What comes to mind is a young, new advocate who had the best of
intentions, but interfered in an interview with a victim. I recognized the
advocate from the most recent volunteer training. As a Detective, I provided
training to new volunteers on the law enforcement response to sexual assault
crimes.
The victim in this case was sexually assaulted by her intimate
partner and was likely to recant. At the very first sign of a tear, the
advocate started asking if the victim wanted a break. After she did that a
couple of times we took a break so I could talk with the advocate. I knew she
was coming from a good place; she was just a little nervous and overly jumpy.
I asked the advocate to step outside and explained that, although
I appreciated her care for the victim, and she was well-intentioned, her
intervention was inappropriate at that juncture. I let her know that
interrupting the interview like this could get her excused from an interview by
other detectives if they did not recognize her inexperience. The advocate was very receptive to this
feedback, and was terrific every other time I worked with her.
I think it is very important for advocates to be in tune with
victims and their need for breaks-especially if the interviewer is not being
sensitive to the victim's needs. However, it is also important to recognize
when it is inappropriate to interfere. This can be a difficult balance,
especially for new advocates. Cross-training and open communication are very
important to ensure that these types of issues are handled appropriately and in
a timely manner so they don’t become bigger problems.
No comments:
Post a Comment