Children and adolescents who are mentally retarded and developmentally disabled (MRDD) are sexually abusedat a rate that is much higher than those children with no reported disability'. Delayed cognitive, social, and emotional skills of ten make it difficult for these children to communicate sexually abusiveevents. To compound this problem, forensic interviewers of tendo not understand thelimitations that developmental delays can have on the interview process and the child'sability to recail important information. This article discusses thephases of the forensic interviewin light of the special considerations that must begiven to those children and adolescents who are mentally retarded and developmentally disabled.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams-TuckerC. (1984). Early treatment of child incest victims. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 38, 505-516.
2.
AldridgeN. (1997). Strengths and limitations of forensic child sexual abuse interviews with anatomical dolls: An empirical review. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 20, 1-37.
3.
BoatB. W., & EversonM. D. (1988). Interviewing young children with anatomical dolls. Child Welfare, 67, 337-352.
4.
BrittonH. L., & O'KeefeM. A. (1991). Use of non-anatomical dolls in the sexual abuse interview. Child Abuse and Neglect, 15, 567-573.
5.
BruckM., CeciS. J., FrancouerE., & RenickA. (1995). Anatomically detailed dolls do not facilitate preschoolers' reports of a pediatric examination involving genital touching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 95-109.
6.
DentH. (1992). The effects of age and intelligence on eyewitnessing ability. In H. Dent & R. Flin (Eds.), Children As Witnesses (pp. 1-13). West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
7.
FallerK. C. (1998). Child sexual abuse: An Interdisciplinary manual for the diagnosis, case management, and treatment. New York: Columbia University Press.
8.
GoodmanG. S., & Schwartz-KenneyB. M. (1992). Why knowing a child's age is not enough: Influences of cognitive, social, and emotional factors on children's testimony. In H. Dent & R. Flin (Eds.), Children As Witnesses (pp. 15-32). West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
9.
KingM. A., & YuilleJ. C. (1987). Suggestibility and the child witness. In S. J. Ceci, M. P. Toglia, & D. F. Ross (Eds.), Children's eyewitness memory (pp. 24-35). New York: Springer-Verlag.
10.
LangR. A., & FrenzelR. R. (1988). How sex offenders lure children. Annals of Sex Research, 1, 303-317.
11.
LumleyV. A., & MiltenbergerR. G. (1997). Sexual abuse prevention for persons with mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101, 459-472.
12.
LumleyV. A., MiltenbergerR. G., LongE. S., RappJ. T., & RobertsJ. A. (1998). Evaluation of a sexual abuse prevention program for adults with mental retardation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 91-101.
13.
MatthewsE., & SaywitzK. (1992). Child victim witness manual. California Center for Judicial Education and Research Journal, 12, 5-81.
14.
MeyersJ. E. B. (1988). Examining the young witness: Paint the child into your corner. Family Advocate, 10, 42-47.
15.
PerryN. W., & WrightsmanL. S. (1991). The child witness: Legal issues and dilemmas. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
16.
RaskinD. C., & YuilleJ. C. (1989). Problems in evaluating interviews of children in sexual abuse cases. In S. J. Ceci, D. F. Ross, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Perspectives on children's testimony (pp. 184-207). New York: Springer-Verlag.
17.
SobseyD., & VarnhagenC. (1988). Sexual abuse and exploitation of people with disabilities. Ottawa: Health and Welfare Canada.
18.
SteinmetzM. M. (1997). Interviewing for child sexual abuse: Strategies for balancing forensic and therapeutic factors. Notre Dame, ID: Jalice Publishers.
19.
WatsonJ. D. (1984). Talking about the best kept secret: Sexual abuse and children with disabilities. The Exceptional Parent, 14, 15-20.
