Çocuklarla Yapılan Adli Görüşmeler İçin Ulusal Çocuk Sağlığı ve İnsan Gelişim Enstitüsü Protokolü (NICHD) Önerisi: Türkçe Versiyonu

Öz

Adli süreç içerisinde çocuklarla yapılan görüşmelerin uygun bir şekilde yapılması ve olaya dair detaylara gerçeğe en yakın şekilde ulaşılabilmesi hem mağdur olan çocuğa hem de sanığa ilişkin adli sürecin hedeflenen yönde yürütülebilmesini sağlamaktadır. Bu nedenle, özellikle çocuklarla yapılan adli görüşmelerde, çocuktan elde edilecek bilginin nitelik ve niceliğinin sağlanması ve korunması amacıyla gerekli önlemler alınmakta, adli sistem içerisinde ihtiyaç duyulan düzenlemeler yapılmaktadır. Ülkemizde çocuk izlem merkezleri ve adli görüşme odalarının kurulmasının asli nedenlerinden biri de budur. Ancak, söz konusu fiziki düzenlemelerin yanı sıra adli görüşme yöntemlerinin de göz önünde bulundurulması ve adli sistemde çocukla temas içinde olan uzmanların ortak kullanımına sunulan standart bir görüşme protokolünün oluşturulması öncelik arz etmektedir. Bu bağlamda, çocuklarla gerçekleştirilen adli görüşmelerin ve bu görüşmeler için sağlanması gereken kriterlerin önemine değinmek amacıyla yapılan bu çalışmada, özellikle cinsel istismar mağduru çocuklarla gerçekleştirilen adli görüşmelerde çocuklardan daha güvenilir bilgi alabilmek adına oluşturulan Ulusal Çocuk Sağlığı ve İnsan Gelişim Enstitüsü Protokolü’nün (The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Protocol-NICHD) Türkçe versiyonu tam metin olarak paylaşılmıştır. Aynı zamanda, bu çalışma vasıtasıyla istismar mağduru çocuklarla adli görüşme sürecinde yer alan uzmanlar için yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme prokollerinin kullanımının öneminin vurgulanması amaçlanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• NICHD protokolü,adli görüşme,çocuk istismarı

The Proposal of The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Protocol for Forensic Interviews with Children: The Turkish Version

Öz

Proper forensic interviews with children during the judicial process and accessing the details of the incident as close to the reality as possible ensure that the judicial process concerning both the victim child and the accused can be carried out in the right direction. Therefore, necessary measures are taken within the judicial system in order to ensure and protect the quality and quantity of information to be obtained, especially in judicial interviews conducted with children. This is one of the main reasons for the establishment of child monitoring centers and forensic interview rooms in our country. However, it is a priority to consider the legal arrangements as well as the physical arrangements in question and to establish a standard interview protocol for common use of experts in contact with the child in the judicial system. In this context, the aim of this study was to discuss the importance of forensic interviews with children and the criteria to be met for these interviews, Turkish version of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Protocol, which was established in order to obtain more reliable information from children, especially during judicial interviews conducted with children victims of sexual abuse is shared as full text. At the same time, this study aimed to emphasize the importance of the use of semi-structured interview protocols for the experts involved in forensic interviews with child victims of abuse.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• NICHD protocol,forensic interview,child abuse

Kaynakça

1. Ahern, E.C., Lamb, M.E. (2016). “Children’s reports of disclosure recipient reactions in Forensic interviews: Comparing the NICHD and MoGP protocols”, Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(2), 85-93. doi:10.1007/s11896-016-9205-x
2. American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children. (2012). Practice guidelines: Forensic interviewing in cases of suspected child abuse. http://www.childfirstpa.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/APSAC_FI_Guidelines_2012.pdf. (25 Aralık 2016 tarihinde indirilmiştir)
3. American Psychological Association (2002). A Reference for Professionals: Developing. Washington: American Psychological Association.
4. Atılgan, E.Ü. , Yağcıoğlu, S. ve Çavdar, Y. (2014a). “Çocuklarla adli görüşme odaları ihtiyaçlar, iyi uygulama örnekleri ve çocuklarla adli görüşme standartları özet rapor.” Ankara: Adalet Bakanlığı, Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı, Hakimler ve Savcılar Yüksek Kurulu, Türkiye Adalet Akademisi, UNICEF Türkiye.
5. Atılgan, E. Ü. , Yağcıoğlu, S. ve Çavdar, Y. (2014b). Çocuklarla Adli Görüşme için Rehber. Ankara: Adalet Bakanlığı, Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı, Hakimler ve Savcılar Yüksek Kurulu, Türkiye Adalet Akademisi, UNICEF Türkiye.
6. Benia, L. R., Hauck-Filho, N., Dillenburg, M. & Stein, L. M. (2015). “The NICHD investigative interview protocol: A meta-analytic review”, Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 24(3), 259-279. doi: 10.1080/10538712.2015.1006749
7. Block, S.D., Foster, E.M., Pierce, M.W., Berkoff, M.C., Runyan, D.K. (2013). “Multiple forensic interviews during investigations of child sexual abuse: A cost-effectiveness analysis”, App Dev Sci, 17(4), 174-183.
8. Cirlugea, O., O’Donohue, W.T. (2016). Review of Psychometrics of Forensic Interview Protocols with Children. In W. T. O’Donohue & M. Fanetti. (Ed.), Forensic Interviews Regarding Child Sexual Abuse: A Guide to Evidence-Based Practice (pp. 237-257). Switzerland: Springfield.

9. Dağlı, T., İnanıcı, M.A. (2010). Üniversiteler için Hastane Temelli Çocuk Koruma Merkezleri El Kitabı. Ankara: Fersa Ofset Matbaacılık.
10. Davies, D., Cole, J., Albertella, G., McCulloh, L., Allen, K. & Kekevian, H. (1996). “Model for conduction forensic interviews with child victims of abuse”, Child Matreatment. 1(3), 189-199.
11. DePure, D.P. & Sites, J. (2015). Child Abuse Investigation Field Guide. Massachusetts: Elsevier
12. DeVoe, E.R., Faller, K.C. (1999). “The charateristics of disclosure among children who may have been sexually abused”, Child Maltreatment, 4(3), 217-221.
13. Ermağan, E. (2015). Çocuk görgü tanıklığının güvenilirliğinin incelenmesi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Adli Tıp Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Anabilim Dalı, (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi), İstanbul.
14. Ermağan Çağlar, E., Kocabaşoğlu, N. (2018). “Bellek boşluklarını doldurmaya zorlamanın çocuk görgü tanığı belleği üzerindeki olumsuz etkileri”, Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi, 9(34), 451-473.
15. Faller, K. C. (2007a). “Forensic and Clinical Interviewer Roles in Child Sexual Abuse.” In K.C. Faller (Ed.), Interviewing Children About Sexual Abuse: Contraversies and Best Practice. (pp. 3-10). New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
16. Faller, K.C. (2007b). “Interviewing Children About Sexual Abuse.” In K.C. Faller (Ed.), Interviewing Children About Sexual Abuse: Contraversies and Best Practice. (pp. 66-89). New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
17. Garven, S., Wood, J. M., Malpass, R. S., & Shaw III, J. S. (1998). “More than suggestion: The effect of interviewing techniques from the McMartin Preschool case”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 347-359.
18. Glaser, D. (2005). “Child maltreatment”, Psychiatry, 4(7): 53-57.
19. Herman, J.L. (2005). “Justice from the victim’s perspective”, Violence Against Women, 11(5), 571-602.
20. Lamb, M.E., Sternberg, K.J., Orbach, Y., Esplin, P.W., Stewart, H., & Mitchell, S. (2003). “Age differences in young children's responses to open-ended invitations in the course of forensic interviews”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71(5), 926-934.
21. Lamb, M.E., Orbach, Y., Sternberg, K.J., Aldridge, J., Pearson, S., Stewart, H., Esplin, P.W., Bowler, L. (2009). “Use of a structured investigative protocol enhances the quality of investigative interviews with alleged victims of child sexual abuse in Britain”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(4), 449-467.
22. La Rooy, D. & Lamb, E.M. (2011). “What happens when interviewers ask repeated questions in forensic interviews with children alleging abuse?”, J Police Crim Psych, 26:20–25. doi: 10.1007/s11896-010-9069-4.
23. La Rooy, D.J., Brubacher, S.P., Aromäki-Stratos, A., Cyr, M., Hershkowitz, I.I., Korkman, J., Myklebust, T., Naka, M., Peixoto, C.E.E., Roberts, K.P., Stewart, H., Michael E. Lamb, M.E., (2015). “The NICHD protocol: a review of an internationally-used evidence-based tool for training child forensic interviewers.”, Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice, 2(1), 76-89.
24. Malloy, L.C., Katz, C., Lamb, M.E., & Mugno, A.P. (2015). “Children's requests for clarification in investigative interviews about suspected sexual abuse”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29(3), 323-333. doi: 10.1002/acp.3101.
25. Orbach, Y., Hershkowitz, I., Lamb, M.E., Sternberg, K.J., Esplin, P.W., & Horowitz, D. (2000). “Assessing the value of structured protocols for forensic interviews of alleged child abuse victims”, Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(6), 733-752.
26. Pipe, M.E., Orbach, Y., Lamb, M., Abbott, C.B., & Stewart, H. (2008). Do best practice interviews with child abuse victims influence case processing. Unpublished report, US Department of Justice. ISO 690.
27. Pipe, M.E., Orbach, Y., Lamb, M., Abbott, C.B., Stewart, H. (2013). “Do case outcomes change when investigative interviewing practices change?”, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 19(2), 179-190.
28. Peixoto, C.E., Ribeiro, C., & Lamb, M., (2011). Forensic interview protocol in child sexual abuse. Why and what for?. In T. Magalhaes (Ed), Abuse & neglect series: To improve the management of child abuse and neglect [Vol.1]. (pp.133-160). Porto: SPECAN.
29. Price, E.A., Ahern, E.C. & Lamb, M.E. (2016). “Rapport-building in investigative Interviews of alleged child sexual abuse victims”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(5), 743-749. doi: 10.1002/acp.3249.
30. State Of Michigan Governor’s Task Force On Child Abuse And Neglect And Department Of Human Servıces. (2011). Forensic interview protocol. (3rd edition). https://www.michigan.gov/documents/dhs/DHS-PUB-0779_211637_7.pdf . (3 Eylül 2016 tarihinde indirilmiştir.)
31. Steele, L.C. (2012). “The Forensic Interview: A Challenging Conversation.” In P. Goodyear- Brown (Ed.), Handbook of child sexual abuse identification, assessment, and treatment. In (99-120). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
32. Sternberg, K.J., Lamb, M.E., Davies, G.M., & Westcott, H.L. (2001). “The memorandum of good practice: Theory versus application”, Child Abuse & Neglect, 25(5), 669-681.
33. Sternberg, K.J., Lamb, M.Y., Orbach, E., Esplin, P.W., & Mitchell, S.(2001). “Use of a structured investigative protocol enhances young children's responses to free-recall prompts in the course of forensic interviews”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 (5), 997-1005.
34. Şahin Dağlı, F. (2017). “Fiziksel ceza ve çocuk üzerine etkileri”, Türkiye Çocuk Hastalıkları Dergisi, 11(2), 11-12.
35. Taylor, C.A., Hamvas, L., Rice, J., Newman, D.L., & DeJong, W. (2011). “Perceived social norms, expectations, and attitudes toward corporal punishment among an urban community sample of parents”, Journal of Urban Health, 88(2), 254-269.
36. The Institute for Human Services,(2010). 203: Investigative Interviewing in Child Sexual Abuse Cases Standard Curriculum. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, School of Social Work
37. Themeli, O., & Panagiotaki, M. (2014). “Forensic interviews with children victims of sexual abuse: the role of the counselling psychologist”, The European Journal of Counselling Psychology, 3(1), 1-19.
38. Wood, B., Orsak, C., Murphy, M. & Cross, H.J.(1996). “Semistructured child sexual abuse interviews: interview and child characteristics related to credibility of disclosure”, Child Abuse & Neglect, 20 (1), 81-92.
39. Wood, J. M., & Garven, S. (2000). “How sexual abuse interviews go astray: Implications for prosecutors, police, and child protection services”, Child Maltreatment, 5(2), 109-118.
40. World Health Organization. (2003). Guidelines for medico-legal care of victims of sexual violence. Geneva.