Expert Testimony on Sexually Abused Child Syndrome in a Child Protective Proceeding: More Hurtful than Helpful

Authors

Mary Ellen Reilly, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Abstract

The note argues that Sexually Abused Child Syndrome (SACS) testimony is unreliable and should not be admitted as corroborating evidence in child protective proceedings. It contends that SACS lacks scientific validity, is not recognized as a medical diagnosis, and fails to meet evidentiary standards for reliability. The author asserts that allowing SACS testimony violates due process rights and risks wrongful outcomes, advocating for stricter standards for expert testimony and alternative methods of substantiating abuse allegations.

Disciplines

Evidence | Insurance Law | Labor and Employment Law | Law

Recommended Citation

Mary E. Reilly, Expert Testimony on Sexually Abused Child Syndrome in a Child Protective Proceeding: More Hurtful than Helpful, 3 Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J. 419 (2005).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cplpej/vol3/iss2/11