Recently a Department of Child Services (DCS) caseworker and I attempted to interview a young girl. We both knew the child was probably too young to be put on the stand in a criminal case, but due to the allegations of sexual abuse, we were obligated to try and take a statement. Despite her age the little girl was reasonably verbal. During the first few minutes of the interview it was obvious we were going nowhere fast. Finally we resorted to bringing out our old anatomical dolls. I had forgotten why I dreaded them so much. Within the first few minutes of introducing the female doll to the child, she had it undressed and was exploring every orifice the doll possessed. Her fingers were in its mouth, then in its vagina and then she turned it upside down, cocked her head to the side and studied the anal opening. Does this mean that she was sexually abused? Your guess is as good as mine. Use of anatomical dolls during interviews with children who have allegedly been abused has been debated for many years. Here's what the experts have to say:
According to Hollida Wakefield, M.A., Ph.D., University of Maryland, former elementary school teacher, college psychology instructor, and staff psychologist at the Institute of Psychological Therapies and member of the National Council for Children's Rights, the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, and the American College of Forensic Psychology, many professionals oppose the use of anatomical dolls. They are controversial and not generally accepted in the scientific community. Wakefield believes the use of anatomical dolls increases the suggestiveness of an interview. "There is no evidence that they add to the completeness and accuracy of the information obtained," she said.
However, Jodi L. Lashley, MSW, LGSW, Training Coordinator for CornerHouse Interagency Child Abuse Evaluation and Training Center said, "There is no better tool. The anatomical dolls are invaluable when used correctly."
If you've worked in the field of child abuse or plan to in the future, one thing you will learn is how important it is to have something tangible to show a jury. The majority of your cases will be "he said, she said" which we all know are hard to prove and make it difficult for jurors to convict a suspect even when they believe it happened. If you are videotaping your interviews, which is recommended, you can see how a well-conducted interview where a child demonstrates what the perpetrator did to him/her using anatomical dolls, could be invaluable. On the other hand, a poorly done interview where the child is given the doll by an interviewer who is not trained to use them will most likely be disastrous.
In the American Prosecutors Research Institute Newsletter Volume 13, Number 8, a protocol for training with the anatomical dolls is outlined by Lori S. Holmes, MS, LISW. Holmes writes that most of what has been written about the proper use of the dolls can be summarized in two rules:
First, it is important that both the interviewer and the child are capable of using the dolls. For the interviewer, this means having the proper training and for the child, this means being able to make a representational shift. This is nothing more than the cognitive ability to understand that the doll is going to represent the child or another actual person and is not an instrument for play.
Second, it is improper to use the dolls exclusively, i.e. without a verbal statement to make a finding that a child has been sexually abused. The child's demonstration with the dolls is but one part of the forensic interview, just as the forensic interview is but one part of the investigation.
Holmes suggests some reasons why an interviewer might use anatomical dolls:
- Clarification purposes
- Allowing the child to demonstrate consistency
- Allowing the child to distance themselves from his or her own body
- Allowing the child to communicate what he or she cannot or will not say
CornerHouse's Jodi Lashley said, "A minimum of two hours of training is necessary to learn how to use the anatomical dolls correctly; however, four hours would be optimal. In four hours you would have time to run through actual scenarios and get some hands-on practice and feedback from the instructor."
It is imperative that those of us who decide to use anatomical dolls during a forensic interview recognize a process for introducing and using them. According to Holms, if the following process is followed, the interviewer will have, in advance, addressed many of the issues commonly raised by defense attorneys.
Training in the use of anatomical dolls should include the following process:
- The dolls should be introduced after the child has made a verbal disclosure of abuse.
- The child should be told specifically that the dolls are not toys and that they are not to be played with.
- Present the dolls fully clothed.
- When finished with the doll(s), offer to take it from the child and either set it aside or put it away.
- Never make assumptions about what the child is demonstrating.
In conclusion, it is crucial for forensic interviewers to have access to any and all tools that will aid them in their work. Without proper training in their use, the tool(s) may do more harm than good.
Readers seeking more information or training should contact APRI's National Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse at (703) 549-4253 or visit their web site, listed below.
