[Interviewing children in cases of suspected child endangerment: pitfalls and quality assurance]

Abstract

Doctors and especially paediatricians in clinics and private practices are often the first professionals to be confronted with the suspicion of a child endangerment (sexual abuse, physical abuse, neglect, Munchausen-by-proxy syndrome). They thus play a key role in the early assessment and clarification of suspicion and setting the course for the further interdisciplinary procedure.The clinical investigation of a suspicion is a diagnostic and communicative challenge. The procedure includes biomedical diagnostics, structured medical history based on standardized questionnaires and a forensic (investigative) interview of caregivers and especially of the affected child.The child's statements are subject to various risks of bias. The mental processing of events can modulate and distort the scope and quality of the report in many ways. Expectations on how the professionals will use this information and the consequences that may arise for the family as well as the resulting conflicts of loyalty are superimposed on the child's willingness to talk and to provide valid statements. On the part of the interviewer too, motivational, affective and cognitive processes pose risks for a suggestive influence on the child as well as for the objectivity in carrying out the interview and the interpretation of the findings. Complex pitfalls endanger the validity and forensic usability of the interview results. In order to assure the quality of their findings, interviewers are therefore required to carefully register and reflect on their own motivational tendencies and implicit hypotheses, to know and avoid suggestive question formulations and to make use of standardized interview protocols whenever possible.

Keywords: Child abuse; Child welfare; Forensic interview; NICHD; Suggestion.