|
HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS FOR CROSS
EXAMINING MENTAL HEALTH WITNESSES IN SEX ABUSE CASES
FREE ARTICLE:
By Michael Brock and Attorney Michael
Trager
Recently
I was asked by an attorney in another state to provide some potential questions
for cross-examining mental health experts in a sex abuse allegation case. The persons being interviewed were the
treating therapist, whose recommendation was based solely on the mother’s
allegation of abuse, and someone who had been hired to do an “extended”
post-forensic interview. Both of these tactics
are still commonly employed by prosecutors or others involved in the forensic
interviewing process when they are not happy with the evidence obtained through
legitimate means. The fact that this
process of incorporating sexist and intentionally biased evidence into
legitimate legal process is still routine should give anyone genuinely
concerned about achieving due process for men accused of these crimes the
willies. It does me. Of course, these represent possible questions
and could be reworded or rephrased to suit the needs of the case.
QUESTIONS
FOR TREATING THERAPIST:
- What is your
education and licensure?
- What specific
training have you had in the area of forensic mental health? Sexual abuse assessment?
- Do you know the ethics
codes applicable to your licensure?
- Are you aware of
professional documents specifically relating to forensic practice (i.e., your
state’s Forensic Interviewing Protocol; APA Standards of Forensic
Practice; APA Guidelines for Conducting Child Custody Interviews, etc.?)
- Do you know what a
forensic interview of a child suspected of being abused is? A forensic interviewing protocol?
- Did you do a forensic
evaluation sufficient to make a parenting time recommendation?
- Do you think it is
ethical to make a parenting time recommendation for someone you have not
evaluated? Someone you never met?
- What method did you
use?
- Do you know what the
American Psychological Association has to say about it?[1]
- Who was the
identified client and what was your treatment diagnosis in this case? (probably some mention of the as yet
unsubstantiated abuse)
- Prior to your
recommendation that the child should have no contact with her father, what
did she reveal to you?
- Who and/or what were
your sources of information prior to interviewing the child, that is,
persons or documents, or both?
- Based on what
information did you conclude that the child had been abused?
- Was it based on what
the mother told you?
- By what method did
you assess the credibility of the mother?
- Is that a proper
basis to conclude that a child has been abused?
- Do you know that
there are statistically more false allegations of abuse in child
custody/visitation cases per the forensic literature?[2]
- How many cases of
sexual abuse have you reported?
- Have you ever handled
a false allegation of abuse? What
you thought was a false allegation?
How would you distinguish between the two?
- Did it occur to you
in this case that the mother could be lying? Why or why not?
- If it turned out she
was lying, you could have done irreparable harm to the child by severing
contact with her father, correct?
- Did you consider
talking to the father before making that recommendation? Why or why not?
- Do you know that it
is unethical to engage in dual roles with a client? Perform both treatment and forensic
roles with the same client? (Quote ethics codes and protocol that address
the issue.)
QUESTIONS
FOR THE EXTENDED INTERVIEW “TRAUMA EVALUATOR”:
- What is your
education and licensure?
- What specific
training have you had in the area of forensic mental health? Sexual abuse assessment?
- Do you know the
ethics codes applicable to your licensure?
- Are you aware of
professional documents specifically relating to forensic practice (i.e., your
state’s Forensic Interviewing Protocol; APA Standards of Forensic
Practice; APA Guidelines for Conducting Child Custody Interviews, etc.?)
- Do you know the
difference between treatment and forensic functions?
- What are the
differences?
- Do you know what a
forensic interview of a child suspected of being abused is? A forensic interviewing protocol?
- Do you know that it
is unethical to engage in dual roles with a client? Perform both treatment and forensic
roles with the same client? (Quote both ethics codes and protocol if they
address the issue.)
- Do you know that
accepted protocol based on forensic research involve only one session with
the child?[3]
- Do you know what
model you were following in your “Trauma Evaluation?” (Connie Carnes, NCAC
model, available on line).
- Do you know that a
forensic examination—one that is intended to produce evidence for the
court—should attempt to be objective and neutral?
- Do you think that the
mother’s demonization of the father may have colored your view of him and
made you more likely to believe the child had been abused?
- Did the mother’s
report of that the father had been sexually abused make you more likely to
believe that he would be a sexual abuser?
Can you cite any studies that say any such connection, were it verified to be true; can
ever be considered to be predictive?
(None exists: there is actually a higher correlation for people who
have been physically abused.)
- Did you ever doubt
the information that was provided to you by the mother? Did it ever occur to you that she could
be lying? Did you seek any
independent confirmation of the information she reported to you? Did you observe any of the serious
symptoms that she reportedly had observed with the child?
- Do you know of any
studies suggesting that the child’s symptoms,
as described by the mother, are predictive
of a child who has been sexually abused? (None exist.)
- Have you ever
observed any bizarre behavior by
this child?
- You only have the
word of the mother that the child “made herself sick” as a reason for
withholding visitation, correct?
- The doctor said there
was no sign of abuse when the mother took the father to see him, didn’t
he?
- What was the result
of the SANE (Sexual Abuse Nurse Examiner) assessment? (negative)
- Why was The child
taken for therapy? (Abuse investigation in disguise)
- Do you think she was
being questioned about abuse?
- Had anyone made a
finding of abuse prior to visitation being terminated? So it was terminated on the report of
the mother regarding the child’s alleged behavior?
- How do you think a
child would perceive such termination in a case where there was no abuse?
(daddy must have done something wrong)
- Would you, as a
mental health professional, expect that as soon as visitation ceased, the
child’s behavior would immediately normalize without treatment? (per mom
it did)
- Is it proper forensic
procedure to let the mother stay with the child during a forensic
interview? (no)
- Did you allow mother
to sit within earshot during the remainder of your ongoing forensic
interviews, including bringing her boyfriend to the last session? (yes)
what does the protocol say (no)
- Did you videotape
your sessions? Take verbatim
notes? (no) Would it be in keeping
with the highest forensic standards of practice to do so? (yes)
- What does the
forensic literature say about the use of anatomical dolls?[4]
(They produce false positives, especially when used before there has been
a disclosure.)
- When you asked the
child why she didn’t see her father anymore, she responded, “Because he
hurt me.” You asked the child
“How?” and the child said, “I don’t know.”
Did you consider the possibility that the child’s response had been
coached and that was why she didn’t have any specifics?
- Did you ever consider
as an alternate hypothesis during the course of your assessment, that
mother could have an agenda of making these allegations to terminate the
relationship of the father with the daughter?
- During these
interviews with the child you took more evidence from mother of continued
decompensation—playing with her feces—when she had previously said the
child had made a remarkable recovery when contact with dad was
terminated. Did you ever witnessed
any of this regressed behavior? Any
extreme behavior on the child’s part?
Why wasn’t in the notes? (If she says the child running out of her
office was extreme, point out that it is no where near what mother says
she observed, and it is possible—in my view probable—that the child was
reacting to the extreme pressure she was being put under by the trauma
evaluator.)
- Was there any
independent verification of this behavior by anyone?
- When “The child did
not want to talk further about good touch, bad touch and “It again seemed
that [the child] seemed to understand what was being asked, but refused to
cooperate,” how did you interpret these behaviors? Could it have been that the child felt
she was being coerced to say something that she knew hadn’t happened?
- Do you think that
asking a child to “label each body part and state their function and
whether anyone has touched them, hurt them, or made them feel uncomfortable
on each part” is considered by many researchers to be very leading and
inappropriate forensic technique? (There
is almost universal agreement that the best evidence is the child’s
narrative. Note the protocol
enclosed based on the NICHD model, Michigan Protocol, and any other Protocol
deemed scientifically valid, which probably says the same.)
- Did The child deny
being hurt or touched on most body parts?
- When she did not want
to talk about her “gina” or her “bum” how did you interpret her response?
(evidence of guilt of the father)
- Could she have been
showing normal childhood embarrassment?
- Later in the same
paragraph, “The examiner again asked about being hurt and the child got
agitated and denied that she had been hurt.” Did it occur that you were asking very
suggestive and leading questions repeatedly and that you were putting the
child under a great deal of pressure?
What response were you looking for?
What did you expect the child to say?
- Doesn’t the forensic
research show that the more interviews and the more times you ask the same
question, the more likely you are to get a positive response when
questioning children?
- To this point the
child has twice denied that anyone has molested her in response to direct
and leading questions. How many
times did the child deny being molested before finally giving you an
affirmative response? (Six times
the child said no or refused to answer.)
- What do children do
when they are under pressure to supply an answer and they don’t have it?
(They fish for it based on what they believe the adult asking the question
wants to hear.)[5]
- In session five, in
response to your question, “Did daddy touch you?” she said she played the
naked game with her brother and sister.
You asked her to explain.
Would you describe her response as fantasy?
- You read, Something
Happened to Me, and Speak Up, Say No! to the child. Was the purpose of reading these books
about children who had been sexually abused to elicit a statement from the
child that she had been abused by her father? Does the impact of all this strike you
as in anyway leading or coercive?
Can you imagine the pressure you were putting on this child?
- Was “no” ever an
acceptable answer to this interrogation process?
- After the story was
read, the child said she still didn’t know why her daddy hurt her; did she
ever say how? (She ran out of the room)
- At the end of the
session The mother told you that The father had threatened the child with
alienation from her extended family if she disclosed. Was there any question in your mind that
she might be lying? How could you
have explored that?
- In the last session,
number six, the child said, “I am going to tell you a long story about
daddy hurting me.” Why would she
just walk in and offer that information, given that she had been so
resistant up to this point? Could
she have been coached?
- What do you say about
the story that followed? You said,
“She went on with a story that didn’t make much sense.” Would you say that she was in fantasy? Would you say that was because she knew
you expected a story from her and she didn’t have one so she was looking
for a story that would satisfy you?
- You then said, “The
examiner asked about the “gina” and the child said, “I don’t think
so.” What does I don’t think so
mean? Would you say that in normal
conversation, even with a three and a half year old it means, “Probably
not?” Is that the ordinary meaning
of that phrase?
- You then say, “The
examiner asked the child if she were sure or not sure.” What message were you conveying to the
child at that time? When you ask a
child a question repeatedly, aren’t you giving the child the message that
her original answer was wrong?
Hasn’t every adult taught children with this kind of
questioning? What color is this
Billy? Blue. What color? Red. Come on Billy; try really hard, what color?
Yellow. Yes! It’s yellow! Very good, Billy!
- So the child finally
gives you the only answer you were prepared to accept, “Yes, I’m sure he
did,” but because she doesn’t recall any such touching, she is not
prepared for the next question, “What did he touch you with?” The child doesn’t want to guess wrong
again; she wants the game over, so she asks you for the answer, and you
give it to her, “His hand.” Do you
think it is right to provide answers for a child in a forensic interview
where the answer will be used to determine the fate of the child’s
relationship with her father?
- Now let’s go back;
whose model of investigation are you using here? The only person that I was able to track
down who recommends extended interviewing is Connie Carnes, are you
familiar with her protocol? (provide her a copy). She has a section called “Trauma
Assessment.” That’s what you called
your interview, right?
- Do you know how many
sessions Your state’s Protocol calls for?
(Probably one session, but be sure)
- Do you know how many
sessions Carnes recommends? “The
current NCAC protocol involves one session with the non-offending
caregiver and five sessions with the child…”
- At the beginning of
the forensic interview, how do you know who is the non-offending
caregiver? Is it safe to say that
the person making the allegation of abuse is assumed to be the
non-offending caregiver? So it’s a
good idea to be fast on the draw?
- So, is it fair to say
that this model assumes there has been an offense?
- Can we assume, since
we are talking about forensic interviews of children suspected of being
sexually abused, that the offense is sexual abuse?
- Ms. Carnes also says,
“Alleged offending parents are generally not interviewed in this model.
Frequently, however, information obtained in the forensic evaluation is
used by law enforcement to confront the alleged offender.” So, then, it can also be assumed that we
know who the alleged offender is, right?
Can we assume that would be whomever the non-offending caregiver—or
since she is being more precise her—the non-offending parent says it is?
- Doesn’t your
interviewing model assume that there is an offense, a victim, a
non-offender, and an alleged offending parent? Is that proper forensic procedure?
- And how do we know
all this? From the non-offending
parent, who you presume is telling the truth, right?
- Ms. Carnes also
states that, “Forensic evaluation is a process of extended
assessment of a child who is too frightened or young to be able to fully
disclose his/her experiences in an initial forensic interview.” So this model assumes that the reason
the child did not disclose in the first interview is because the child was
too young or too frightened, not because the crime didn’t happen, right?
- She also says that,
“The 8-session condition was significantly more likely to produce
successful outcomes than the 4-session condition. Analysis of disclosure
patterns in the 8-session condition revealed that 95.3% of new disclosures
were obtained by the 5th session with the child. Only 51.2% of the new
disclosures had been obtained by the 3rd session with the child.” So a successful
outcome is equated with disclosure, correct? And therefore non disclosure is failure,
right?
- Isn’t it true that
both science and law have as their underlying goals to remain as objective
as possible and ultimately, to arrive at the truth? Would you say that Ms. Carnes is stating
a position that is neutral, or one that assumes one outcome is to be desired
and one not? And that the outcome
to be desired is the substantiation of the claim of abuse?
- Yet even Ms. Carnes,
despite her clearly discernable bias, has some misgivings about her
method; hence she says, “With five child sessions, the likelihood of
obtaining any available credible disclosure information is maximized, and
the suggestibility risks of longer evaluations are minimized.” How many sessions did you have with the
child? Six? When was disclosure
made? That’s right; it was on the 6th
visit.
- You stated that the
child was “unable or unwilling to talk about any suspected abuse until the
last session,” but isn’t it true that you talked about abuse, questioned
her about it, read to her about it, throughout the entire course of this
extended trauma evaluation, and that the child only agreed that something
had happened to her as a result of being asked a direct and leading
question and your unwillingness to accept her original response, and then
she was unable to give you the simplest detail regarding how it happened;
you had to provide that detail—that she had been touched with her father’s
hand?
- Are there any studies
or legal decisions cited in the forensic literature that you are aware of
that state children’s behavior is diagnostic of sexual abuse?[6] Are there any that say it is not
diagnostic?[7]
- Have you read any of
these studies?
- Do you think it is
right for mental health professionals to draw conclusions of law?
- What do you think is
the central principle of mental health forensic practice? Would you agree with Mr. Brock (a mental
health professional) and Mr. Saks (an attorney) who say that mental health
investigations should track law, not vice versa? Do you think that was done here?
- Do you know that
there are statistically more false allegations of abuse in child
custody/visitation cases per the forensic literature?[8]
- In “Disclosure of
Child Sexual Abuse: What Does the Research Tell Us About the Ways that
Children Tell?[9]”
the authors conclude with regard to Ms. Carnes methods:
Suggestive techniques, especially when used by biased
interviewers entail a risk of producing false allegations (e.g. Bruck, Ceci
& Hembrooke 2002, Poole and Lamb 1998)…Our
analysis clearly shows that when children who have been abused are questioned
in a formal setting, they will usually tell, obviating the need for suggestive
strategies.”
Would
you agree with this conclusion?
[1] APA
Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Divorce Cases 13. The psychologist does not give any
opinion regarding the psychological functioning of any individual who has not
been personally evaluated.
[2] American Psychiatric Assn Protocol 1988, Ceci and
Bruck 1995, Lamb and Poole 1998, Bow et. al.
2002
[4] They produce false positives (Lamb and Poole 1998 P.
186-187, 190-191); Michigan Protocol
[5] Terence Campbell, Smoke and Mirrors (1998),
P. 29-30
[6] Carnes (2001) states, “The Child Sexual Behavior
Inventory (CSBI, Friedrich,1990), a
parent or caregiver report instrument, measures sexual behavior, the only
indicator that has been empirically shown to discriminate between abused and
non-abused children (Friedrich, 1993).”
However, she acknowledges that Friedrich did not claim the test alone
was predictive. Moreover, in the context
of this case, the obvious concern would be the potential bias of the parent
making the allegation.
[7] Bow, et. al. (2002), Bruck, Ceci, Shuman (2005),
Michigan Supreme Court, People v. Beckley
(1990), Lamb and Poole, P. 214 (1998), New Jersey v. Michaels (1993), San Diego
County Grand Jury report (1994).
[8] American Psychiatric Assn Protocol 1988, Ceci and
Bruck 1995, Lamb and Poole 1998, Bow et. al.
2002
[9] Bruck, Ceci, Shuman 2005
|