Child investigation is a very tricky activity owing to age sensitivity of the child which, if wrongly done, it could have adverse ramifications on the child. However, this action is necessary as it provides a substantial basis for evidence collection during the investigation (Hammer, Moynihan, and Pagliaro, 2013). The fact that child testimony and evidence carries significant weight in terms of evidence also opens it up to instances which are sensitive to the child that may result in collection of the wrong evidence provided as a result of various causes such as pleasing the interviewer, forgetfulness, or failure to understand the questions asked (Graham, 2012). For this reason, child investigation requires considerable care to be undertaken to avoid such instances. There are often two types of child investigations, forensic and clinical inquiries, whose differences are discussed further below (Vieth and Perrona, 2011):
A forensic investigation is based on the collection of facts and which is driven by a truth-finding mission about the occurrence of the event. In this regard, the probe process is focused on the collection of accurate and reliable information from the informant. In this regard, being a judicial process, this activity is guided by rules of evidence. On the other hand, a clinical investigation aims at providing information essential in the assessment and provision of treatment to the victim (Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 2000). As such, this process involves the adoption of therapeutic measures that are geared towards ensuring the well-being of the client during the investigation process.
A forensic investigation is pegged on aspects of objectivity, avoidance of biases, and neutrality. As indicated above, being a fact-finding mission requires that accurate information is provided to prove this concept. As such, the forensic interviewer maintains objectivity in order to enhance the child’s accurate reminder of events as they happened. A clinical investigation, on the other hand, is aimed at being empathetic and providing support to the child. In this regard, the child investigator seeks to understand the child’s perception and how it has altered following the happening of the event (Stevens, 2013). As being an advocate for the child, it means that they might develop biased opinions.
The interviews conducted by a forensic investigator are formal and rigid as they are based on a determined judicial process. The information collected is also recorded, with its confidentiality being restricted. A clinical investigator adopts various interviewing strategies whose primary focus is on ensuring the comfort of the child to prevent any harm on their condition. The information collected by the clinical investigator is private and only available to relevant individuals. Traditional confidentiality is also maintained.
According to Graham (2012), one of the interviewing techniques adopted while interviewing children or persons with disabilities is preparation. In this case, the interviewer should prepare adequately for the interview. This allows the interviewer to be aware of the child’s condition and seek to create familiarity in the interviewee’s situation in a bid to make them comfortable.
In addition, the interviewer should also create a friendly environment. In the case of a child, the room should be furnished with appealing childlike essentials such as papers, crayons, amongst others. In the event of individuals with disabilities, the interview room should be prepared accordingly.
Also, in order to reduce incidences of forgetfulness on the part of the child, recording of the child’s experience by relevant professionals such as children’s social worker, police officer, lawyer, amongst others should be applied. This technique avoids the need for repeating the same event by the child that may lead to conflicting recounting of events, a situation that may affect a successful legal process.
In a forensic interview carried out on a partner taking on the role of the victim I introduced myself as a friend. Additionally, I assured the victim that they did not have to have the answers, and it was okay for them not to remember and not guess any answers (Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 2000). I also made sure I established a good rapport with the victim. This involved creating a friendly environment in which I smiled more often which allowed the victim to get comfortable with the situation. This approach allowed them to divulge more information.
Moreover, I made sure that I spoke with the victim at eye-level and avoided looking above them. In this case, this created the impression that I am relatable as I maintained eye contact to ensure that I was paying attention to them.
At the onset of the interview, the victim was quiet but after assuring them that they were in a safe place, he relaxed but remained silent. However, after establishing a good rapport as indicated above and asked general questions about their favorite pastimes, the victim opened up and was ready to talk. The following were the questions in the interview:
Interviewer: Which game do you like to play?
Victim: I love soccer, but I also pitch the ball when my brother is practicing for his baseball game at home.
Interviewer: Tell me about your friends?
Victim: My best friend is called Joey. We love playing soccer outside at home and also at school.
Interviewer: I want you to close your eyes for me. Remember the school baseball game you went with your parents. Was it sunny outside?
Victim: Yes. My mum and dad told me were going to support my big brother who was playing in their school’s baseball team.
Interviewer: What were you wearing that day?
Victim: My favorite blue shirt given to me by my mum on my birthday and my brother’s baseball cap.
Interviewer: Tell me what happened when you went to get some popcorn?
Victim: Well I was standing in line waiting for my turn, and someone grabbed my baseball cap. My head hurt when he did that and when I touched it; I realized some of my hair was missing.
I think I did well during the interview session as I was able to make the victim open up about his experience. However, next time, I will improve in creating a friendly environment for the interview to avoid instances that create anxiety for the victim.
References
Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (2000). The differences between forensic interviews and clinical interviews. The University of Oklahoma Health Services Center.
Graham, B. (2012). Effective child abuse investigation for the multi-disciplinary team. New York: CRC Press.
Hammer, R. M., Moynihan, B., & Pagliaro, E. M. (2013). Forensic nursing: A handbook for practice. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Stevens, S. (2013). Forensic nurse: The new role of the nurse in law enforcement. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Vieth, V. & Perrona, A. (2011). Ending child abuse: New efforts in prevention, investigation, and training. New York: Routledge Publishers.
