Beyond the ‘victim as everyman’: a qualitative study of forensic interviewers’ experiences with victims with disabilities in Türkiye
Psychology, Crime and Law, 2026 (SSCI, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Derleme
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1080/1068316x.2026.2750943
- Dergi Adı: Psychology, Crime and Law
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Criminal Justice Abstracts, EBSCO Legal Collection, EBSCO Legal Source, HeinOnline-Law Journal Library, Psycinfo, Criminal Justice Periodical Index, Social Sciences Abstracts, Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), Social Science Premium Collection (ProQuest), Criminology Collection (ProQuest), Health Research Premium Collection (ProQuest), Law Journal Library (HeinOnline), Legal Collection (EBSCO), Legal Source (EBSCO), Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO), Sociology Source Ultimate (EBSCO)
- Anahtar Kelimeler: access to justice, forensic interviewing, Türkiye, victim as everyman, Victims with disabilities
- Erciyes Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
The ‘victim as everyman’ critique highlights how treating victims as a homogeneous group can obscure differences in their experiences and support needs. Using this critique as an interpretive lens, this study examined forensic interviewers’ experiences with victims with disabilities in Türkiye. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 interviewers across seven judicial districts and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Four interconnected themes described a progressive process. First, the absence of disability-specific training, information and protocols left interviewers unprepared. Second, disability was often understood through a communicative threshold based on whether the victim could understand questions and provide an account. Third, interviewers were positioned between victims’ needs and judicial expectations, assuming an intermediary role while experiencing professional and emotional strain. Finally, outcomes were reduced to whether a statement could be obtained, while interviewers relied on trial and error, peer modeling and improvisation to address institutional gaps. The findings extend this critique by showing how, in interviewers’ accounts, a victim’s perceived ability to communicate becomes a practical threshold of ‘interview-ability’ that shifts responsibility for adaptation from the system onto the interviewer and, ultimately, onto the victim.