis. Michael Lamb's (1994) "Consensus Statement" is a welcome glimmer of hope on the horizon, but is based on the agreement of 20 individuals in attendance at a conference in Switzerland and does not account for the published opinions of absent experts. This article is offered as a caveat against using inappropriate techniques when professionally interacting with a child who is alleging sex abuse, and as a guide to conducting a valid examination of such a child that will be both admissible and defensible in a court of law.

Major Theoretical Approaches

According to Raskin and Esplin (1991), "Statement Validity Analysis" (SVA) is a set of interview techniques and analytical procedures for obtaining and evaluating statements. These procedures compel the evaluator to explore and consider all of the available information and many possible explanations prior to, during, and after the interview. SVA essentially incorporates three procedures: the first is the obtaining of a free narrative by the child who alleges sexual abuse, without using dolls or other props as communication aids. This interview is not therapy and should not be performed by the child's therapist due to dual role conflicts (Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, 1991; American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 1988). Guidelines are offered as to the formation of alternative hypotheses, when to use cue questions, direct questions and probe questions. The second procedure is the application of Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA, Raskin & Esplin, 1991) to the narrative provided by the child and recorded verbatim. CBCA analyzes the narrative statement for general characteristics, specific contents, and motivation-related contents. The third procedure is the application of the Validity Checklist (Raskin & Esplin, 1991) to the entire body of data accumulated through both legal and psychological means relevant to the case. The Validity Checklist consists of four categories of information to be analyzed: a) psychological characteristics of the child; b) interview characteristics of the child and the examiner, c) motivational factors relevant to the child and others involved in the allegations and; d) investigative questions regarding the consistency and realism of the entire body of data. These procedures, taken together, discourage premature conclusions by forcing a systematic consideration of all necessary and available information.

Boat and Everson (1986) have developed a comprehensive set of guidelines on interviewing children who allege sex abuse, using Anatomically Detailed (AD) dolls. This involves a structured interview that begins by assessing cognitive competencies, then uses AD dolls to help children with immature verbal ability communicate what may have happened to them. The American Psychological Association's Council of Representatives (1994) has recently published a position paper on the use of AD dolls, in which the use of AD dolls is endorsed as a communication and memory aid for children undergoing a sex abuse investigation, but not as a definitive diagnostic test that can say with certainty whether a child has been sexually abused.

Hindman (1987) has published Step By Step: Sixteen Steps Toward Legally Sound Sexual Abuse Investigations. The book provides guidelines for interviewing children who allege child sexual abuse. She recommends use of another of her books, A Very Touching Book (1985), which describes the concepts of "good touch, bad touch and secret touch" to a child who is then asked to relate whether he or she has experienced any "touching trouble" and if so to describe it. Although Hindman states that AD dolls may be used to augment the interview, she offers no specific guidelines as to use of the dolls, and the general guidelines offered differ from the guidelines of Boat and Everson.

Gardner's (1992, 1995) investigative method is interview-based. He emphasizes the importance of evaluating not only the alleged victim, but also the alleged perpetrator, and the accuser, and reserves the right to bring all three together in the same room for conjoint interviewing. In his 1992 book, he offered 30 "differentiating criteria" for use in assessing the likelihood of sexual abuse. In his 1995 book, he offers an additional 21 criteria derived from direct inquiry and 11 criteria derived from projective testing. He also lists several criteria to be considered when evaluating the alleged victim's parents, the accused male, the accused female, and the accuser. Gardner explains that there is no scoring scheme or cut-off point to indicate when sexual abuse has occurred, but that his criteria form a continuum of likelihood that a child has or has not been sexually abused: the greater the number of indicators met, the greater the likelihood that a child has been abused.

Greenberg (1990) offers suggestions for conducting unbiased investigations of alleged child sexual abuse victims. He focuses on the interview format, but allows certain toys to be used as stimuli for verbalizations and behavior. He speaks to the role and context of the forensic investigator, the importance of evaluating children's competencies before judging the content of their speech, the use of counterbalanced questioning about the alleged victimization and the alleged perpetrator, questioning about sequelae of the alleged abuse, and achieving closure at the end of the interview.

Inter-Theoretical Differences

Wells and Loftus (1991) state that "Statement Validity Analysis" has inadequate empirical support and may lack ability to partition individual and age-related differences in linguistic abilities from validity-related differences. Gardner (1992) opposes the use of AD dolls, calling them a source of "psychological grief" to children. Others, including Underwager and Wakefield (1990) posit that AD dolls are sexually suggestive. Contrary to the other methods, Gardner's method emphasizes interviewing the alleged perpetrator whenever possible, and often jointly with the alleged victim, before rendering an opinion as to whether sexual abuse of a child has occurred.

Bruck and Ceci (1993/1995) emphasize the myriad ways in which children's competence and accuracy of information can be sabotaged by incompetent investigative procedures and interview techniques, while Lamb, Sternberg & Esplin (1995) offer ways in which the conscientious investigator can enhance the quality, accuracy, and amount of information obtained from children who allege sex abuse. In addition, Lenore Terr (1994) emphasizes the accuracy of children's memory, while Elizabeth Loftus (1994) eloquently argues the fallibility of children's memory. Memory itself cannot be judged to be accurate or inaccurate unless the investigator's interviewing style and techniques are sound.

Case Synopsis: Montana v. Harts

In Montana v. Harts (State of Montana v. Harts, 1993), the State's child protective services workers had performed the first several evaluations of two children, ages 3 and 5, who had alleged sexual abuse by their great-grandparents, ages 78 and 81, who had no documented history of previous criminal behavior or of sexually inappropriate behavior. Child protective services workers and police rewarded the children with praise when they provided affirmative responses to their questions. When one child reported something that the other could not at first remember, pressure applied until the child could remember it. No effort was made to verify the physical possibility or impossibility of the allegations. The children were sent to a therapist who insisted that the children elaborate on this abuse by asking them to "draw a picture of your rectum" and "draw a picture of how you feel about Pa's genitals." These drawings were submitted to the county attorney over the next two years as evidence of abuse. Other grossly inappropriate "therapeutic techniques" were also used to extract confirmation from the children that bizarre and violent sexual abuse had been perpetrated against them. The 5-year-old boy was put into treatment sessions with a 9-year-old boy who was a confirmed sexual abuse victim. The therapist typically saw the children in her home for up to 6 hours at a time. The therapist forbade anyone to talk to the children, including their grandparents, unless they promised not to express any doubt as to the children's allegations, or unless the therapist was present. When the children tried to say that their reports were "just dreams" or had never been true, these statements were discounted. The therapist asked the children to draw something and when they did not, she produced the drawing, labeled it as the child's, and sent it to the county attorney. The therapist collected crime victim's compensation funds for the children's treatment, long before an unbiased investigation was performed, reinforcing the necessity from the therapist's perspective that the crime be confirmed even if it had not occurred. Through disorderly and biased procedures, these children were induced, albeit unintentionally, to report ever more heinous acts of sexual abuse against them.

Deposition testimony indicated that upon re-evaluation the children's statements did not meet credibility criteria when the procedure, "Statement Validity Analysis" (Raskin & Esplin, 1991) was applied. Re-evaluation also indicated that initial evaluation procedures had been faulty. The county attorney filed a brief to quash this challenging testimony at trial, maintaining that SVA and the other procedures described above were inadmissible as expert testimony due to major disagreements and lack of consensus among experts in the field.

A review and analysis of the literature identified eight core similarities among the major approaches to such evaluations. Expert testimony was offered that these eight similarities, used as the foundation for the investigation of the sex abuse allegations, do meet evidence admissibility requirements. The judge allowed the challenged testimony, ruling that investigative procedures utilizing these eight core similarities were scientifically acceptable and admissible as evidence. Prior to trial a Statement Validity Analysis was performed enabling further expert testimony to the effect that the children probably had not been abused, but had been led to believe that they were, based on suggestive, coercive, and biased investigative and therapeutic conduct. The Judge ultimately ruled that the alleged sexual offenders were "not guilty."

Areas of Consensus

Analysis of these major investigative formats indicates that, in spite of the many criticisms of each method of investigation, there is substantial overlap among them. Eight similarities are either explicitly or implicitly a part of the major published approaches to the clinical investigation of alleged child sexual abuse. Several months after testimony was given in the Hart case detailing these eight similarities, Michael Lamb (1994) published an interdisciplinary consensus statement on the investigation of child sex abuse allegations that reviews areas of consensus among 20 experts from Europe, North America and the Middle East. Conference attendees were able to agree on seven areas of consensus. Table 1 is a compilation of items on both the "Hart" list and the "Lamb" list.

(Insert Table 1 here)

Areas of Agreement Among Experts in Child Sex Abuse Investigations

1) The investigator must carefully examine his or her own emotions and possible biases regarding child sex abuse before undertaking to interview children who allege sex abuse, so as not to unwittingly project those biases into the assessment of the child's allegations.

2) A well-trained and experienced forensic interviewer and not the child's therapist should conduct the investigation. This will yield more informative and accurate accounts by children.

3) The greatest accuracy is obtained by eliciting a free narrative from the child in response to open-ended questions. Inaccuracies increase with the level of suggestiveness and coerciveness of the interview techniques used.

4) A structured interview technique with which the interviewer is familiar should be used, not a freeform or unstructured interview.

5) The interview and child's behavioral responses should be recorded, preferably by videotape, but at least by audiotape with detailed notes. Note-taking alone should be reserved for cases involving special circumstances.

6) Preschool age children are prone to suggestiveness and fantasy/reality confusion, and thus require special skills by the interviewer, including a concession that such confusion is possible, and knowledge of developmental differences.

7) Some measure of a child's ability to distinguish between truth and falsehood must be taken and all such measures are not equal. For example, asking a child to "tell the truth" about the color of your sweater and the child says 'red' and the sweater is red, does not mean that the child can reliably distinguish between truth and falsehood in all applications.

8) Some children's statements will be false and must be distinguished from true statements by the application of a structured technique, and not by "gut feeling" or "hunches" unsupported by articulable criteria.

9) Behaviors that mimic sexual activity are seen more frequently in abused children than in non-abused children.

10) Children's accounts that contain peripheral details and are logically embedded in a rich context are more likely to represent a true occurrence.

11) Tools and props such as anatomically detailed dolls, puppets, or human figure drawings may be useful when interviewing children under age 5 or older children who are uncommunicative.

12) Although medical exams commonly do not show evidence of sexual abuse, they should be performed and documented in every case as soon as possible after the allegation, by a highly trained specialist using multiple techniques and sophisticated equipment.

Training Public Officials

Doris et al. (1995) recently emphasized the importance of formal training for child protective services workers. Public officials are not to blame for their relative ignorance in the area of child sex abuse investigations. Several have pointed out that psychologists first hammered them for a decade to take child sex abuse allegations seriously, and that they are now criticized for their well-intentioned (albeit misguided) efforts to advocate for children who cannot advocate for themselves. The criticism, however, is not against advocacy for children, but against poor quality of training and of investigative procedures. Poorly trained workers and investigators commit errors based on lack of knowledge of the fundamentals delineated here, giving rise to legal and personal fiascos such as the Hart case discussed briefly herein. Whichever scientific method of investigation of child sex abuse allegations is chosen as the method to be taught to child protective services workers, or others, the fundamental procedures delineated herein should form the minimal foundation for a clinical investigation.

References

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (1988). Guidelines for the clinical evaluation of child and adolescent sexual abuse. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 25, 655-657.

Boat, B. and Everson, M. (1986). Using anatomical dolls: Guidelines for interviewing young children in sexual abuse Investigations. Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel hill, North Carolina.

Bruck, M. and Ceci, S. (1993/1995). Amicus brief for the case of State of New Jersey v. Michaels presented by committee of concerned social scientists, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1(2), 272-322.

Ceci, S., & Bruck, M. (1995). Jeopardy in the Courtroom: A scientific analysis of children's testimony, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. (1991). Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655-665.

Doris, J. (editor) (1991). The suggestibility of children's recollections: Implications for Eyewitness Testimony, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Doris, J., Mazur, R., & Rosenthal, R. (1995). Training in child protective services: A commentary on the brief of Bruck and Ceci (1993/1995), Psychology, Public Policy, and law, 1(2), 479-493.

Edwards, S. M. & Soetenhorst, J. (1994), The impact of 'moral panic' on professional behavior in cases of child sex abuse: An international perspective, Journal of Child Sex Abuse, 3(1), pp. 103-126.

Gardner, R. (1992). True and false accusations of child sex abuse. New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics.

Gardner, R. (1995). Protocols for the Sex-Abuse Evaluation. New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics.

Greenberg, S. (1990). Conducting unbiased sexual abuse evaluations, Preventing Sexual Abuse, 8-14.

Goodman, G., & Bottoms, B. (1993). Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving testimony, New York: The Guilford Press.

Hindman, J. (1985). A very touching book. Ontario, Oregon: AlexAndria Associates.

Hindman, J. (1987). Step by step: Sixteen steps toward legally sound sexual abuse investigations. Ontario, Oregon: AlexAndria Associates.

Koocher, G., Goodman, G., White, S., Friedrich, W., Sivan, A., & Reynolds, C. (1994). Report of the Anatomical Doll Task Force to the American Psychological Association Council of Representatives: Psychological science and the use of anatomically detailed dolls in child sexual abuse assessments. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Lamb, M. (1994). The investigation of child sexual abuse: An interdisciplinary consensus statement. Journal of Child Sex Abuse, 3(4), 93-132.

Lamb, M., Sternberg, K., & Esplin, P. (1995). Making children into competent witnesses: Reactions to the amicus brief In re Michaels. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1(2), 438-449.

Loftus, E., & Ketcham, K. (1994). The myth of repressed memory. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Perry, N., & Wrightsman, L. (1991). The Child Witness: Legal Issues and Dilemmas, California: Sage Publications.

Raskin, D., & Esplin, P. (1991). Statement validity assessment: interview procedures and content analysis of children's statements of sexual abuse. Behavioral Assessment, 13, 265-291.

Raskin, D., & Esplin, P. (1991). Assessment of children's statements of sexual abuse. In J. Doris (Ed.), The suggestibility of children's recollections (pp 153-164). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

State of Montana v. Harts, Gallatin County Cause No. DC-93-173.

State of New Jersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels, 625 A.2d, New Jersey Sup. Ct.ff 1993.

Terr, L. (1994). Unchained memories. New York: Basic Books.

Underwager, R., & Wakefield, H. (1990). The real world of child interrogations. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Vidmar, N. (1997). Generic Prejudice and the Presumption of Guilt in Sex Abuse Trials. Law and Human Behavior, 21(1), 5-26.

Wells, G., & Loftus, E. (1991). Commentary: Is this child fabricating? Reactions to a new assessment technique. In J. Doris (Ed.), The suggestibility of children's recollections (pp. 168-171). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

©1998 by The American Academy of Experts in Traumatic Stress, Inc.

Original Article

UAADV DV Awareness Shop