NCJ Number
148203
Journal
Child Abuse and Neglect Volume: 18 Issue: 2 Dated: (February 1994) Pages: 113-129
Date Published
1994
Length
17 pages
Annotation
This article examines the validity of various criticisms leveled against the use of anatomical dolls in the evaluation of child sexual abuse by identifying seven distinct uses of the dolls: comforter, icebreaker, anatomical model, demonstration aid, memory stimulus, diagnostic screen, and diagnostic test.
Abstract
The four specific criticisms examined here include the lack of a commonly accepted, standard protocol for the use of anatomical dolls, inadequate norms on how sexually abuse and nonabused children respond to and interact with anatomical dolls, the suggestive and overly stimulating nature of the dolls, and the probability of interviewer error and misuse in the use of anatomical dolls. Each criticism was rated in terms of its relevance and applicability to the seven functions of the dolls. Results of the evaluation show that decisions about whether a child has been sexually abused should not be made solely on the basis of the child's behavior with anatomical dolls. The most common criticism, that they overly stimulate sexually naive children, was not supported, and the continued use of these dolls in child sexual abuse investigations was supported. 2 tables and 57 references