Childrens Testimony

Over the last thirty years, the idea of children as witnesses and the accuracy of their testimony has been widely debated. People are asking themselves if the memories of young children, specifically between the ages of five and ten, can be accurate and in return trusted. So, can children's memory and testimony be accurate? Prolific amounts of research have been conducted in an attempt to answer this question. Most of the research suggests that unfortunately we can not rely on their accurate recall in testimony. I would have to say I agree with the findings.

The current anxiety about the validity of children's testimony in court stems mostly from heavily publicized cases of child molestation during the 1980's (Meyer, 1997). As a result of society's reaction to dramatic increases in reports of abuse and neglect, children increasingly are being admitted as witnesses in juvenile and criminal proceedings (Ceci & de Bruyn, 1993). Each year hundreds of thousands of children in North America become entangled in the legal system. Often these children testify about the alleged actions of a parent, teacher, baby-sitter, relative or neighbor. And when this happens, the case is often decided on the basis of the relative credibility of the child versus the defendant. Regardless of whether such testimony is made in forensic interviews, during preliminary hearings, or at trial, it may result in life altering decisions for all involved (Ceci & Bruck, 1995).

The issue of children's veracity is not new to the courtroom. There were cases in Puritan times in which youngsters' testimony was responsible for the imprisonment and execution of a number of individuals accused of being witches (Meyer, 1997). Because of this, for both theoretical and practical reasons, many child psychologists, legal professionals, and others have long sought to understand more fully the extent to which young children are able to recall their experiences and to report on them accurately. As part of this effort, there has also been a great interest in learning more about the developmental course through which young children acquire the capacity (Stern, Stern, & Lamiell, 1999).

To thoroughly understand the subject, we must look closely at several aspects and effects of children as witnesses in the legal system. First, we must look at the cognition of children. We have to understand their mental development and comprehension, as well as their memory and recall abilities. Second, we must look at the affects of being a witness not only on the legal system but also on the child as an individual. Children could be further traumatized emotionally and physically by involvement as a witness. Finally, we need to closely look at how the legal system is set up and how well children fit into this system. Are witness procedures set up in a way that children can understand and accurately give their testimony? These are the things that need to be looked at closely to determine if children can be reliable and credible witnesses in court.

Because of the greater involvement of child witnesses in legal settings, it is important to know whether their recollections of an event can be trusted (Koriat et. al, 2001). This is a question that obviously can not be answered with a simple yes or no answer. However we can look at the way in which children develop cognitively to help us better understand the way in which children think and understand the world around them. We know that children are lacking in experience as compared to adults. A four year old just has much less life experience than a 16 year old. Younger children are not able to detect subtle differences like, implications and sarcasm in conversation. In addition, children being less cognitively developed have immature and less concrete schemas. These schemas may change constantly through your life, but they change at an even more accelerated rate as a child. Jean Piaget the leader in research on children's mental development said the half-century he spent with children convinced him that the child's mind is not a miniature model of the adult's. Young children understand the world in radically different ways than adults do, a fact we sometimes overlook (Myers, 1996). Piaget found people have mental structures that determine how data and new information are perceived. He found that from birth to adulthood we mentally develop in stages. Children from birth to about age 12 go through the stages of self-orientation, and have an egocentric view. Children can use these skills only to view the world from their own perspective. They are not yet able to perform on abstract problems. They do not consider all possible outcomes. If we consider this development, it could have serious effects on a child's testimony. The child may not be intentionally lying in giving false testimony, but has not yet developed the mental skills needed to understand what they are specifically saying and its ramifications. Children only understand things in the context of their world. They cannot comprehend what affect their words could have on the defendant's future. Which makes them much less of a credible witness than an adult.

Children's comprehension is at a different level than that of adults, so children can also have problems understanding the questions asked in a courtroom. Because they do not completely understand subtleties in things like conversations, or questions like those that might be asked of them when they are testifying in a courtroom. This can lead to further skewing of the testimony. When children do not fully understand a question they typically answer the bit they do, usually the beginning or end, which can lead to inaccuracies. Furthermore, children are prone to comprehension failure, since they do not have the developmental capacity to be able to determine when they do not fully understand a question, and therefore request clarification. It should also be remembered that at school children are encouraged to guess answers, a practice which in the forensic context can have serious consequences (Sattar & Bull, 1996).

As discussed before, it is questionable whether children are fully capable of understanding what is meant in the oath when it is said, "the truth the whole truth and noting but the truth". Because of their lack of development and schemas they might unknowingly lie. Also, because of their lack of development as compared to adults, they may not fully understand what their duty is, as a witness. Younger children do not have the capacity to see and understand all that being a witness encompasses. For example answering each question clearly and directly. Moreover, because they are still in an egocentric place in development it is hard for them to grasp the consequences of their testimony, which