Investigative interviewing of children has unique characteristics as an assessment technique. First, its goal is to elicit accurate information from children about specific upsetting events. These events include directly experienced child abuse and trauma, as well as witnessed startling or traumatic events. Second, investigative interviewers use methods of inquiry as open-ended as possible to obtain a narrative from children about the events in question. Finally, in most states, investigative interviews are conducted by mandated professionals—law enforcement officers and child protection caseworkers.
Historical Context of Investigative Interviewing
Investigative interviewing evolved in response to reports made to child protection agencies of child sexual abuse. Reports of physical abuse and physical neglect, as a rule, are resolved by examining the child’s condition and/or the child’s environment. In cases of physical abuse, a medical professional determines whether the type, pattern, and explanation of the child’s injuries indicate they are inflicted or perhaps accidental. Physical neglect generally is investigated by examining the child’s living situation to determine if shelter, food, and supervision are adequate, and the child’s person to see if the child’s height, weight, and general physical health are within normal limits.
Sexual abuse, in contrast, usually doesn’t result in definitive physical evidence, and when there is genital or anal injury, it quickly resolves, typically before the child is taken for a medical exam. Consequently, professionals must rely on other means for determining whether sexual abuse has occurred. Because offenders and even no offending family members commonly deny sexual abuse, the child’s statements and behavior constitute the best source of information about the likelihood of sexual abuse. In recent years, the investigative interviewing methods developed for sexual abuse have been applied to cases involving physical abuse and cases where children witness a traumatic event, such as domestic violence and homicide.
Rationale for Special Investigative Interview Techniques
Fact gathering is a practice employed in all child maltreatment cases. Children’s reports of sexual abuse, however, have been challenged in terms of their accuracy. One reason for such challenges is that, for most people, it is difficult to contemplate an adult engaging in sexual abuse of a child. However, the most vigorous challengers of children’s accounts have been those accused of sexual abuse and their advocates. Moreover, research has demonstrated that preschool children are more suggestible than older children and that all children can be overly compliant with authority figures and adults; these child characteristics could lead to an inaccurate report.
Concerns about children’s accuracy also have led to scrutiny of the interview techniques of the fact gathering professionals as a possible source of false accusations of sexual abuse. This scrutiny has influenced the types of questions and other interview techniques that professionals use when conducting investigative interviews.
Specific Strategies Employed in Investigative Interviewing
In this section, guidelines for investigative interviews will be described: number of interviews, interview phasing, demonstrative communication aids, and understanding the scope of abuse. Dozens of protocols have been developed. These guidelines will focus on commonalities among protocols.
Number of Interviews
Most children receive a single interview, but prevailing professional opinion is that additional interviews should be conducted if needed to resolve the question of sexual abuse. The use of a single interview is driven largely by the volume of reports and consequent pressure on scarce investigative resources. The single interview practice also derives from concerns that interviewers unwittingly could program children to provide a false account over several interviews.
Phases of the Interview
Investigative interviews are intended to have phases, at minimum a beginning, a middle, and an end. Presently there are interview protocols advising three to nine phases. In actuality, interviewers may find it difficult to follow a phased approach because interviewers are also admonished to follow the child’s lead.
The Beginning Phase
In the beginning phase, the interviewer explains his or her role in a way the child can understand and may set rules and expectations for the interview, such as telling the truth during the interview and not guessing at answers to questions. The interviewer also attempts, by various means, to develop rapport with the child and ascertain the child’s ability to describe past events, knowledge of his or her environment, and capacity to communicate.
Transition to the Abuse-Related Phase
The transition from the beginning phase to the middle or abuse-related phase of the interview is sometimes challenging. If the alleged abuse is recent, the interviewer may say, “Now that we’ve gotten to know each other, tell me why you came to talk to me,” or “I understand something may have happened to you. Tell me about it as best you can.” If the alleged abuse is more remote and/or less salient, the interviewer will need to employ more closed-ended questions.
The Abuse-Related Phase
During the abuse-related phase, the interviewer attempts to gather information to help determine if the child has been sexually abused, or if there is some other explanation for the report. The level of concern about sexual abuse will vary based upon information in the report. This information usually will guide the interviewer’s inquiry.
Despite reliance on background information, the goal of the abuse-related phase of the interview is to gather information from the child, not to ask the child to affirm information already known. Best practice is to use probes and questions as open-ended as possible— for example, “Tell me all about what happened to you”—and use follow-up prompts such as “Anything else?” and “Then what happened?” If the interviewer must use more closed-ended questions, such as “Did you get hurt?” or “Has someone touched you?” the interviewer will have less confidence in information the child provides. Furthermore, if the child provides an affirmative response to such closed-ended questions, the interviewer should follow up with an open-ended probe; for example, “Tell me everything you can remember about the touching, from the beginning, to the middle, to the end.”
After the interviewer has gained as much information as seems possible using open-ended probes, the interviewer asks follow-up questions to gather details, so that “who,” “what,” “when,” and “where” information is ascertained. The interviewer will also want to gather sensorimotor details about the sexual acts. The purpose of gathering details is twofold; detail will help the interviewer decide about the likelihood of sexual abuse, and detail should furnish information the prosecutor needs to make criminal charging decisions.
The Closure Phase
When the interviewer thinks all information related to the abuse has been gathered, he or she commences the closure phase, perhaps by saying, “I think we’re about done.” Closure may include letting the child know what will happen next, calming the child if the child is upset, and praising or thanking the child for participation in the interview.
Demonstrative Communication
Because children may lack verbal communication skills or may be reluctant or distressed when asked to respond verbally, the interviewer may employ demonstrative communication modes. These can include drawing pictures, demonstrating with a dollhouse, writing responses, or employing body maps—for instance, anatomical dolls, anatomical drawings, or a “gingerbread” body outline. When these communication modes are employed, the interviewer is not interpreting play, but rather asking the child to demonstrate acts by saying, for example, “Show me with the dolls what happened to you,” or “Can you mark on the man drawing the part or parts that Mr. Jones used to hurt you?”
Scope of the Abuse
Many children experience multiple acts of abuse. In such circumstances, interviewers try to determine approximate duration and frequency. Because of difficulties providing precise numbers, interviewers are advised to ask young children, “Did the abuse happen one time or more than one time?” With older children, interviewers may say, “Tell me how often he abused you,” or “Did he abuse you about once a week, once a month, or how often?” Because most children have difficulty describing every event in detail, a good practice is to ask, “Tell me about the last time the abuse happened.” The interviewer might also ask about the most memorable instance and the first time. In addition, interviewers probe to see if the child knows if the offender has abused other children and whether anyone else has sexually abused the child. Finally, some protocols call for queries about other types of maltreatment and parental problems such as substance abuse, domestic violence, and criminal activity.
The Role Of Mandated Professionals
State child protection and criminal statutes mandate to child protection workers and law enforcement primary responsibility for investigating sexual and other types of abuse. Consequently these professionals usually conduct investigatory interviews. In some jurisdictions, however, Children’s Advocacy Center forensic interviewers or mental health professionals also conduct investigative interviews.
Many states also require child protection and law enforcement professionals to do joint investigations of sexual abuse. How these joint endeavors are structured varies by jurisdiction, but these professionals have different roles. Child safety and well-being are primary mandates of child protective services (CPS). Investigating crimes, including sex crimes and other serious maltreatment, is the mandate of law enforcement. Differences in mandates can make joint investigation challenging.
Because both CPS and law enforcement may lack specific training in interviewing and assessment, investigative interviewing guidelines have added importance. Their potential lack of expertise is a rationale for scripting investigative interviews.
Protocols and Nondisclosure
Investigative interview protocols propose ideal interviews. In reality, many children cannot provide a narrative and need to be asked a fair number of closed-ended questions. In addition, protocols emphasize techniques that guard against eliciting fictitious reports of abuse. Research indicates about 60% of children thought to have been sexually abused make disclosures during investigative interviews. Little guidance is available for assisting children who do not readily disclose, although research from a variety of sources indicates nondisclosure of actual abuse is a larger problem than fictitious reports.
Bibliography:
- American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children. (1997). Guidelines for psychosocial evaluation of suspected sexual abuse in children (2nd ed.). Available at https://www.apsac.org/
- American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children. (2002). Guidelines on investigative interviewing in cases of alleged child abuse. Available at https://www.apsac.org/
- Bourg, W., Broderick, R., Flagor, R., Kelly, D., Ervin, D., & Butler, J. (1999). A child interviewer’s guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Davies, D., Cole, J., Albertella, G., McCulloch, L., Allen, K., & Kekevian, L. (1996). A model for conducting forensic interviews with child victims of abuse. Child Maltreatment, 1(2), 189–199.
- Faller, K. C. (2003). Understanding and assessing child sexual maltreatment (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Poole, D., & Lamb, M. (1998). Investigative interviews of children. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
This example Investigative Interviewing Of Children Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.
See also:
ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER
Always on-time
Plagiarism-Free
100% Confidentiality
Special offer!
