farrockaway; I find the assertion that “when kids say abuse occured they are right 95% of the time to be quite interesting.
The following is a qoute from the American Academy of Experts in traumatic Stress”
“An attempt to make up for decades of ignorance of childrens stories of abuse led to an unfettered and unaxamined acceptance of every childs story as true. By the close of the 1980’s the negative repercussions of this attitude were obvious.
Now infamous cases such as California vs Buckley (the McMartin Preschool case, 1990) New Jersey vs Michaels (1993) highlight the trauna and tragedy that can and do result from childrens stories being uncritically accepted as valid. The State of Montana saw its own version in Montana vs Harts (1993).
For a relativley brief period of time, the arguement seemed to revolve around whether children would deliberetley lie about s. abuse. An abundance of research has now disassembled the question when stated this way.
It has been learnt and amply documented that the issue of truth when applied to childrens statements is multi dimensional.
The focus on how childrens statements might differ from adults statements has compelled a scientific return to the understanding of child development in moral, cognitive,emotional, and social spheres.
Many svolumes have recently appeared on the suggestibility of children the creation of false or distorted memories motivation and other aspects of truth telling all of which attempt to explain why some childrens reports of s. abuse are not true even though the the child may appear sincere”.
I am sorry but the research on the topic gives lie to your assertion.
I might add, in light of the research currently availible one stands in awe of the wisdom of the Torah in prohibiting the acceptence of a childs testimony in court.