Scientific Methodology
An 11-year-old girl was reported missing at an amusement park on September 2011. The timing of the report was not mentioned during the initial reporting period. The observational time
period of the incident can indicate the population and the capacity of the park in order to determine when the child was most likely kidnapped. Due to the nature of the case and the information provided by the park, the best approach for this case would be to use forensic interviewing in order to develop an accurate timeline of events. Both parents did not realize their daughter was missing for approximately 45 minutes before notifying the amusement park authorities. Both parents thought the other one had the child. At this time, interviewing the parents separately and using cognitive interview techniques can put into place what both parents were doing and paying attention during the kidnapping. Cognitive interviewing or forensic interviewing can help place the parents back to the time to recall any missing information that they did not remember during the time of the incident. This will help recall the event during the first 45 minutes and determine if the parent are able to recognize any of the unknown subjects in a line up.
The authorities were notified and placed security watches around all the entrances and exits throughout the park and questioned patrons leaving the park. In order to suggest that all entrances and exits were manned by security a roaster of all security personnel and their post at the time of the incident must be a part of the investigation to account for the where about of all personnel location during the time of the event. When questioning patrons nearly 20 reported seeing the girl who fitted the description leaving the park with a man. All 20 patrons’ information was recorded and their personal information was taken to follow up interviews. During the time of questioning of the 20 patrons who reported seeing a girl fitting the description leaving the park, where the patrons subject to seeing a picture of the girl or did the security personnel give a description of the missing person. This can eliminate questions on whether or not the eyewitness was tampered with before a court trial. Later that day, park officials did a sweep of the park and found the girl fitting the description that the parents give the park official in the dumpster in a remote section of the park near the service entrance, which she appeared to have been sexually assaulted. The park stated “All entrances and exits were covered by security personnel” then why was the service entrance not manned with a security watch. This can lead to a questioning attitude and the integrity of park official who claim all entrances and exits were manned. Police then contacted the 20 patrons who earlier stated seeing the girl leaving the park, but only three of them were able to identify the girl in a photo array. At this time, we are able to conclude that the 20 patrons were not tampered with because only three recognized the picture of the girl. Eight of the patrons reported that the suspect appeared to be Latino male, but the other four suggested the suspect was African American. If only three out of twenty was able to identify the girl, how come eight patrons reported the suspect appearing Latino and four suggested African Americans? What did the three patrons who identified the girl suggest the appearance of the unknown subject was?
Later the officers used computer software to sketch out a possible suspect and only 15 agreed that the sketch resembled the man they had seen. Again, if only three patrons were able to positively identify the victim how can 15 agree that the sketch resembled the man? Are the patrons related and did they speak to one another before seeing the sketch. Police later that night released the sketch on the news asking for any additional witness who can provide information to find the suspect. Three weeks had past and they received approximately 200 leads, but only five of the 200 leads where individuals who were at the park on September 2011 based on the surveillance video of the entrances and exits of the park. The detective on the case annotated that the only evidence they have is eyewitness evidence because there was a problem with the DNA collection and psychical evidence being obtained. Who is the eyewitness? Is the eyewitness able to choose the victim in a line up? Moreover, it is recognized that the eyewitnesses presented conflicting information regarding the crime that took place on September 2011. What are the conflicting information? Is the conflicting information related to the story line or the placement of the unknown subject and victim? The detective realized in order to obtain a conviction of the guilty individual, she would need to be able to obtain a meticulously placement of any of the five subjects with the girl on the day of the disappearance and sexual assault on September 2011.
Theoretical Framework
According to Veronique (2015) the United States in the mid-1980s surged a movement in missing children do with the results from disappearances in the country. Moreover, Ethan Patz (6 years old) located in New-York when he was walking to school, which was two blocks away from his residents. Additionally, Adam Walsh (6 years old) disappeared from a Sears’s department store in Florida according to Veronique (2015). Two weeks later Adam’s body was located in a drain pipe with a severed head. He was located 62 miles from the place of disappearances. Whilst predatory adults do exist and some children are abducted by strangers every year, the great majority of children (and adults) reported missing to the police will return in days (Home Office, 2011). A major issue for the police and the people reporting a missing child is the assessment according to Hayden and Goodship (2013) due to the fact that it is believed that the missing by those responsible for them at the time. According to Hayden and Goodship (2013) such risk assessments are not necessarily rational and may be framed by values and subjective perceptions with extreme event leading to either an overestimate or risk because of anxiety, or an underestimation of the risk that are infrequent. In contrast the parents of the missing girl were unaware of their child for 45 minutes. Did each parent know the where about of each other during the time. Is this the reason why they delayed the reporting of their missing child. According to Veronique (2015) a seminal article published in 1962 by pediatrician C. Henry Kempe (Kempe et al. 1962) was a major factor in discovering the frequency of ill-treatment of very young children by their close kin. The study brought the focus to interfamilial abuses, including sexual abuse. Furthermore, reporting a child missing to the police is self-evidently about the child's whereabouts are unknown and eventually when both parents do not know the whereabouts of the child due to believing the other parent has the child. In contrast to the kidnapping of the girl, which parent had the child last before the child was noticeably missing. The psychological theory of attention is broken down into four main functions, which are signaled detection and vigilance, search, selective attention, and divided attention (Sternberg & Sternberg, 2012). Divide attention was the most influential on cognition in this case. As described by Sternberg and Sternberg (2012) divided attention is the allocation of attentional resources to different tasking. In other words, divide attention allows us to allocate multiple tasking throughout the day. When objectives are parallel, it becomes easier to divide attention to complete objectives of the same nature. In order to divide attention when there are unparalleled objective it must be learned and practiced. Moreover, it is the ability to multitask different objectives in the order of importance and least importance. Furthermore, Sternberg and Sternberg (2012) explains divided attention as the engagement of two or more tasking. Sternberg and Sternberg (2012) discussed that most people are able to listen to music and concentrate on writing simultaneously. In comparison, people are better at dividing their attention when competing task are in different modalities. In contrast, it will be a good idea to do a psychological test on both parents to determine their attention in signalling detection and vigilance, search, selective attention, and divided attention to determine where or not the parents were negligent or had something to do with the kidnapping of their daughter. Likewise, this can help with the eyewitness case to rule out the parent and focus on the five unknown subjects. This will also help determine whether or not the eyewitness claim is justifiable through psychological assessment to range there signaled detection and vigilance, search, selective attention, and divided attention.
Ethical Implication and Ethical Conduct
Among this case there are many factors, which contributes to potential ethical implications and integrity of the cause for the forensic psychologist. The high level of concern for the welfare of the family and the client can lead to coercion and deception, threats to confidentiality and trust of the case. The relationship between the family and forensic psychologist must not compromise the integrity of the case due to dual and multiple role relationship between the victim’s parents, client, and forensic psychologist. According to the American Psychological Association Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all people to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the process, procedures, and service being conducted by a psychologist (Koocher, Spiegel, 2008, pg. 551). Additionally, The American Psychological Association suggests multiple-role relationships occurs when a therapist is already in a professional role with a person or in another role with the same person or closely associated with or related to the person (Koocher, Spiegel, 2008, pg. 263). Moreover, evaluate the rights, responsibilities, and vulnerability of all affected parties. Before the psychologist speaks to the client or victim’s parents there are necessary steps which need to take place before any forensic interview begins. Informed consent in psychology involves both verbal and written communication between clients and therapist. Informed consent is in agreement between professionals and client, which bonds rules, regulations, and confidentiality. The detective and psychologist must understand their role in the case in order to minimize and understood the information and rules of each individual. It is important to have informed consent before any treatment, counseling, research, experiment, and expert witness testimonies. According to APA (2014) Standard 3.10 states informed consent is a requirement when conducting research, counseling, therapy, or assessment (Koocher & Keith-Spiegel, 2008, pg. 555). The foundation of any relationships with a psychology professional and client should involve around the guidelines of engagement between both individuals. It is important to have rules and regulations in order to have an understanding of what to expect and the lines of boundaries which should not be crossed. The clients most know how fur confidentiality goes when speaking to a psychology professional. When receiving consent the person must be mentally sound and able to understand what they are agreeing to. Overall consent must be understood by both parties agreeing to the terms and the consent should follow all legal and ethical term and procedures. In this case the forensic psychologist, must establish informed consent by sitting down with the client and write an agreement both parties agree to the terms. Since, forensic psychology deals with the legal processes, it must be understood that forensic psychologist are not lawyers but expert witness to behavioral analysis. This consent must be created before we are allowed to work with the clients or cases, so both parties understand the boundaries of the relationship and expertise. Do with the fact of the case of an 11-year-old girl was reported missing at an amusement park on September 2011. The timing of the report was not mentioned during the initial reporting period. The observational time period of the incident can indicate the population and the capacity of the park in order to determine when the child was most likely kidnapped. Due to the nature of the case and the information provided by the park, the best approach for this case would be to use forensic interviewing in order to develop an accurate timeline of events. Confidentiality must be understood by all parties in this case in order to minimize any disclosure of confidential information. The role of the forensic psychologist must be understood during the case to avoid any confusion on the role of the forensic psychologist. The ethical dilemma which can arise in this case is the psychological role of the client and the victim’s parents. This can cause an ethical dilemma because the psychologist must always stay ethical, tells the truth, and stay within their field of knowledge, but when a client or victim asks the psychologist to lie to protect them it can cause in an ethical dilemma. In order to minimize this from happening an outlines of guidelines and agreements must establish before continuing the case which evaluates the rights, responsibilities, and vulnerability of all affected parties will have to sign such agreement before moving forward with the case to delineate any ethical issue which can affect the case of client eyewitness. Furthermore, determine whether the matter truly involves ethics. This is the starting point in order to identify any moral or ethical principle which are applicable to a current situation. This will allow the investigation to determine if they're on any ethical dilemmas involved.
Implications of Diversity
It is important for psychology professionals to develop empathy around cultural differences, lifestyle differences, and diversity when handling cases because of clients who backgrounds are different. Psychology professionals are there to guide their clients to a health recover or resolution to their issue, so there is no room to judge. In this case of the missing girl the psychologist must not be biased because he or she also has a child around the same age. Personal feeling must not cloud the evaluation of the case because of personal and ethical belief which are different from others. By being empathic this will allow psychologist working the case to be more diverse and understanding of each cultural differences in order to find the right path or type of assessments for the client in order to determine who is the best eyewitness in order to solve the case. According to the American Psychological Association Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all people to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the process, procedures, and service being conducted by a psychologist (Koocher, Spiegel, 2008, pg. 551). To be empathic is the key to be successful when working with different types of clients and cases because this will show the client compassion and that the psychologist understand the terms of the case. Being empathic and understanding the differences in parental mentoring must not be viewed as Negligence occurs when an individual falls below an ordinary or reasonable level of care. Once the authority was notified they place security watches around all the entrances and exits throughout the park and questioned patrons leaving the park. As a forensic psychologist the root cause and root condition of this cause revolve around both parents, who did not realize their daughter was missing for approximately 45 minutes before notifying the amusement park authorities. Both parents thought the other one had the child. Although there is no information about the race of the parents and the victim an open mind is important because of the information and description of the unknown subject race and gender can easily affect the psychologist prospective or assumption of who the unknown subject is because the description of the unknown subject was he was either African American or Latino which could imply that the female is of white decent. Moreover, the description of the eyewitness has not been noted and show reminds unknown to avoid any basis tendencies when evaluating which eyewitness is the best one in order to receive a verdict or guilty. In order to resolve this issue the description of all witness such as race and sex should not be disclosed to the forensic psychologist in order to minimize any basis or culturally basis stereotype to influence the decision of the psychologist.
References
Campion-Vincent, Véronique. Folklore (14060957) , 2015, Vol. 62, p81-110, 30p. Publisher:
Folklore: Electronic Journal of Folklore.
Hayden, Carol; Goodship, Jo. British Journal of Social Work , Mar2015, Vol. 45 Issue 2, p440-
456, 17p. Publisher: Oxford University Press / USA.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Cognitive psychology. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College.
No comments:
Post a Comment