Forensic Interview Analysis

The Forensic interview technique is a result of the increasing awareness of child abuse and neglect cases in the United States in the last quarter of the 20th century (Newlin et al, 2015). Forensic interviewing has come a long way from when it was first being developed and has continuously evolved to have the best outcome for children. The purpose of Forensic interviewing is to be more child friendly, to consider the age and development of the child, and to be cognizant of a child’s trauma which is specified in the “Purpose of the Child Forensic Interview” and “Considerations Regarding the Child” sections of the Newlin article. Forensic interviewing has become more specialized and developed since it first began to be utilized. It has developed

The child advocacy center model incorporates several different approaches to create one that has been more beneficial compared to other Forensic interviews (Hebert et al, 2016). It combines multidisciplinary teams, evidence-informed Forensic interviewing practices, and victim advocacy (Herbert et al, 2016). This is similar to what has been found to be beneficial when working with victims of human trafficking. Child advocacy centers also offer child-friendly settings in how people interact and how the building looks. Children could be intimidated by certain settings like a police station, a hospital, school, or CPS office and could feel like they are the ones in trouble (Herbert et al, 2016; Jones et al, 2007). A child advocacy center aims to be comforting and be inviting to the child, so they aren’t afraid. It also works to limit the amount of interviews the child undergoes by being multidisciplinary. If a child is constantly having to repeat their story, it increases the likelihood they will change pieces to please the interviewer or will recant altogether (Herbert et al,

The younger a child is, the more suggestible that child is. The Volpini study found that the total suggestibility does not differ between gender of the child. A child with an intellectual disability though, could have a higher level of suggestibility than a child without an intellectual disability. It has been found that a child’s cognitive development is not complete until adolescence (Volpini et al, 2016). This is good to keep in mind considering the majority of minor age sexual human trafficking victims are of adolescent age. Children are also more likely to lie to gain a reward or to avoid punishment (Volpini et al, 2016). Interviewers should be cognizant of claims that could possibly be false or of situations where a child may be recanting using different wording than when they alleged abuse. When children recant, their wording may be different from the wording given when they first disclosed alleged abuse (Katz, 2014) which could indicate that the answer the child is giving may not be their