title: Reliability of professional judgments in forensic child sexual abuse evaluations: unsettled or unsettling science?
abstract: In the absence of photographic or DNA evidence, a credible eyewitness, or perpetrator confession, forensic evaluators in cases of alleged child sexual abuse must rely on psychosocial or "soft" evidence, often requiring substantial professional judgment for case determination. This article offers a three-part rebuttal to  Herman's (2009 ) argument that forensic decisions based on psychosocial evidence are fundamentally unreliable and that this conclusion represents settled science. The article also discusses the potentially adverse consequences of Herman's proposed reforms to forensic practice on child protection and prosecution efforts.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychiatry, University ofNorth Carolina at Chapel Hill, 104-A Market Street, Chapel Hill, NC 27516, USA. mark_everson@med.unc.edu
authors.forename: Mark D
authors.initials: MD
authors.lastname: Everson
authors.forename: José Miguel
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Sandoval
authors.forename: Nancy
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Berson
authors.forename: Mary
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Crowson
authors.forename: Harriet
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Robinson
mesh_terms: D002648:Child; D002650:Child Abuse, Sexual / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment; D015203:Reproducibility of Results