How valid are child sexual abuse validations?

Abstract

In 1984, Ben Bussey was found guilty of child sexual abuse following eyewitness testimony to the alleged offense. At trial, a psychiatrist testifying for the prosecution explained to the Kentucky court that the alleged child victim exhibited symptoms of the child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome (CSAAS;Summit, 1983). The Supreme Court of Kentucky reversed the conviction on the grounds that the lower court had erred by allowing the expert testimony into evidence because CSAAS was not a medically accepted scientific concept (Bussey, Jr. v. Commcvealth, 1985). Th' is case marked the first in a series of child sexual abuse convictions overturned by the Supreme Court of Kentucky on the basis of the failure of CSAAS expert testimony to meet the legal-scientific standards of People 01. Kelley (1976) and Frye 01. United States (1923; see also Stewart 6r Young, 1992).' 'The cases of KeZ&y and Fsye represent tindings that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is inadmissible unless the technique is "generally accepted" as reliable in the relevant scientific community. This criteria does not necessarily apply for expert testimony that does not claim to be an application of scientific techniques ( E l k , 1992). In a more recent case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Frye test, and by definition the "general acceptance" criteria, is superseded by adoption of the Federal Rules of Evidence (Daubert u.

Admisibilidad en contextos forenses de indicadores clínicos para la detección del abuso sexual infantil

“…Por estas razones y debido a la falta de evidencia empírica, propuestas como el Síndrome de acomodación (Summit, 1983) han sido descartadas para evaluar el abuso sexual infantil en contextos forenses (Fisher y Whiting, 1998). Incluso el propio Summit (1992) estableció lo inapropiado del uso de esta propuesta en la evaluación forense, en el artículo titulado Abuso del síndrome de acomodación en abuso sexual infantil.…”

Improving Decision Making in Forensic Child Sexual Abuse Evaluations.

“…In contrast to the widely accepted legitimacy of the data collection and communication roles for qualified MHPs in FCSAEs, there is considerable controversy surrounding the central data interpretation role. In fact, there is a widespread (but not universal) consensus among experts in the field that decisions by clinicians to either substantiate or not substantiate uncorroborated sexual abuse allegations currently lack a firm scientific foundation (Fisher & Whiting, 1998; Goodman, Emery, & Haugaard, 1998; Horner et al, 1993; Poole & Lindsay, 1998) and that such opinions may be based on little more than a clinician’s subjective opinion or hunch that abuse did or did not occur (cf. Benedek et al, 1998).…”

Post Hoc Reasoning in Possible Cases of Child Sexual Abuse: Symptoms of Inconclusive Origins.

“…At this time, there are few scales that accurately measure the constructs of interest in these cases, such as the level of age‐inappropriate sexual knowledge or behavior. Please refer to Fisher and Whiting (1998) for a full discussion of the measurement challenge posed by CSA‐related constructs.…”

“…They may assess the child's current mental health status, noting any symptoms. Regularly included in the expert testimony is an interpretation of the information using one of a variety of models of the psychological effects of CSA (Fisher and Whiting, 1998). The demonstrated adequacy of each of these models for explaining the presentation of any child with a history of sexual abuse has not been required for their use in CSA cases in many courtrooms.…”