Crown counsels and therapists : a work relationship and its influence on the child witness
Date
1996
Authors
Marshall, Judith Margaret
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Child witnessing is a current phenomenon, resulting from the recent recognition of the child as a credible witness and often the only witness to his or her own sexual abuse. The problem of meeting the special needs of these child witnesses pervades practice and policy realms, as well as the everyday life of the child and family. A call for interdisciplinary relations has emerged concerning child sexual abuse in general and court process in particular. Interdisciplinary relationship is a necessary means to meet the concerns of legal and psychological/social perspectives in criminal cases involving children as witnesses. Informed by an actual legal case and looking at the perspective of front-line practice, this study enabled an understanding of the work relationship between two Crown Counsels and two therapeutic practitioners. The study posed the following research questions: 1) Within the context of a single court case of alleged child sexual assault, how do the Crown Counsels and the therapeutic practitioners perceive their work relationship? 2) What are the Crown Counsels', the therapeutic practitioners', and the child's parents' perceptions of the influences of this work relationship on the child witness?
Informed by case study methods, a qualitative methodology was used to produce descriptive data--from interviews with the study participants and from observation of the legal trial. In addition, relevant documents were accessed. Four themes emerged from the interviews with the two Crown Counsels and the two therapists which described their perceptions of their work relationship: 1) The Crown Counsels and the therapists mutually respected and recognized each other's expertise and responsibilities; 2) knowledge was exchanged through the work relationship and its legal context; 3) the Crown Counsels and the therapists perceived the impact of their work relationship in professional and personal terms; 4) the attributes of the relationship were generally positive, with a mutual appreciation of the therapists' frustration with the legal context.
Three themes described the Crown Counsels' and the therapists' perceptions of the influence of their work relationship on the child witness: 1) The workers felt that the needs of each child and family were recognized and communicated within the work relationship; 2) the work relationship aided accommodation for the child in the courtroom; 3) the Crown Counsels and the therapists found the child's therapy was limited, constrained by the legal context of the work relationship. Parents also described their own child's and family's experience with the court processes and therapy. Parents felt that each child was unique: Each child experienced his or her own fears and anxieties related to the accused and to legal processes; courtroom accommodations for each child were a mixed blessing, seen as helpful but at the same time, difficult; parents had different feelings from one another regarding each child's therapeutic involvement.
Supported by the current literature, the findings were compared to the concepts that guided the study: "the best interests of the child", "the parameters of therapeutic support", and "descriptors of relationship". Implications for policy and practice were revealed, as well as areas for future research development.