 |
 |
|
|||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
View My Cart: 0 Items |
 |
Home > The Role of Law Enforcement in the Response to Child Abuse and Neglect > The Role of Law Enforcement in the Response to Child Abuse and Neglect : The Investigative Process
The Role of Law Enforcement in the Response to Child Abuse and Neglect
The Investigative ProcessInvestigators involved in child maltreatment cases must determine if a crime has occurred. If a crime has occurred, officers must determine who is responsible, if any actions on law enforcement's part are necessary to protect the child, and if criminal prosecution is warranted. To answer these key questions, investigators must complete a number of tasks to collect necessary information. The investigator must have certain information prior to initiating the investigation. An adequately trained officer or CPS caseworker may have already obtained the necessary information. If not, or if some additional clarification is necessary, the investigator should contact the reporter directly.16 The more comprehensive the information provided by the reporter, the better able investigators are to determine the appropriateness of the report for law enforcement or CPS intervention and the better able they are to determine the level of risk to the child and the urgency of the response needed. Information gathering should focus on demographic information about the child and family; information about the alleged maltreatment; and information about the child, the parents, caretakers, and the family as a whole. Demographic information serves two primary purposes: to locate the child and family and to assist in the assessment of risk to the child. Each State defines the scope of demographic information to be collected. In general, officers should gather information regarding:
Information Regarding the Alleged Maltreatment Investigators should obtain information about the type(s), nature, severity, chronicity, and the location(s) where the alleged maltreatment took place.
Information Regarding the Child To effectively evaluate the level of risk to the child and determine the urgency of the response, officers should obtain the following information from the reporter.
Information Regarding the Parent(s)/Caretaker(s) If the reporter has the information, it is important to gather as much information as possible about the parents/caretakers. Knowledge of the parents'/caretakers' emotional and physical condition, their behavior, history, view of the child, child rearing practices, and quality of their relationships outside the family helps to determine the level of risk to the child.
Information Regarding the Family CPS caseworkers need to gather as much information as possible about family characteristics, dynamics, and supports.
Gathering this indepth information is essential because it helps to determine how quickly an investigation must begin. It enables officers to identify the victim(s), the parent(s)/caretaker(s), and the offender and determine how to locate them so that the initial investigation can be conducted. It also identifies other possible sources of information about the family that will help evaluate the possibility of past, current, or future abuse or neglect. Finally, it will assist the investigator in accurately and effectively planning the approach to the investigation. While neglect allegations are the most common form of child maltreatment reported to child protection agencies, criminal investigation and prosecution occurs in only a small minority of the cases. Allegations of physical neglect normally involve the care the child receives in his/her home. The first step in such an investigation is to visit the home, generally on an unannounced basis. The neglect may involve environmental hazards, a lack of supervision, abandonment, malnutrition, failure to provide medical care, or other factors. The officer investigating possible environmental hazards in the home should examine the living conditions with the permission of the occupant or, in extreme cases, under the authority of a search warrant. The investigator must draw a distinction between poverty, a dirty house, poor housekeeping and clutter, and true environmental hazards to the child. The distinction is best made by separating poverty or life style factors from those conditions that will adversely affect the child's health and safety. Significant amounts of human or animal feces; exposed live electrical wires; extreme rodent and insect infestation; rotting garbage; and structural damage to the house, exposing the child to the risk of illness or injury, may independently or collectively constitute child neglect. Unless law enforcement officers find clear and present danger requiring immediate action, they will rarely act independently in cases of child neglect. CPS staff are often in a better position to work with parents to reduce the risks to the child without unnecessary removal from the home. In fact, under Federal law, Public Law 96-272 (and many parallel State laws), the juvenile or family court requires CPS agencies to demonstrate that they attempted reasonable efforts to prevent out-of-home placement. Some communities have many options for avoiding foster care placement in neglect cases. These include intensive family preservation programs, day care, teaching homemakers, parenting classes, and traditional counseling. For some neglectful parents the answer is financial aid, with CPS referring them to income maintenance and job search programs. Law enforcement officers generally lack access to those services and consequently are handicapped in neglect investigations unless CPS is involved. There are situations in which law enforcement may determine that independent action is required. These include times when CPS is not accessible and when:
A child neglect investigation includes a visit to the child's home or place where the neglect is alleged to have occurred to determine the physical conditions present. The investigation should include an interview with the caretaker(s) to determine their perception of the situation and to assess their ability and willingness to care for the child. The investigation may include securing medical assessments of the child, particularly in cases where malnutrition, failure to provide medical care, or improper physical care is alleged. A combination of medical exams and psychological or developmental assessments may also be useful, particularly when neglect is alleged to adversely affect the development of small children or in cases of emotional neglect. The CPS caseworker generally arranges for these assessments. Criminal prosecution of physical child abuse is more common than prosecution of neglect, and the role of law enforcement becomes clearer. The first step after conferring with the complainant is to interview the child. The investigator, preferably acting as part of a team with CPS staff, can explain to the caretaker that the agency received a call concerning the child and that they would like to talk to the caretaker about the child's condition. It is important to avoid using the term child abuse at this stage as it has different meaning for different people and can elicit intense feelings resulting in parental resistance in the interview. Some parents may admit to disciplining their children in a way that accidentally caused severe injury. In reality, much physical abuse, if not most, is the result of the offender's efforts to discipline the child and a failure to control the situation, his/her temper, or the force used. However, caretakers rarely view what they have done as abuse. Interviewing the Alleged Victim After explaining the reason for the visit, investigators should ask to see the child. One of the investigating team members should explain, if the child is old enough to understand, why they are there and what they will be doing. Depending on the allegations and/or the child's age, the investigator will need to visually examine the child for signs of obvious trauma. Investigators should document any injuries noted and, if possible, photograph areas of injury or of questionable physical findings. The child should be interviewed outside the presence of the caregiver. The investigator is interested in such issues as:
If the investigator finds the child has sustained life threatening or severe injuries, the first priority is securing emergency medical attention for the child. After talking with the child and assessing the presence of obvious physical findings, the investigator should talk with the caretaker(s). The caretaker should be asked for his/her explanation of any injuries. Again, the investigator should make an initial assessment of the match between the injuries and the explanations the child and adult caretaker(s) provide. The investigator should remain nonjudgmental and matter-of-fact during this stage, since some people who physically abuse their children fail to recognize the impropriety of their actions and will openly acknowledge what has happened. If they recognize that the officer disapproves of what they have done, they will attempt to cover up their actions. In cases of significant injury, however, such resistance can be expected. If CPS staff are present, they may need to talk with the caretaker(s) about their background and current living situation to assess the risk of future abuse. The investigator may find that there have been a number of persons caring for the child during the period of injury, and the child may not be willing or able to identify the person responsible for the injury (due to trauma or age). In this case, the officer should obtain details about who has recently cared for the child, for what time periods, and if anyone else was present, building a chronology of care so the investigator knows the transition points between these caretakers. Names, addresses, and telephone numbers should be secured. If any of these caretakers are present, the investigator should discuss the injuries with them as well. If there is any question about who is responsible for the abuse, all caretakers should be asked what signs of injury they observed, when they first noticed them, and when was the last time they knew those injuries were not present. Investigators should also determine what they know of the other caretakers' actions, of any past history of injury to this or other children in the home, or other relevant factors. If other children are under the care of the same people, the investigator should talk with these children and perform, as appropriate, a screening for signs of physical injury. Other children should be asked about any injuries noted, as well as their observations about the injury on the alleged victim. Even if no sign of abuse is present in these children, they may be able to provide valuable information about family interactions, such as how discipline is handled, by whom, whether it varies from child to child, etc. When there is evidence of injury in cases of physical abuse, it is advisable to secure a medical examination of the child as soon as possible. The physician can document any injuries and treat any conditions present. The physician can also check for injuries with little outward manifestations such as internal bleeding, old fractures, or shaken infant syndrome. The doctor can also assess the developmental level of smaller children. Perhaps the most valuable role of the physician (after the treatment of any injuries) is to assist in the assessment of the match between the injuries noted and the explanation offered. For example, if the parents say that a 1-month-old child pulled himself up in his crib and tumbled out, the physician can explain the implausibility of the story based on child development and show that the injuries sustained are not consistent with a fall but the result of violent shaking. While the order of these steps may vary by necessity, the law enforcement agency may wish to seek physical evidence to substantiate any criminal charges. Using either a consent to search or a search warrant, the officer will be interested in the instrumentalities of the crime, such as the rod, coat hanger, bed board, belt, etc., used to inflict the injuries; blood-stained items such as children's clothing; and the exact location where abuse occurred to possibly photograph blood splatters on wall/floor/furniture, etc. Interviewing the Alleged Perpetrator In the event a possible or alleged perpetrator is not the caretaker already interviewed, the officer should interview the subject. The interview of this person should be postponed until the investigator can get a clear idea of what has happened (unless the delay exposes children to undue risks). The interview should parallel the caretaker interview, seeking information nonjudgmentally, which will generally yield the best results. Again, the officer is not seeking an admission of responsibility for "abuse," but seeking an acceptance of responsibility for the injuries sustained. Due to the nature of child sexual abuse, law enforcement and CPS are strongly encouraged to approach the allegation of sexual abuse as an investigative team. This will reduce the number of interviews the child must experience and improve the investigative outcomes of both agencies. Prior to initiating the field investigation, investigators must make several key decisions.
Interviewing the Alleged Victim Once the aforementioned decisions have been reached, the investigators should proceed with the field investigation. Generally the first step, after clarifying necessary information with the complainant, is to interview the alleged victim. For the most part investigators should seek to arrange this in a neutral setting and away from the place where the abuse may have occurred. The location of the interview should de-emphasize the "power" of the alleged perpetrator. For example, if the child is alleged to be abused by his/her father, then an interview in the family home is generally ill-advised because of the sense of power the child may perceive from the perpetrator, even if he is not home. However, the location should be in a place where the child can feel comfortable. Consequently, a busy police station may also be unwise. Many investigators have had success interviewing children at school, at a CPS interview room, or in a special room at the law enforcement agency. If the abuse occurred outside the home by a nonfamily member, the child's natural home may be the best location. The actual interview should be conducted consistent with the "Special Considerations for Interviewing Children" chapter of this manual. Because of the nature of sexual abuse, the victim interview plays a far more critical role than in other forms of maltreatment. In sexual abuse cases, the investigative interviewer must be extremely thorough. The investigator must:
Interviewing Other Children/Siblings After interviewing the alleged victim, the investigator should also talk with any other children identified as possible victims or witnesses for information about sexual activity directed at them or for any corroborating or conflicting information that they can provide. The child witnesses may not have direct knowledge of the incident, but may be able to confirm that the victim told them of the incidents long before the disclosure to adults. These other children may confirm elements of the victim's statement, such as seeing the perpetrator leaving the victim's room, hearing the victim's cries, or simply confirming the household routine that allowed the perpetrator to be alone with the victim as the child alleged. Interviewing Other Adult Witnesses Any adult witnesses who can shed light on the allegations should be interviewed for much of the same information as described above: what did they see, what were they told, and how did they react. Interviewing the Nonoffending Spouse In intrafamilial cases, the nonoffending parent, most commonly the mother, will be the next family member interviewed in depth. Frequently, this is the most difficult interview for the investigator. The primary goals of the officer's interview are:
This interview, like that of the victim's, should be conducted in a neutral setting if possible. Only the interviewer and the parent should be present. Because of the nature of some of the questions the officer asks the parent (such as the concern about spousal violence or quality, quantity, and type of sexual activity engaged in with the offending spouse), the element of privacy should be maintained. During the early stages of the interview, the investigator should convey an attitude of concern for the nonoffending parent and the child. No guilt or recriminations should be indicated by the interviewer. The interviewer should reassure the parent as much as possible that there is a legitimate investigative necessity for not only this interview but for specific questions that will be asked. The attitude of the interviewer should be that of seeking the truth and discovering what actually happened. In general, the investigator wants to determine what the parent knows about the sexual abuse. The investigator should tell the parent only what is absolutely necessary about the child's disclosure. The investigator should not reveal anything during this interview that should not be repeated to the perpetrator. It is frequently best to use generalities, at least in the initial stages of the interview. There are a number of possible reactions to such information ranging from anger and grief to total disbelief and hostility. The interviewer might find it necessary to give the parent several minutes to ventilate and express his/her feelings before bringing the interview back on track. Some nonoffending parents will be very concerned about what will happen to them as opposed to the child's immediate well-being. While taking note of this attitude, the interviewer can make it clear that this will be discussed at a later time. It is necessary for the investigator to determine how much of the child's statement the parent can corroborate. As in all interviews, it is frequently best to let the parent talk about his/her knowledge in a flowing narrative style, and then go back to ask specific questions at the end of this parent's recitation. Specifics to be covered should include:
This information is extremely important in assessing the cooperation of the parent, his/her ability to influence the future cooperation of the child, and his/her desire and ability to protect the child from further abuse. Other circumstantial evidence that this parent could provide to enhance the credibility of the child's statement includes a description of household routine; for example, which parent is the primary disciplinarian; who controls the finances; and what is the child's daily routine. These can be explored early in the interview in a manner that gives the nonoffending parent a chance to talk about nonsexual and less threatening matters first. The investigator needs to obtain all possible details during this initial interview. Once the nonoffending parent has had a chance to think about possible consequences of the situation or talks with the molester or other family members, he/she might be reluctant to expand on any statements that verify the child's account. Once the investigator has an understanding of the family dynamics, he/she can move to the more sensitive issues:
If the nonoffending parent is appropriately concerned, believes the child, and is supportive of the goals of the investigation, this parent can be enlisted as an ally with the investigator to help the child. If this parent does not believe or support the child or demonstrates a hostile, punitive, or rejecting attitude toward the child, then he/she cannot be considered properly protective of the victim. Out-of-home placement of the child should be discussed with CPS staff in these situations. The interviewer should be aware of the services such as temporary shelters, financial assistance, medical and psychological assistance, etc., that are available for the nonoffending spouse and children. It is preferable to have this information in written form, which can be left with the nonoffending parent. If possible, end the interview on a positive note, giving the nonoffending parent a card with the investigator's name and telephone number. Let the parent know that if he/she needs any assistance or thinks of anything that would help the child to feel free to call. The investigator should prepare the parent for further intervention of the criminal justice system, such as the possibility of preliminary hearings, grand jury proceedings, videotaped interviews, medical examinations, etc. The interviewer should attempt to address any concerns and answer any questions that the parent has at this time. The law enforcement investigator should remember that if circumstances warrant, charges can be brought against the nonoffending parent for either complicity in the sexual abuse itself or failure to protect the child. This should be discussed with the team and the prosecutor, if appropriate. Interviewing Parents in Out-of-Home Abuse Cases In out-of-home abuse cases where the perpetrator is not a family member, parents are interviewed after the child has been interviewed. Investigators are interested in what the child has told the parents concerning the assault(s) and in physical or behavioral indicators that they may have observed. In cases where the offender is someone known, the investigator wants to explore the parents' relationship with the offender, how they first met the offender, what the offender told them he/she was doing with their child, and how the offender responded to particular questions the parents asked concerning activities with the child. It is important to confirm whether or not the parents believe the child and what plan they can develop to prevent further abuse. Investigators should offer parents an explanation of the steps in the investigative process and discuss the possibility that the child may recant the disclosure. Parents should be instructed not to question the child about the abuse but be prepared to discuss it if the child brings it up. Investigators should give parents a name and number to call if they have problems during the investigation or think of further details relevant to the case.18 Generally the next step in the investigative process is to arrange a medical examination, as appropriate. Some controversy exists as to which children should be physically examined. Advocates for exams for all alleged victims argue that the exam may provide evidence of genital trauma, venereal disease, or the presence of sperm even in cases where no abuse was disclosed by the child or the abuse was minimized by the victim. Another reason offered for examining every child is that it will assure the child victim that he/she is unharmed and allay any fears that they have been damaged. Other researchers suggest that requiring a child who has not been abused and denies any contact to undergo a genital exam is very stressful in its own right and may unnecessarily traumatize the child. Evidence of sexual assault can be medically detected in only a minority of cases. Muram, for example, reported that only 45 percent of the cases studied revealed clear evidence of sexual assault among cases in which the perpetrator confessed.19 Other researchers concur. Such findings are not surprising, given the nature of sexual abuse. Most incidents of exposure, fondling, forced masturbation, or oral sex would not be expected to leave medically detectable evidence. For this reason, the terms chosen by the physician for the exam report can be very powerful. A child disclosing a history of fondling to the examiner may be described on the report as having "no evidence of sexual abuse," subtly undermining the child's statement. The same physician may just as accurately phrase the results as, "consistent with the child's statement, no abnormal medical findings."20 Physicians and nurses specializing in child sexual abuse know ways to minimize the child's discomfort. Those working with the child should describe clearly, in terms the child will understand, what is going to happen, perhaps using anatomically detailed dolls. The child should be given as much control as possible over the exam. The examiner should conduct a general physical exam in a head-to-toe fashion, paying no more attention to the genitalia than is necessary. Tools such as colposcopes or special magnifying medical cameras may allow the examiner to see and record on film important findings. The examiners should swab for sperm as appropriate to the case, which may include swabs of the mucus lining of the nose (where semen may have been aspirated after oral sex), vagina, rectum, or as indicated. Body orifices should be examined for trauma, unusual characteristics, or foreign bodies. Pregnancy testing may be appropriate, and venereal disease screening is often indicated. The body should be examined for teeth marks and signs of physical abuse. The physician should take a thorough history from a child who is old enough to communicate verbally. This will help the examiner to focus the exam. In addition, statements made by physicians are admissible in many civil proceedings and, at times, in criminal trials. In taking the assault history, the physician should ascertain the time lapse since the assault and the kind of sexual contact (e.g., oral, anal, vaginal, whether or not ejaculation took place, and whether or not a condom was used). The number of assailants, use of force or weapons, or injuries secondary to force/restraints/escape should be explored. The physician needs to question the child concerning post-assault symptoms such as pain, bleeding, bruises, loss of consciousness, nausea, or vomiting. An example of a question a physician could ask is: Did the child have any post-assault activities, such as bathing or douching, defecation, urination, eating or drinking (which would be important in cases of oral assault), or was the clothing changed? The physician should try to document any prior sexual contact the child has had. The investigator should request legible copies of all medical reports and notes. The investigator should confirm how evidence collected during the exam will be handled to ensure the chain of custody. All samples should be labeled with the name of the victim and identification number and with the signature of the person(s) responsible for collecting and processing the sample. The evidence should be maintained in a locked environment and signed over only to representatives of law enforcement or the prosecutor. A primary objective of every law enforcement investigation of child sexual abuse should be to avoid having the child victim testify in court. Building a case so strong that the defendant will want to plead out rather than go to trial is one way to accomplish this goal. The presence of physical evidence is a key determinant toward this end. The investigator should view every case, no matter what the relationship between the offender and the child, as a case which he/she is preparing for vigorous prosecution. If, after the interview with the child, the investigator feels that this is a potentially valid complaint, the officer should proceed with the investigation, just as he/she would with any other criminal investigation. One of the most important points to keep in mind in these cases is that corroborative evidence is extremely critical; all attempts should be made to secure any evidence that supports any statement that the child has made. The investigator should also keep in mind standard investigative crime scene procedures and use these in all possible circumstances. The following rules of evidence should be followed:
The investigator should be creative in the search. The search warrant should be broad enough to include items that might not be considered sexual, but which the child may have mentioned in the statement as used by the offender to entice the child, help consummate the crime, or record the crime. Investigators must also consider the possibility of obtaining a legal consent to search when interviewing a nonoffending spouse in an intrafamilial case. As mentioned earlier, if the investigator believes that such items may be destroyed or hidden after the child is interviewed, the investigator should take immediate steps to secure this evidence. This may involve contacting the prosecutor to expedite the issuance of a search warrant or sending officers to the location where it is believed this material is housed to secure it until such time as a search warrant can be obtained. The investigator should consult with the prosecutor regarding what circumstances would be considered exigent where the items could be seized without a search warrant. Telephone search warrants might be used in jurisdictions where they are permitted.21 Interviewing the Alleged Perpetrator If the identity of the offender is not known, the investigator should conduct normal investigative procedures to ascertain identity. This means neighborhood canvases, all points bulletins, a check of local jails, hospitals, etc., that have had recent inmate releases, strangers in the neighborhood, and suspicious vehicles that may have been reported. If possible, the timing of the interview with the offender should be selected carefully. Many sexual abuse cases have been lost or jeopardized because investigators moved too rapidly to interview the offender before they were fully conversant with the facts of the case. The investigator must keep in mind that the offender is, in many cases, not likely to cooperate with him or her unless the offender is convinced that the investigator has strong evidence to prove the abuse. However, in some cases consideration should be given to interviewing this individual early in the investigation where the element of surprise can work to the investigator's advantage. The offender, if unaware of the investigation, will not have prepared an alibi, retained an attorney, or destroyed physical evidence, all of which is possible if the investigator does not act swiftly. This should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. There is no one style of interviewing a suspected child sexual assault offender. Just as there are different types of offenders, there are different techniques that will work with various offenders. Adolescents, for example, account for a significant number of offenders, and the interviewing style and procedure must be adjusted, consistent with local procedure. As stated earlier, the primary objective of any investigation is to collect enough corroborative evidence so that it will not be necessary to have the child testify in court. Therefore, the interview with the suspected offender should be handled in a timely and skilled fashion. It is preferable that only one investigator be present during the interview. As in interviews with the child victim, the offender will often feel inhibited about his/her behavior if other persons are present. It is desirable that this interview be conducted in a room with a two-way mirror and, if possible, videotaped for the record. The principal psychological factor contributing to a successful interrogation is privacy, being alone with the person under interrogation. In providing privacy during interrogations, it is advisable to select a quiet room with none of the usual police surroundings and with no distractions within the subject's view. In cases where a suspect has given an alibi, it should be checked if at all possible before the interview begins. Any known inconsistencies in the alibi will assist the officer. Moreover, an alibi check may actually establish the innocence of the suspect. However, many other circumstances may point to his/her guilt. A background check should be done before the interview to determine if there are any prior arrests for crimes of a similar nature. The number of times he/she has moved or the number of jobs the suspect has held may point toward the fact that in prior communities and in prior places of employment there was some problem that might have stemmed from the individual's sexual preference. The officer should avoid creating the impression that he/she is an investigator seeking a confession or conviction. It is far better to appear in the role of one who is seeking the truth. The neutrality of this position will give the investigator an advantage and may lull the suspect into being overconfident. The interrogator should dress in civilian clothes rather than in uniform during an interrogation. Otherwise, the subject will have before him/her a constant reminder of police custody and the possible consequences of an incriminating disclosure. The investigator should avoid inflammatory words or expressions such as "rape," "pornography," "abuse," and "confess your crime." It is much more desirable, from a psychological standpoint, to employ milder terminology like "touch," "caress," and "tell the truth." The investigator should keep in mind that some offenders do not view their activities with children as criminal. They may not regard the fondling of children as a criminal assault, and they may not regard the photographs of children in the nude or engaged in sexual activity as pornography. The investigator should maintain and use nonjudgmental language. A subject should be treated with decency and respect, regardless of the nature of his/her offense. This behavior on the part of the interviewer may well be the turning point of the interrogation and may make the suspect feel comfortable enough with the interrogator to give a full confession and, in fact, admit to crimes of which the interviewer had no prior knowledge. It has been noted by a number of investigators that once a child molester begins talking, he/she frequently details each and every episode of sexual assault that the offender can remember. A sympathetic, understanding attitude in an interrogation is far more effective than a threatening approach. Because of the coercion issue, the interviewer should avoid, at any time during the interview, making any promises to the offender about the possible effect a confession would have on the prosecution of the case. To promise an offender anything at this time, including probation or a diversionary treatment program, is promising something the law enforcement officer cannot carry out. If the offender stands by his/her constitutional rights not to make a statement and the investigator then advises the offender that he/she will not be considered for diversion or treatment programs if he/she does not confess and he/she subsequently confesses, this confession may well be held as having been coerced and be considered inadmissible in a court hearing. Therefore, the investigator should work hard to establish rapport with the offender so that the offender wants to try and please or brag to the investigator about the activity. In dealing with a suspect whose guilt is definite or reasonably certain, the interrogator will usually disclose his/her belief in the suspect's guilt and attempt from the onset to secure a confession or incriminating statement. If the interview with the child was videotaped, it might be useful to show the offender all or part of the tape. In some instances, this has persuaded offenders to make a full confession. During the interview with the suspect, investigators should:
As with medical findings, the opinions of mental health professionals will sometimes be introduced into child abuse investigations. Extreme caution should be exercised when mental health professionals are called upon to offer an opinion about whether this child was abused by this perpetrator, particularly if based on the assessment of the alleged offender. Various psychological tests and/or clinical interviews by a trained professional may yield information about the individual's predisposition to commit abuse or factors which may contribute to abuse, such as a history of victimization, immaturity, sexual arousal toward children, a tendency toward violence, or a loss of self-control. (It should be recognized that defense expert witnesses may argue that the lack of such known risk factors makes the individual innocent of any criminal charges.) Both arguments overstate the role of the mental health professional. The time for such input is when sentences are being determined, when the court is considering incarceration versus community-based alternatives. While not appropriate evidence, the insight of mental health professionals can be helpful in child maltreatment investigations. Mental health therapists can best assess the impact of the abuse and the investigation on the child. They can provide insight into the ability of the child to testify and explain the developmental reasons for a child's actions. Their clinical training may help determine the credibility of a child's statements or how the investigator should proceed in interviewing the principals involved. State child abuse statutes abrogate professional privileges of confidentiality. Consequently, mental health professionals must share relevant information regarding a particular case.
This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare Information Gateway. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
