Developmentally Appropriate Questions for Child Witnesses
Developmentally Appropriate Questions for Child Witnesses
复制标题
针对儿童证人提出适合发展的问题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2000
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Kang Lee
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Schuman;N. Bala;Kang Lee
加拿大最近的立法改革使法院更容易接受儿童的证词，也使儿童更容易忍受作证的经历。然而，律师和法官由于不了解儿童发展的基本原则，往往不能有效地询问儿童。让孩子们接受混乱和发展不适当的问题，使他们无法准确地传达发生在他们身上的事情和他们所观察到的事情。这不仅使证人的经历令人不安，而且使确定真相变得困难。作者探讨了如何改善司法系统专业人员与儿童的互动：律师和法官可以学习提出适合儿童证人年龄和能力的问题，法官可以在监测和评估儿童在法庭上被问到的问题方面发挥更大的作用。首先，作者认为，对儿童证人的有效询问需要了解儿童在三个关键领域（语言，认知和情感）的发展，并针对儿童的具体发展水平使用适当的问题。通过教育、实践和敏感性，司法系统专业人员可以有效地询问儿童证人。第二，研究加拿大的判例法，他们认为，法院在监测和评估儿童作证能力方面可以发挥作用。如果儿童的证据是通过令人困惑或激进的盘问提取的，法官可能会选择降低对儿童证据的重视程度。律师也可能有义务传唤关于儿童发展的专家证据，以协助法院评估儿童的证据。当孩子们被适当地询问时，他们中的大多数都可以成为非常有效的证人。通过学习提出适合儿童成长的问题，律师和法官可以提高儿童证词的效用，并减少儿童因其法庭经历而受到创伤的可能性。
Recent legislative reforms in Canada have made it easier for courts to receive the testimony of children and for children to endure the experience of testifying. However, both lawyers and judges, unaware of the fundamentals of child development, often fail to question children effectively. Subjecting children to confusing and developmentally inappropriate questioning makes them unable to communicate accurately what happened to them and what they observed. Not only does this make the witnesses' experience upsetting, it makes it difficult to determine the truth. The authors explore ways in which justice system professionals' interactions with children may be improved: lawyers and judges can learn to ask questions appropriate for the age and capacity of the child witness, and judges can play a larger role in monitoring and assessing the questions children are asked in court. First, the authors argue that effective questioning of child witnesses requires an understanding of child development in three critical domains (linguistic, cognitive and emotional) and the use of appropriate questions for children's specific levels of development. With education, practice and sensitivity, justice system professionals can effectively question a child witness. Second, examining Canadian caselaw, they argue that the courts have a role to play in monitoring and assessing a child's ability to testify. Judges may choose to give less weight to the evidence of children if it was extracted by confusing or aggressive cross examination. Lawyers may also have an obligation to call expert evidence on child development to assist the courts in assessing the evidence of children. When children are questioned properly, most of them can be very effective witnesses. By learning to ask developmentally appropriate questions, lawyers and judges can improve the utility of children's testimony as well as reduce the likelihood that children will be traumatized by their courtroom experiences.