Untitled Normal Page

[The following material is from O Timothy magazine, Volume 13, Issue 3, 1996. This material cannot be placed on BBS or Internet sites without express permission from the author. Any articles which are redistributed by e-mail or print must be left intact and nothing must be removed or changed, including these informational headers. Copyright 1995 by David W. Cloud. All rights are reserved by the author. O Timothy is a monthly magazine. Annual subscription is US$20 FOR THE UNITED STATES. Send to Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org. FOR CANADA the subscription is $20 Canadian. Send to Bethel Baptist Church, P.O. Box 9075, London, Ontario N6E 1V0. The Way of Life Internet web site is http://www.wayoflife.org .]

DO CHILDREN LIE ABOUT ABUSE AND SEXUAL TRAUMA?

The following is excerpted from a report by the 1991-92 San Diego County Grand Jury, assigned to investigate the issues of child sexual abuse, assault, and molestation:

Psychological experts testified that children lie about these issues. Recent literature reflecting studies conducted by the American Psychological Association not surprisingly concluded that some children lie and others don't. Studies also indicate that young children can be very easily contaminated to believe that things happened which, in fact, did not occur.

Witnesses from DSS and the District Attorney's Child Abuse Unit told the Jury that children rarely lie about abuse and sexual trauma. It was disturbing to the Jury that these same witnesses often concluded that a child was in denial or being protective if they denied abuse by a parent but were never lying when they accused.

The Jury examined cases where children made allegations of abuse and then later wanted to retract them. The children said they had lied and were sorry. THE SAME SOCIAL WORKERS, THERAPISTS, PROSECUTORS, AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS WHO BELIEVED THE STORIES OF ABUSE, REFUSED TO BELIEVE THE CHILDREN WHEN THEY ADMITTED TO A LIE.

Jurors observed a teenage girl testify to molest by her step-father. She reported to a school counselor that he had touched her once on the breasts and genital area while she was clothed. She denied any previous occurrence. Evidence presented at trial included love letters she had written to an older maternal uncle with whom she was romantically involved. In these letters she wrote graphically about her sexual attraction to this uncle. She also wrote that she was trying to get her mother to strike her so that she could report the abuse to CPS and live with the grandmother. (Not coincidentally, the uncle also lived with the grandmother and the mother was trying to limit contact.)

Prior to the introduction of the letters the teenager had testified to a good relationship with her mother and no conflicts. The letters clearly indicated that this was not true. Despite contradictory testimony from three adults who were awake and present within 15 feet, and a sibling who was awake in the next bed, at the time of the alleged abuse, a true finding was made. At no time was the teenager cautioned about telling the truth. Everyone in the courtroom was solicitous of this child to the point of ignoring contradictions in the girl's testimony.

The Jury investigated a case brought by citizen complaint. The natural 18-year old son of a foster mother was accused by a 10-year old foster child of sexual molest. The child was immediately removed, the foster care license pulled, and the 18-year-old prosecuted for felony- sexual assault. The only evidence in the case was the child's allegation. The 18-year-old adamantly denied the charge. The 18-year old plead "nolo" to a misdemeanor charge with the understanding that this would be removed from his record in one year.

The foster mother had not been informed prior to the placement of this child that the child had a history of sexual molest, multiple placements, and false allegations against various parties. While in this home the child made allegations against his social worker and classroom teacher.

The DSS file includes a long history of psychological problems and psychological evaluations which reported that the child was a pathological liar. The District Attorney and DSS had this information; the defense did not. There was no physical evidence and the decision to prosecute was based solely on the child's allegation. Defense costs bankrupted this family. The Department lost a foster care provider.

A professional family adopted an abused, very petite, four year old. She did well in this home until puberty. She began to act out, lie, not come home, etc. She told a counselor at school that she was being abused at home. She told the counselor that she wasn't being fed and that was the reason she was so small. The family was investigated. The family cooperated and agreed to services in the hopes that the child and family could be helped. The child wasn't pulled but social worker contact continued. The child made allegations to her social worker of sexual molest by her brother. The parents became alarmed and agreed to her placement in foster care in order to protect their son. Each person who believed the stories told by this child ultimately regretted it. The social services record show a trail of gullible adults. Even a Deputy District Attorney tried to adopt this child. She returned the child after several serious problems. This deeply troubled child now has an extensive record as a delinquent and no family to turn to. The adoptive family no longer feels capable of coping with her problems.

There are dozens of these stories. Some children lie. Failure to recognize this as fact is ultimately not in the child's best interest. Each one of the children in the stories above has suffered as a result of the system's gullibility.