skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview: (FETI); Part 2: A matter of growing concern. Report obtained by this Blog indicates 'FETI' has been rejected by the U.S. Air Force..."Given the lack of empirical evidence on FETI’s effectiveness, and the large number of investigative, professional and scientific concerns regarding FETI and FETI training, the Air Force does not consider FETI as a viable option for investigative interviewing. We believe it would be inappropriate and irresponsible to discontinue the use of a robust, well-studied, effective, and empirically-validated interviewing method that is supported by the latest scientific research (the Cognitive Interview), in favor of an interviewing method that is loosely constructed, is based on flawed science, makes unfounded claims about its effectiveness, and has never once been tested, studied, researched or validated (FETI)."
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: In an article cited in Part 1 of this series on 'Forensic Experiential Trauma interview' - a matter of growing concern - author Emily Green writes that "Investigators in the
U.S. Army have fully adopted the FETI approach, and it’s quickly taking hold in
other branches of the military as well." According to a fascinating report which I have obtained, this is not exactly the case. It
is called "Report to Congressional Commitees: Report on the use of the
Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview (FETI) Technique within the
Department of the Air Force. The Executive Summary of this report states: "Given
the lack of empirical evidence on FETI’s effectiveness, and the large number of
investigative, professional and scientific concerns regarding FETI and FETI
training, the Air Force does not consider FETI as a viable option for
investigative interviewing. We believe it would be inappropriate and
irresponsible to discontinue the use of a robust, well-studied, effective, and
empirically-validated interviewing method that is supported by the latest
scientific research (the Cognitive Interview), in favor of an interviewing
method that is loosely constructed, is
based on flawed science, makes unfounded claims about its effectiveness, and
has
never once been tested, studied, researched
or validated (FETI)." The Executive Summary also indicates: "U.S.
Air Force sexual assault investigators and Air Force judge advocates are
trained to use the Cognitive Interview technique for
interviewing victims of sexual assault. The Air Force does not train or utilize
the FETI technique, and has no plans to do so in the future. The decision to
select the Cognitive Interview, and to eliminate FETI as a viable option,
resulted from exhaustive research and consultation with leading subject matter
experts. The Cognitive Interview is a very robust, well-studied, effective,
empirically-validated interviewing method that is supported by the latest
scientific research. In contrast, FETI has never been empirically studied or
validated. Given the lack of any empirical evidence on FETI’s effectiveness,
and the large number of investigative, professional and scientific concerns
about FETI and FETI training, the Air Force does not consider FETI as a viable
option for investigative interviewing. In addition to providing the attached
subject matter expert reviews, AFOSI will gladly provide any additional
supporting document." The report is a big deal - and sends out the message in the strongest terms that FETI must be closely scrutinized and carefully validated before it is ever accepted as evidence in the courts. It was commissioned by the U.S Senate and sent by Air Force specifically to Senator John McCain, Chairman of the Committee
on Armed Services, Jack Reid, Ranking member of the Committee on Armed
Services, and Mac Thornberry, Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of The U.S. House of
Representatives. Most importantly, the report is based on contributions from highly respected consultants, whose work in enclosed in appendices to the report. Here are some capsules:
Christian A. Meissner: PhD; Iowa State University; "A through search of the available research literature yielded no published peer review studies on the efficacy or the effectiveness of FETI. The supporting materials developed by Strand and colleagues provided no empirical evidence to support these claims of effectiveness - no experimental or field studies have been offered comparing the effectiveness of FETI to either existing practice or other comparable methods developed within the empirical literature ...Only anecdotal claims (testimonials) are provided to bolster some degree of efficacy and relevance to forensic practice - an insufficient basis upon which to rest claims of effectiveness."
Charles A. Morgan; MD; MA: University of New Haven; "In my opinion, it is in a reasonable degree of medical certainty that" FETI does NOT represent a best practice standard for the assessment of people with PTSD; FETI does not represent a clinical best practice standard for the assessment of trauma related memories; FETI does not represent a valid scientific representation of the nature of neurobiology, brain functioning and human memory. Put bluntly, there is NO scientific evidence to support the idea that FETI should be offered as a valid clinical method for working with victims of trauma."
Susan E. Brandon; PhD and Sujeeta Bhatt, PhD; High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group; "The notion that trauma victims/witnesses should be interviewed differently then non-trauma victims/witnesses because of different memory processes, is not supported by science. Even if trauma memories were different from non-trauma memories, there are no data showing that different interview methods are necessary. However, it is reasonable to assume that victims or witnesses of trauma require additional displays of empathy and assurances that make feel safe (as noted by Strand (undated), relative to victims/witnesses of non-traumatic events."
Daniel J. Neller; PsyD, ABPP (Forensic); Directorate of Psychological Operations, U.S. Army Special Operations Cmd. "It is worth noting that the FETI is offered as a technique to collect nonphysical evidence. Just as techniques that collect physical evidence can be subjected to admissibility challenges, so, too, can techniques that collect nonphysical evidence. To the extent that FETI-informed testimony is based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge, its admissibility can be challenged in courts of law. To date, the FETI evidently has not been studied with rigorous empirical testing; has not been subjected to formal peer review and publication; does not have a known or potential error rate; and does not clearly enjoy widespread acceptance within the forensic and law enforcement community. Consequently, and robust challenge to the admissibility of FETI-based testimony could result in its exclusion, thereby jeopardizing the effective prosecution of a sexual assault case."
Linda S. Estes, PhD and Jeane M. Lambrecht, PsyD, Major, USAF Air Force Office of Special Investigations. (Because of their experience as investigative psychologists, they were asked to assess sections of a course in which students were taught "memory, trauma and the Forensic Experiential Trauma (FETI) Interviewing Technique.) "We do not disagree that sensory details and emotion consistent with an allegation add to statement credibility and make for a more credible and sympathetic victim in court. However, we are concerned with calling this "evidence" and particularly with the implication that retrieving emotion equals proof of trauma. At one point, the instructor stated; "Behavior after the event can be used to show evidence of non-consent." This seemed to imply that symptoms of PTSD or trauma-related anxiety cab be used as evidence to show that a crime had been committed. There is a danger of faulty reasoning here - if there is emotion present, one must have been traumatized, even if one cannot retrieve the memory. This exact type of reasoning became endemic in the therapeutic community decades ago as part of the "recovered memory" movement, which led to many false accusations of abuse. In fact, the recovered memory movement relied heavily on the same sources (such as literature on "body memory") cited in this course. As noted above, memory is susceptible to suggestion, even in adults, and some individuals are mire susceptible to suggestion than others.. We do not feel it is prudent to present sensory details and emotion as "evidence" of an allegation and we are concerned that using this terminology could lead our investigators to be discredited in court."
The entire Executive Summary and Report can be read at the link below:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the
Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my
previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put
considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith
and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic
pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses
on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please
send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest
to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy;
Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
