General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What's really relevant in the Dylan Farrow molestation case [View all]pnwmom
(110,260 posts)Because that's the effect it had on her. After giving the same story three times, she thought they didn't believe her. Furthermore, every time a child who has been traumatized has to describe the event to a stranger, she is subject to being re-traumatized. There is no excuse for how they handled this.
Dr. Diane Schetky, quoted below, is an associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, co-author of the textbook Child Sexual Abuse and co-editor of Clinical Handbook of Child Psychiatry and the Law.
By the way, the investigative reporter who wrote this article is not the same person who wrote the 1992 Vanity Fair article.
http://www.andythibault.com/columns/CT%20Magazine%20-%20Apr%2097.htm
The team interviewed Dylan nine times. For three consecutive weeks, she said Allen violated her sexually. In several of the other sessions she mentioned a similar type of abuse. When Dylan did not repeat the precise allegation in some of the sessions, the team reported this as an inconsistency.
The nine interviews were "excessive," Schetky says. "The danger is the child feels like she's not believed if she's asked the same questions over and over."