Skip to main content
Log in

Child witnesses and the confrontation clause

The American psychological association brief inMaryland v. Craig

  • Articles
  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

InMaryland v. Craig, the United States Supreme Court relied heavily on a brief prepared by a committee of the American Psychology-Law Society on behalf of the American Psychological Association (APA). The APA brief concluded that sexually abused children may be particularly vulnerable to distress in the legal process, especially when forced to confront the defendant face to face, and that such acute distress may be inconsistent with the state's interests in promotion of reliable testimony and child welfare. APA also argued that psychological theory and research provide foundations for individualized determination of the need for measures to protect children from face-to-face confrontation. *** DIRECT SUPPORT *** AFE06051 00002

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Goodman, G.S., Levine, M., Melton, G.B. et al. Child witnesses and the confrontation clause. Law Hum Behav 15, 13–29 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01044827

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01044827

Keywords

Navigation