Facilitated communication: rejected in science, accepted in court-a case study and analysis of the use of FC evidence under Frye and Daubert.

نویسنده

  • B J Gorman
چکیده

This article traces the phenomenon of facilitated communication (FC) from its introduction to the United States in 1990 to its use in recent court proceedings. FC is an alleged breakthrough technique that enables nonverbal individuals with developmental disabilities to communicate via a form of assisted typing. Widespread use of FC resulted in miraculous communications and surprising allegations of abuse. The growing importance and notoriety of FC attracted the interest of the scientific community which rejected the technique after numerous controlled studies were undertaken. Despite the rejection of FC by the scientific community, however, some courts have accepted this unproven technique by evading their state's test of scientific admissibility. It is asserted that court decisions admitting FC evidence are pretextural, and it is argued that FC should not be admitted into court proceedings. In addition, this report analyzes the future of FC in those states that have adopted the newer Daubert standard for scientific evidence.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Handwriting Evidence in Federal Courts - From Frye to Kumho.

In federal courts, the admissibility of scientific expert testimony in the last century has been governed by three major standards. The first of these standards, the "general acceptance" test, arose from the 1923 Frye v. United States (Frye) and required that any technique or method introduced in court be generally accepted by the relevant community of scientists. The more liberal "relevancy" s...

متن کامل

Quantitative EEG and the Frye and Daubert standards of admissibility.

The 70-year-old Frye standards of "general acceptance" were replaced by the Supreme Court's 1993 Daubert criteria of the scientific method, which established the standards for admissibility of evidence in Federal Court. The four Daubert criteria were: 1- Hypothesis testing, 2- Estimates of error rates, 3- Peer reviewed publication and 4- General acceptance (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical...

متن کامل

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals: a new standard for scientific evidence in the courts?

The Supreme Court, in Daubert v. Merrell Dow explored the guidelines for admitting "scientific evidence" by way of expert opinion in legal cases. The Federal Rules of Evidence that were revised in 1975 did not explicitly mention the Frye standard and thus left it unclear as to what guidelines should be used by judges in federal courts. The Court held that the Frye rule was superseded by the new...

متن کامل

Assessing the Admissibility of a New Generation of Forensic Voice Comparison Testimony

This article provides a primer on forensic voice comparison (aka forensic speaker recognition), a branch of forensic science in which the forensic practitioner analyzes a voice recording in order to provide an expert opinion that will help the trier-of-fact determine the identity of the speaker. The article begins with an explanation of ways in which human speech varies within and between speak...

متن کامل

A Study of Testing Mean Reversion in the Inflation Rate of Iran’s Provinces: New Evidence Using Quantile Unit Root Test

T his paper is to examine the mean reverting properties of inflation rates for Iran’s 25 provinces over the period from 1990:4 to 2017:7. To the end, we use various conventional univariate linear and non-linear unit root tests, as well as quantile unit root test by Koenker and Xiao (2004). Results of conventional unit root tests indicate that the null hypothesis of the unit root test...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Behavioral sciences & the law

دوره 17 4  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 1999