Abstract
AbstractThe scientific basis for recovering repressed memories of child sexual abuse raises important but different concerns for both clinical practice and expert testimony in the courts. This article identifies these concerns, particularly focusing upon the admissibility of expert witnesses in litigation. After considering the different standards for the admissibility of scientific evidence and the policies underlying these standards, the issue of the courts employing a lower threshold for admitting mental health professional testimony about the same or similar information (i.e. recovered repressed memories) that could not be pxesented by a scientist is confronted. Two solutions are proposed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
