Parent advice to children during interrogations: Do crime severity and perceptions of consequences matter?
Johanna Hellgren,Emily Haney-Caron,Sydney Baker,Naomi E. S. Goldstein,Kaillee Philleo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000417
2024-02-08
Abstract:Although many jurisdictions assume that the presence of a parent during youth interrogation protects the child’s rights, research on factors that influence parents’ behavior and advice is limited. The current study examined factors that influence parental advice to their children regarding Miranda waiver, including the severity of the crime and perceived consequences of adjudication. In an online survey, 997 parents were presented with personalized vignettes in which their child was accused of a crime that varied in severity. We asked parents what advice they would give their child regarding Miranda waiver, the motivation(s) for their advice, and the consequences they believed would be associated with potential adjudication. As predicted, we found that as the severity of the crime increased, so did the number of perceived consequences, which in turn led to an increased likelihood of parents advising their child to assert their Miranda rights. Additionally, a majority of parents cited wanting to protect their child’s rights as the motivation for giving advice to assert Miranda. However, parents who advised their child to talk with the police reported they would do so because they also believed it protected their child and was important for them to be honest and take responsibility for their actions. Our results contextualize past research related to parental advice during interrogation and provide support for scholarship that theorizes parents may be influenced by competing roles in the interrogation room. Findings suggest the need for additional policy protections for youth during interrogation, even for interrogations about lower-level offenses.
psychology, multidisciplinary,law,health policy & services