000			01926 a2200289 4500
001			1317683692
005			20250317111603.0
008			250312042016GB eng
020			_a9781317683698
037			_bTaylor & Francis _cGBP 54.99 _fBB
040			_a01
041			_aeng
072	7		_aJKSN _2thema
072	7		_aMBNH _2thema
072	7		_aJKSN _2bic
072	7		_aMBNH _2bic
072	7		_aMED035000 _2bisac
072	7		_aSOC025000 _2bisac
072	7		_a618.9285836 _2bisac
100	1		_aKathleen Faller
245	1	0	_aContested Issues in the Evaluation of Child Sexual Abuse _bA Response to Questions Raised in Kuehnle and Connell's Edited Collection
250			_a1
260			_aOxford _bRoutledge _c20160108
300			_a189 p
520			_bThis book represents a significant contribution to the highly contested debate surrounding how allegations of child sexual abuse should be evaluated. Despite decades of substantial research in this sensitive area, professional consensus remains elusive. A particular source of contention is the sensitivity vs. specificity debate; whether evaluators should aim to reduce the number of true allegations that are labelled false or to reduce the number of false allegations that are labelled true. This edited collection aims to address directly and offer new insights into this debate. It responds directly to Kuehnle and Connell's edited volume, The Evaluation of Child Sexual Abuse Allegations: A Comprehensive Guide to Assessment and Testimony (2009), which included chapters which advocated strong specificity positions at the expense of sensitivity. The chapters in this collection feature both challenges to, and replies by, the authors in Kuehnle and Connell's book, making this an essential resource that moves the debate forward. This book was originally published as a special issue of the Journal of Child Sexual Abuse .
700	1		_aMark Everson _4B01
999			_c4250 _d4250