**16. The need to be asked and the need to be safe**

Nelson [28] explores the need for potential victims to be asked about any experience of abuse. The Children's Commissioner uses the phrase 'enabled telling' in recommending ways that professionals can approach this ([16], p. 39). The majority of survivors who do not disclose until adulthood say they simply were not asked – or not in a way that they felt safe with.

Nelson [28] points out that, in the context of backlash propaganda, being proactive by asking about a history of abuse takes courage on the part of professionals. This applies particularly to the crucial intervention that children need. Fear of putting words into a child's mouth, ideas into their head, or contaminating any evidence, results in denying the child the one thing they need – to be asked directly. We saw in Cleveland that once children were asked in general terms what had happened to them, often by the examining paediatrician who found signs of abuse, some would then be able to tell what had happened. This moved the investigation on for such children if the perpetrator could then be identified. However, this often depended on an immediate intervention to create external safety for the child, and time to allow that to have an effect on the child's inner world, so that safety became psychologically as well as physically real.

Taking a proactive stance requires assuring the child that they will remain safe, and ensuring that this happens. One major aspect of the tragedy in Cleveland was that the professionals acted in the belief that the court would give this assurance. We then had to face the outcome that many of the children were returned home, in our belief to possible further abuse in some cases. Nelson quotes a child protection worker in a high profile case in Orkney, Scotland who said the most distressing part of the whole affair was 'watching one small girl cross the tarmac to a huge cheering crowd, to her own parents and massed TV cameras… we had failed her, and I will never be able to get that sight out of my mind" ([28] p. 115). In Cleveland, we remain haunted by an 8-year-old child, who whilst on the return journey to her home, asked her social worker what she should do if the abuse started again.

### **17. The role of protective parents**

One of the enduring myths of Cleveland has been that children were removed from, and then returned to 'innocent families'. In fact, many children were quickly returned from interim care situations, subject to conditions imposed by the court, once the perpetrator was known and the child could be protected. If, as was usually the case, the abuse was thought to be occurring within the family, the role of a protective and believing attachment figure was crucial in the process of return. Following the crisis and the lack of an effective child protection system in the 90's, efforts became more directed at empowering protective parents, mainly mothers, to take action [29]. This was important in itself for healing and strengthening the attachment bonds between the mothers and children, which were often damaged by the dynamics of abuse. We came to realise the importance of the child's attachment system in mediating the effects of abuse, particularly if the abuse was by a close family member.

In the absence of parallel legal intervention with the perpetrator, this approach only worked if the mothers were empowered to separate themselves and the child from the perpetrator. The voices of protective mothers were rarely heard [2].

### **18. Do children lie and fantasise about abuse?**

This commonly held assumption has been shown to be erroneous in many studies. A report by the Australian Law Commission states: 'Indeed, research suggests that children may be actually more truthful than adults. Certainly, the research on children's beliefs about court proceedings implies that children may be more cautious about lying in the witness box than adult witnesses' [30].

Although children can make false allegations, it is much more likely that in order to avoid breaking secrecy, punishment, and embarrassment they will deny abuse or retract previous disclosures. This is consistent with our model of the continuum along which children move between disclosure, denial and secrecy, according to the situation.

#### **19. The legal system: has anything improved for child witnesses?**

The Achieving Best Evidence (ABE) [16] protocol used in the UK is based on good research about how best to help children tell. It allows for more specialist interviewing with children deemed to be disturbed or otherwise vulnerable. However because the guidance allows only a reduced number of interviews it is difficult for interviewers to establish rapport with the child and take account of the level of trauma in creating memory problems and confusion. In our view this is unhelpful even for children in Group A who are ready to talk about what has happened, making it far less likely that they will give a full account. To avoid influencing the evidence, interviewers became wary of giving kindly reassurance, or any indication that they believe the child.

The use of carefully structured, supportive interviews can facilitate children who are reluctant to tell and indeed, some children will only tell if they are asked. Nelson ([28], p. 40) comments that the ABE protocol, which requires the child to give a more or less free narrative account, can be seen as a classic example of defensive responses and reactions to the backlash, and does not fit well with children's own feelings, difficulties and reactions.

Although we now know that children can accurately recall and give accounts of abuse, are no more suggestible than adults, and can provide evidence that ought to be acceptable, we also know that they are unlikely to give such information spontaneously. Testifying in court will also be very stressful and likely to create further trauma. Studies have shown [31] that to help them give a fuller account children benefit from support to reduce stress: this will not undermine or reduce the value of the testimony but in fact will enhance the child's ability to recall and give an account of traumatic memories.
