Rethinking the competing discourses on uncorroborated allegations of child sexual abuse

This article shows that the competing discourses on uncorroborated allegations of child sexual abuse (UACSA) each rests on unreliable epistemic assumptions, meaning that in any given case it is uncertain whether the individual making the accusation is a genuine victim or the perpetrator of a false a...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Naughton, Michael (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2019
In: The British journal of criminology
Year: 2019, Volume: 59, Issue: 2, Pages: 461-480
Online Access: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Allegations of child sexual abuse
False allegations
Discourse
Victims
Harm
Falschbeschuldigungen
Falsche Beschuldigung
Kindesmissbrauch
Sexueller Kindesmissbrauch
Fehlbeschuldigung
Opfer
Description
Summary:This article shows that the competing discourses on uncorroborated allegations of child sexual abuse (UACSA) each rests on unreliable epistemic assumptions, meaning that in any given case it is uncertain whether the individual making the accusation is a genuine victim or the perpetrator of a false allegation against an innocent individual. It argues that this presents a fatal challenge to the existing fields of knowledge and practise on either side of the discursive divide in terms of how alleged victims in UACSA cases are conceptualized and measured and how they are acted upon. It concludes with a call for an open-minded approach, which prioritizes the pursuit of truth in investigations to try to ensure that criminal justice system interventions in such an inherently problematic area are just and that they do not cause or compound the forms of harm and injustice currently at play.
ISSN:1464-3529
DOI:10.1093/bjc/azy037