No abstract

No abstract

Traditional felony prosecutions of child sexual abusers are problematic because physical evidence is uncommon (Bulkley, 1982b), making the charges difficult to prove. In such instances, the case will hinge on the testimony of the child victim, who may be secondarily victimized by the process. When the accused is a family member, the problem is compounded if the child is afraid to testify against a relative (Costin, et al, 1991). Necessary treatment for the offender andvictim is not forthcoming in traditional felony litigation and the already disrupted family will suffer further. As a corrective response, mental health and legal professionals have collaborated to create innovative intervention strategies in many jurisdictions. In 1981, more than 300 such programs were identified by the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (unpublished list). The number is probably higher today. This article investigates child sexual abuse intervention strategies by focusing on three jurisdictions in which felony trial diversions, juvenile court petitions, and treatment programs are intertwined into intervention strategies for first‐time, intrafamilial offenders. The purpose of this article is to describe the three programs, then analyze the strategies to determine the type of services each client received.

Despite a declining delinquency rate, legislatures and courts are getting tough with juveniles. Such policies are antithetical to the “best interest of the child” philosophy and counter‐productive to treatment. Protecting the child's rights to due process and individualized treatment must be enhanced, not subverted. The laws which govern the behavior of citizens, companies, institutions, and various other elements in our society are man‐made. “Public policy is whatever governments choose to do or not to do.”1 However, these decisions are not made in a vacuum. They are ultimately made by the confluence of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the government that are, and of necessity must be, at least tangentially responsive to perceived public needs. “Courts respond … to societal pressures; they are moved by the same tides of public opinion as are legislatures and executives.”2 The resultant public policies and the programs created to administer them reflect these societal needs and respond to them accordingly. The evolution of the Children's Code in America, its eventual adoption into law and its subsequent changes over the years mark these shifts in society's view of its children. Throughout this slow and sometimes grudging process, the legal status of children has made numerous gains. Today, children hold a special place in our culture and until recently, the Children's Code was utilized to assist them in maintaining and enhancing that status. However, within the last few years this tide of evolutionary gains has turned into a flood of erosion of due process rights. Yet:

Few statistically significant sex differences were found in orientation to clinical practice of a randomly selected sample of 300 licensed clinical social workers. 28 male and 69 female licensed clinical social workers had very similar attitudes, philosophies, and behaviors toward clinical practice. These findings add to the limited research available.