When psychological science fails to be heard: the lack of evidence-based arguments in a ministerial report on child sexual abuse

被引:16
作者
Dodier, Olivier [1 ,2 ]
Tomas, Frederic [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Clermont Auvergne, Dept Psychol, Clermont Ferrand, France
[2] Univ Toulouse Jean Jaures, CLLE LTC Lab, Toulouse, France
[3] Univ Paris 08, Dept Psychol, St Denis, France
关键词
adolescent victims; child victims; cognitive interview; child sexual abuse; dissociative amnesia; evidence-based practice; interviewing technique; limitation period; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development protocol; traumatic memory; COGNITIVE-PROCESSES; LAW-ENFORCEMENT; MEMORY; DISSOCIATION; BELIEVE; TRAUMA; KNOWLEDGE; INTERVIEWS; DISCLOSURE; STRESS;
D O I
10.1080/13218719.2018.1506716
中图分类号
DF [法律]; D9 [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
One of the most debated issues in relation to child sexual abuse (CSA) is whether there should be a limitation period for prosecutions. In 2017 a French ministerial report was released proposing extension of the limitation period in part because of the sometimes long delay between the alleged events and the disclosure of the abuse. For this, the report relied on dissociative amnesia. It also advocated for the development of child victim interview protocols by victim associations. We show that dissociative amnesia is not consensual within the scientific community. Instead, we recommend scientifically reliable cognitive principles to explain the lack of memory. Moreover, interviewing techniques for children have already been designed by memory researchers to enhance recall and report of CSA, from which any uncontrolled deviation might put the child's testimony at risk. We conclude by advocating for the use of evidence-based psychology, and for co-operation between practitioners, judges and researchers.
引用
收藏
页码:385 / 395
页数:11
相关论文
共 73 条
[1]   Traumatic impact predicts long-term memory for documented child sexual abuse [J].
Alexander, KW ;
Quas, JA ;
Goodman, GS ;
Ghetti, SG ;
Edelstein, RS ;
Redlich, AD ;
Cordon, IM ;
Jones, DPH .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2005, 16 (01) :33-40
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2014, RECUEILLIR PAROLE EN
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1954, Clinical versus Statistical Prediction: A Theoretical Analysis and Review of the Literature
[4]  
[Anonymous], CAUS WRONGF CONV
[5]  
Baker Timothy B, 2008, Psychol Sci Public Interest, V9, P67, DOI 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01036.x
[6]   Eyewitness memory is still not common sense: Comparing jurors, judges and law enforcement to eyewitness experts [J].
Benton, TR ;
Ross, DF ;
Bradshaw, E ;
Thomas, WN ;
Bradshaw, GS .
APPLIED COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 20 (01) :115-129
[7]  
Berthet G., 2007, ENFANCES PSY, V36, P80
[8]   Cognitive Processes in Dissociation: Comment on Giesbrecht et al. (2008) [J].
Bremner, J. Douglas .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2010, 136 (01) :1-6
[9]  
BREMNER JD, 1992, AM J PSYCHIAT, V149, P328
[10]  
Brilleslijper-Kater S.N., 2000, ChildAbuse Review, V9, P166, DOI DOI 10.1002/1099-0852(200005/06)9:3