Extended Forensic Evaluation

A subset of children referred to investigators when sexual abuse is suspected require more than one interview. The National Children's Advocacy Center (NCAC) forensic evaluation model was designed for that specific group of children. Following a 2-year pilot study at the NCAC (Carnes, Wilson, & Nelson-Gardell, 1999), 22 professionals at approximately 20 sites across the United States adopted the model and collected data on its efficacy for a two-year period. The pilot study had shown that 47% of children referred for forensic evaluation ultimately disclosed in a credible manner, and that a court finding supported 71% of those cases further. The multi-site study replicated pilot study findings: in 44.5% of the cases, a credible disclosure was obtained, with 73% of these cases supported in the legal system. Combining cases with credible disclosures and cases where abuse was determined unlikely, the forensic evaluation procedure yielded credible factual information to be used in child protection and prosecutory decisions in 64% of the cases.

Children are referred for extended forensic evaluation when: 1) the child does not disclose abuse to investigators, but exhibits behaviors or other indicators strongly suggestive of victimization, 2) the extent or nature of abuse is not disclosed by the child during the initial investigative interview by Law Enforcement/DHR, or 3) when the information gathered in the initial investigative interview needs further clarification.

The purposes of the Forensic Evaluation are to: (1) determine the likelihood of whether or not the child has been abused, and to identify suspected perpetrators (2) gather forensically sound facts necessary for child protection and law enforcement officials to understand what, if anything, has happened (3) allow the child to disclose over time in a non-threatening environment and to assess the extent and nature of the alleged abuse (4) gather information regarding the child's social and behavioral functioning in order to make treatment recommendations, and to establish a foundation for effective treatment if needed.

Structure for Extended Forensic Evaluation

  1. Non-offending Caregiver Interview. The evaluator first interviews the alleged non-offending caregiver (NOC), gathering information pertaining to: family history and dynamics, current family composition, names and relationships of any other significant individuals in the child's life, child's social and developmental history, care routines, access to sexual information, family names for body parts, and the non-offending caregiver's understanding of the current allegations or concerns.
  2. Rapport Building . The first stage of the evaluation with the child is rapport building. The goals are to: (1) establish the context of the evaluation and the role of the evaluator, (2) establish a precedent for narrative responses (3) begin assessing the child's developmental status and (4) establish a comfortable relationship with the child.
  3. Developmental Assessment. The two primary goals of developmental assessment are to determine the child's capacity for giving specific, credible accounts of events and to begin to learn about the domains that challenge our ability to enter the child's world (e.g. the child's affective/expressive capabilities, and the ways in which the child perceives connections between events, people and places).
  4. Social and Behavioral Assessment . Social and behavioral assessment is accomplished through review of behavioral checklists and developmentally appropriate in-session activities with the child. Behavioral checklists employed include the Child Sexual Behavior Inventory (Friedrich, 1990), the Child Behavioral Checklist, (Achenbach, 1988) and the Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children (Briere, 1996). In-session activities include exploration of the child's self-understanding and self-esteem and the child's perceptions of others in the environment.
  5. Focusing on the topic of concern. Moving into more specific questioning, the evaluator remains neutral and maintains a hypothesis-testing approach, using open-ended neutral prompts whenever possible. The evaluator uses a variety of means to introduce the topic of concern, moving from more general to more specific.
  6. Gaining more specific detail. When children disclose abuse, they may at first provide skeletal descriptions due to anxiety or developmental limitations. Several techniques are useful for gaining more specific details that increase the credibility of the disclosure and enhance the ability to make the most accurate decisions on protective and prosecution issues.
  7. Closure. At the last session, the evaluator does closure work with the child, including final review and clarification of any abuse disclosures made. The evaluator also summarizes the forensic evaluation experience with the child and discusses any plans for a therapy referral.

Resources

NCAC offers 3 day trainings on Forensic Evaluation twice per year. There is a detailed manual of the model available for purchase. The manual and training registration materials are available here.

References

  • Carnes, C., Nelson-Gardell, D, & Wilson C. 2001. Extended forensic evaluation in alleged sexual abuse cases: A multi-site field study. Child Maltreatment,
  • Carnes, C. 2000. Forensic Evaluation of Children when Sexual Abuse is Suspected (Third Edition). National Children's Advocacy Center: Huntsville, AL
  • Carnes, C., Nelson-Gardell, D, & Wilson C. 1999. Addressing Challenges and Controversies in Child Sexual Abuse Interviewing: The Forensic Evaluation Protocol and Research Project. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, Vol. 2, No. 2.
  • Carnes, C., Wilson C., & Nelson-Gardell, D. 1999. Extended Forensic Evaluation when Sexual Abuse is Suspected: A Model and Preliminary Data. Child Maltreatment, Vol. 4, No. 3, August.
  • Carnes, C., Nelson-Gardell, D, & Wilson C. 1999. Addressing Challenges and Controversies in Child Sexual Abuse Interviewing: The Forensic Evaluation Protocol and Research Project. Maltreatment in Early Childhood: Tools for Research Based Intervention. Haworth Press.