Forensic Interview with Children Victim of Sexual Abuse and Its Importance

Öz

Forensic interviews with children who are victims of sexual abuse are crucial in contributing to the legal process in terms of the information obtained from the child and prevention of secondary trauma by considering the child’s best interests. The reliable information obtained from the child contributes to the offender's punishment and help taking precautions to protect the victim. It is of utmost importance being aware of the factors affecting the interview process to obtain reliable information while working with children in forensic settings. Among the most critical factors that will have an impact on the interview process are the question styles used in the interviews. Question styles frequently utilized in forensic interviews are in open-ended, focused, optional, and yes/no answer formats. It has been observed that forensic interviewers allowing free association through open-ended questions gather more detailed and reliable information from the children. In addition to their question styles, forensic interviewers' education, knowledge, experience and sensitivity to children's emotional and behavioral clues also affect the interview process and prevent secondary traumas. In this review article, the interview experiences of forensic interviewers who have gone through a long training process and important factors affecting the interview process were discussed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sexual abuse
• forensic interview
• child abuse

Cinsel İstismar Mağduru Çocuklarla Adli Görüşme ve Önemi

Öz

Cinsel istismar mağduru çocuklarla yapılan adli görüşmeler çocuktan sürece ilişkin alınan bilgilerle hukuki sürece katkı sağlamasının yanı sıra çocuğun üstün yararını gözeterek ikincil travma yaşamasının önüne geçilmesi açısından oldukça önemlidir. Çocuktan alınan güvenilir bilgi ile suçlunun cezalandırılmasına ve mağdurun korunmasına yönelik önlemler alınmasına katkı sağlanmaktadır. Çocuklarla yapılan adli görüşmelerde özellikle görüşme sürecine etki edecek faktörlere karşı farkında olunması güvenilir bilgi alınmasının önemli koşullarındandır. Görüşme sürecine etki edecek en önemli faktörler arasında görüşmede kullanılan soru tarzları gelmektedir. Adli görüşmelerde sıklıkla kullanılan soru tarzları; açık uçlu, odaklanılmış, seçenekli ve evet/hayır cevaplı soru tarzlarıdır. Görüşmelerde açık uçlu soru tarzı kullanarak serbest çağrışıma izin veren adli görüşmecilerin çocuklardan daha ayrıntılı ve güvenilir bilgi aldıkları görülmektedir. Soru tarzlarının yanı sıra adli görüşmecilerin eğitimi, bilgi ve deneyimi, çocukların duygusal ve davranışsal ipuçlarına karşı duyarlılıkları da görüşme sürecine etki etmekte ve çocukların ikincil travmalarının önüne geçmektedir. Bu derleme makalede uzun bir eğitim sürecinden geçen adli görüşmecilerin görüşme deneyimleri ve görüşme sürecine etki eden önemli faktörler tartışılacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cinsel istismar
• adli görüşme
• çocuk istismarı

Kaynakça

1. Ackerman, M.J. (2010). Essentials of Forensic Psychological Assessment. 2. Baskı. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
2. Agnew, S.E. ve Powell, M.B. (2004). The Effect of Intellectual Disability on Children’s Recall of an Event Across Different Question Types. Law and Human Behavior, 28(3), 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LAHU.0000029139.38127.61
3. Alpar, G. (2017). Adli Psikolojik Görüşme. İçinde: Şenol-Durak, E.ve Durak, M. (Edl), Adli Psikolojide Gözlem Görüşme ve Psikolojik Değerlendirme (ss. 1–30). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
4. Anderson, W. (1986). Stages of Therapist Comfort with Sexual Concerns of Clients. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17(4), 352–356. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735- 7028.17.4.352
5. Anderson, G.D., Anderson, J.N. ve Krippner, M. (2016). “I Only Want to Know What You Know”: The Use of Orienting Messages During Forensic Interviews and Their Effects on Child Behavior. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 25(6), 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2016.1194356
6. Atılgan, E.Ü, Yağcıoğlu, S. ve Çavdar, Y. (2014). Çocuklarla Adli Görüşme için Rehber. Ankara: Adalet Bakanlığı, Aile Ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı, Hâkimler ve Savcılar Yüksek Kurulu, Türkiye Adalet Akademisi, UNICEF Türkiye.www.cocuklaricinadalet.org
7. Brown, D.A. ve Lewis, C. (2013). Competence is in the Eye of the Beholder: Perceptions of Intellectually Disabled Child Witnesses. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities and Education, 60(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2013.757132
8. Brown, D.A., Lewis, C.N., Lamb, M.E. ve Stephens, E. (2012). The Influences of Delay and Severity of Intellectual Disability on Event Memory in Children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80(5), 829–841. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029388

9. Brown, D.A., Lamb, M.E., Lewis C., Pipe, M.E., Orbach, Y. ve Wolfman, M. (2013). The NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol: An Analogue Study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19(4), 367–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035143
10. Brown, D., Lewis, C., Stephens, E. ve Lamb, M. (2017). Interviewers’ Approaches to Questioning Vulnerable Child Witnesses: The Influences of Developmental Level Versus Intellectual Disability Status. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22(2), 332–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12104
11. Ceci, S.J. ve Bruck, M. (1995). Amicus Brief for the Case of New Jersey v. Michaels Presented by Committee of Concerned Social Scientists. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1(2), 272–322. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.1.2.272
12. Çağlar, E.E. ve Türk, T. (2019). İstismara Maruz Kalan Çocuklarla Adli Görüşme: NICHD Protokolü Önerisi. Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi, 1(38), 393–412.
13. Çelik, D. (2017). Mağdur Çocuklarla Adli Amaçlı Görüşme. İçinde: Durak, E.Ş. ve Durak, M. (Edl.), Adli Psikolojide Gözlem-Görüşme ve Psikolojik Değerlendirme (ss.67–96), Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
14. Dağlı, T., Teker, N. ve Kesmez, D. Kırılgan Gruplar, Özellikli Durumlar ve Adli Görüşme Süreçleri, Adli Görüşme Odaları Uzman Modülü. UNICEF, Adalet Bakanlığı ve ÇOKMED iş birliği ile yayınlanmıştır.
15. Duron, J.F. ve Cheung, M. (2016). Impact of Repeated Questioning on Interviewers: Learning from a Forensic Interview Training Project. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 25(4), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2016.1161687
16. Exline, R., Gray, D. ve Schuette, D. (1965). Visual Behavior in a Dyad as Affected by Interview Content and Sex of Respondent. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(3), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021865
17. Feltis, B.B., Powell, M.B., Snow, P.C. ve Hughes-Scholes, C.H. (2010). An Examination of the Association Between Interviewer Question Type and Story-grammar Detail in Child Witness Interviews About Abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 34(6), 407–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.09.019
18. Fishman, P.M. (1978). Interaction: The Work Women Do. Social Problems, 25(4), 397–406. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1978.25.4.03a00050
19. Henry, L.A., Ridley, A., Perry, J. ve Crane, L. (2011). Perceived Credibility and Eyewitness Testimony of Children with Intellectual Disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 55(4), 385–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01383.x
20. Hutcheson, G.D., Baxter, J. S., Telfer, K. ve Wrden, D. (1995). Child Witness Statement Quality: Question Type and Errors of Omission. Law and Human Behavior, 19(6), 631–648. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499378
21. Kaplan, M.S., Becker, J.V. ve Tenke, C.E. (1991). Influence of Abuse History on Male Adolescent Self reported Comfort with Interviewer Gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626091006001001
22. Korkman, J., Santtila, P. ve Sandnabba, N.K. (2006). Dynamics of Verbal Interaction Between Interviewer and Child in Interviews with Alleged Victims of Child Sexual Abuse. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2006.00498.x
23. Korkman, J., Santtila, P., Westeraker, M. ve Sandnabba, N.K. (2008). Interviewing Techniques and Follow-up Questions in Child Sexual Abuse Interviews. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5(1), 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620701210460
24. Kunkel, A.W. ve Burleson, B.R. (1999). Assessing Explanations for Sex Differences in Emotional Support:A Test of the Different Cultures and Skill Specialization Accounts. Human Communication Research, 25(3), 307–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14682958.1999.tb00448.x
25. Lamb, M.E., Sternberg, K.J. ve Esplin, P.W. (2000). Effects of Age and Delay on the Amount of Information Provided by Alleged Sex Abuse Victims in Investigative Interviews. Child Development, 71(6), 1586–1596. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00250
26. Lamb, M.E. ve Fauchier, A. (2001). The Effects of Question Type on Self-contradictions by Children in the Course of Forensic Interviews, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15(5), 483–491. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.726
27. Lamb, M.E. ve Garretson, M.E. (2003). The Effects of Interviewer Gender and Child Gender on the Informativeness of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse Victims in Forensic Interviews, Law and Human Behavior, 27(2): 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022595129689
28. Lamb, M.E., Orbach, Y., Hershkowitz, I., Esplin, P.W. ve Horowitz, D. (2007). Structured Forensic Interview Protocols Improve the Quality and Informativeness of Investigative Interviews with Children: A Review of Research Using the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol. Child Abuse Neglect, 31(11-12): 1201–1231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.03.021
29. Leclerc, B. ve Wortley, R. (2015). Predictors of Victim Disclosure in Child Sexual Abuse: Additional Evidence from a Sample of Incarcerated Adult Sex Offenders. Child Abuse and Neglect, 43, 104–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.03.003
30. Melinder, A. ve Gilstrap, L.L. (2009). The Relationships Between Child and Forensic Interviewer Behaviors and Individual Differences in Interviews About a Medical Examination. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 6(3), 365–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620701210445
31. Michel, M.K., Gordon, B.N., Ornstein, P.A. ve Simpson, M.A. (2000). The Abilities of Children with Mental Retardation to Remember Personal Experiences: Implications for Testimony. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29(3), 453–463. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15374424JCCP2903_16
32. Newman, J.E. ve Roberts, K.P. (2014). Subjective and Non-subjective Information in Children’s Allegations of Abuse. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 29(2), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-013-9133-y
33. Newlin, C., Steele, L.C., Chamberlin, A., Anderson, J., Kenniston, J., Stewart, H., Russell A, Vaughan -Eden, V. (2015). Child Forensic Interviewing: Best Practices. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
34. Oates, K. veShrimpton, S. (1991). Children’s Memories for Stressful and Non-stressful Events. Medicine, Science and Law, 31(1), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/002580249103100102
35. Orbach, Y., Hershkowitz, I., Lamb, M.E, Sternberg, K.J., Esplin, P.W. ve Horowitz, D. (2000). Assessing the Value of Structured Protocols for Forensic Interviews of Alleged Child Abuse Victims. Child Abuse and Neglect, 24(6), 733–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/S01452134(00)00137-X
36. Patterson, T. ve Pipe, M.E. (2009). Exploratory Assessments of Child Abuse: Children’s Responses to Interviewer’s Questions Across Multiple Interview Sessions. Child Abuse and Neglect, 33(8), 490–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.12.012
37. Peterson, C. ve Bell, M. (1996). Children’s Memory for Traumatic Injury. Child Development, 67(6), 3045–3070. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131766
38. Pipe M.E., Lamb, M.E., Orbach, Y. ve Esplin, P.W. (2004). Recent Research on Children’s Testimony About Experienced and Witnessed Events. Developmental Review, 24(4), 440–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2004.08.006
39. Powell, MB.,ve Snow, PC. (2007). Guide to Questioning Children During the Free-narrative Phase of an Investigative Interview. Australian Psychologist, 42(1), 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00050060600976032
40. Price, H.l. ve Roberts, K.P. (2011).The Effects of an Intensive Training and Feedback Program on Police and Social Workers’ Investigative Interviews of Children. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 43(3), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022541
41. Price, H.l., Roberts, K.P. ve Collins, A. (2013). The Quality of Children’s Allegations of Abuse in Investigative Interviews Containing Practice Narratives. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2012.03.001
42. Sağlık Bakanlığı (2017), Çocukla Adli Görüşmeci Sertifikalı Eğitim Programı. Revizyon No: 2.
43. Saywitz, K., Snyder, L. ve Nathanson, R. (1999). Facilitating the Communicative Competence of the Child Witness. Applied Developmental Science, 3(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0301_7
44. Sternberg, K.J., Lamb, M.E, Orbach, Y., Esplin, P.W. ve 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.https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.997
45. Themeli, O. ve 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. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejcop.v3i1.17
46. Waterman, A. ve Blades,M. (2011). Helping Children Correctly Say “I Don’t Know” to Unanswerable Questions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(4), 396–405. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026150
47. Wolfman, M., Brown, D. ve Jose,P. (2016). Talking Past Each Other: Interviewer and Child Verbal Exchanges in Forensic Interviews. Law and Human Behavior, 40(2), 107–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000171
48. Yii, S.B., Powell, M.B. ve Guadagno,B. (2014). The Association Between Investigative Interviewers’ Knowledge of Question Type and Adherence to Best-practice Interviewing. Legal and Criminology, 19, 270–281. DOI:10.1111/lcrp.12000