Abstract
Families, community members, and professionals often view forensic interviews as traumatizing for children. However, research and practice in forensic interviewing indicate that these interviews are not inherently traumatizing. To minimize additional trauma, interviewers can employ techniques such as anticipatory guidance, interviewer support, and the promotion of narrative conversation. Anticipatory guidance empowers children by giving them a sense of autonomy and control over the interview process. Interviewers can routinely check in with the child to identify any barriers to disclosure and provide empathetic and non-suggestive support. Effective interviewers implement various strategies that encourage children to share their narratives, which is a well-established method that enhances the understanding of culturally relevant information and reduces the need for additional questioning. Case examples are discussed, along with implications for future practice.
Child abuse investigations require careful and compassionate handling, and professionals should continuously strive to adopt trauma-informed practices. A growing body of research focuses on forensic interviews, a critical component of these investigations. In these settings, children are questioned in a trauma-informed, open-ended, and non-suggestive manner to obtain details about their experiences. The information gathered during these interviews may be used for investigations, prosecutions, and child protection actions.
Despite the structured and empathetic approach of forensic interviewers, there remains an assumption among child abuse professionals and the broader community that such interviews are inherently distressing for children. In our experience, forensic interviewers report hearing these sentiments from colleagues and community members in both professional and social settings. Advocates report in multidisciplinary team meetings that caregivers and family members often express reluctance to have their child participate, fearing that the process may exacerbate the child’s trauma. Some children demonstrate this reluctance to engage in a forensic interview by avoiding a discussion of their 16 experiences, even telling interviewers that they are worried that speaking about the abuse might be too painful of a reminder or could lead to further victimization (Gemara et al., 2022). Although studies of various trauma therapies have shown that discussing traumatic events has the potential to initially elevate stress symptoms, such as heart rate or feelings of discomfort (Nachar et al., 2014; Tong et al., 2017), narrative-focused therapeutic interventions have positive long-term outcomes for patients and non-offending caregivers (Ramirez de Arellano, et al., 2015; Lely et al., 2019). In accordance with trauma research, many interviewers are deeply committed to addressing child reluctance and minimizing the risk of additional trauma during the forensic interview process.
Many children who participate in forensic interviews have already endured trauma. The primary objective of these interviews is not to reduce or resolve a child’s trauma, but to gather accurate and essential information for the investigation while limiting any additional distress. To achieve this, interviewers employ various techniques designed to create a safe and supportive environment that fosters a sense of autonomy and control for the child.
Anticipatory Guidance
Many effective interviewers utilize a variety of methods to ensure that a forensic interview is not a traumatic experience for the child. Interviewers assess how to minimize the child’s stress from the beginning of their interactions with the child. In addition to their harmful effects on children’s wellbeing, anxiety, stress, and fear can hinder memory recall and cognitive function (Davis & Bottoms, 2002; Faller, 2007; Newgent et al., 2002). To address this distress, interviewers allow a child to feel a sense of control (Faller, 2007; Olafson, 2007). A child feels more power and autonomy when they understand the interview process and know that the interviewer is honest and transparent with them.
Anticipatory guidance is a simple method of providing this transparency (Kenniston, 2025). It is defined in the medical field as proactive information provided to a patient to prepare them for what to expect (Weber-Gasparoni, 2019). This assists patients in dealing with transitions and reduces patient anxiety (Lopez, 2015). Within a forensic interviewing context, giving the child insight into what to expect allows the interviewer to identify and address possible barriers to disclosure that may arise. Katz (2012) found that the earlier an interviewer can detect reluctance, the better the interview will go, since the interviewer can spend time addressing the reason behind the reluctance and building more rapport. By detecting and exploring reluctance, interviewers can get a more detailed disclosure from the child (Lewy et al., 2015), which assists in prosecution.