This article was originally published in the Court Watcher (October/November
1991); newsletter of the Divorced Men's Association of Connecticut.
   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      The Child Abuse Potential Inventory
                                      by
                                Reid Kimbrough
In his article Say No To CAPI (The Liberator, December 1990) Charles Jamieson
reported on problems with the Child Abuse Potential Inventory and gave 
easons
why this assessment tool should be avoided when involved in a child abuse al-
legation. Readers are encouraged to review the article and consider 
dditional
problems with the Child Abuse Potential Inventory.
The "Questionnaire Form VI" shows copyrights for 1977, 1982, 1984, and a re-
vised edition in 1986. The author is shown as Joel S. Milner, PhD. The inven-
tory consists of 160 statements to which the respondent circles either "A" to
AGREE or "DA" to DISAGREE.
The computer grading from an actual inventory shows three screens. The top of
the first screen is titled "DATA ENTRY" and shows a matrix of "A's" and 
D's".
The horizontal axis is labeled at the top with "0" to "9" and the vertical
axis is labeled on the left with "0" to "160". At the top right of the screen
are seven menu keys identified as: "A-agree", "D-disagree", "Space-none",
"Space-both", "B-backup", "R-restart", and ">- page end".  The bottom of the
screen asks "change data Y)es or N)o".
This screen is obviously used to enter the "A's" and "D's" that the 
espondent
circled on "Questionnaire Form VI".   It will be assumed the option to change
data is elected if the scorer makes a mistake when entering the respondents
answers.
The top of the second screen is titled "CAP INVENTORY VALIDITY SCORES"; under
this is "Validity Scales" for "Lie", "Random", and "Inconsistency".  To the
right of these headings are numbers for each and in this particular case each
was "normal".  Also on the second screen are "Validity Indexes" for "Faking-
Good Index", "Faking-Bad Index", and "Random Response Index".  In this parti-
cular case each was "normal". The bottom of the screen says "please press
return" and a question mark is shown under this.
The top of the third screen is titled "CAP INVENTORY ABUSE SCORES"; under 
his
is "Abuse scale" and under this is "Abuse", a number, and "normal" for this
case. This screen also shows "Factor Scores" for "Distress", "Rigidity", "Un-
happiness", and three "Problems" which are "Child/Self", "Family", & "Other".
Numbers are shown for these "Factor Scores" and all were "normal". The bottom
of the screen says "Consult manual for cutoffs and further information on
scale interpretation" and "please press return".
We may now add another problem with the Child Abuse Potential Inventory -
knowing "cutoffs and further information on scale interpretation" and having
the ability to change the data makes the inventory susceptible to "scorer
error".
The reader should also consider Mr. Jamieson's comment, "Because of the 
ecent
interest generated about the CAPI, it should be expected that social workers,
child abuse therapists & other well intended, but misinformed, 
professionals"
may attempt to utilize this procedure in a child abuse case.".
Therefore the potential for "scorer error" is increased if the scorer 
elieves
that children do not lie about sexual abuse; the scorers' training & 
ducation
is limited to the child abuse accommodation syndrome, behavioral indicators,
anatomical dolls, children's drawings, good touch/bad touch books; or if the
scorer was sexually abused as a child.
Conversely the potential for "scorer error" is decreased if the scorer is
current on not only aspects of child abuse but also on the allegations of
child abuse because they are two related overlapping subjects in which the
scorer should be educated. Knowledge of one without knowledge of the other
is insufficient to assess either.
Considering the 1977 copyright an effort was made to find further information
on the Child Abuse Potential Inventory & the authors (Milner, Gold, Ayoub, 
nd
Jacewitz) or on their paper Predictive Validity of the Child Abuse Potential
Inventory, 52 J. Consulting & Clinical Psych. 879 (1984).
A search of this data base, which exceeds 14000 pages of reference material,
failed to reveal any of the authors or specific information on the inventory.
Author names and papers provided in the references from the professional
material are in the data base. There were no references by the numerous au-
thors in SEXUAL ABUSE ALLEGATIONS IN CUSTODY AND VISITATION CASES: A Resource
Book for Judges and Court Personnel (American Bar Association, National Legal
Resource Center for Child Advocacy and Protection; February 1988). If any in-
formation was to be found this book was one of the more obvious choices.
It is interesting that many prominent writers of papers on child abuse and
allegations of child abuse have not cited the Child Abuse Potential Inventory
or its authors. Other than the paper brought to our attention by Mr. 
amieson,
no further information was found.  One author in discussing sex offender pro-
grams cited "various sexual inventories" but nothing specific on the Child
Abuse Potential Inventory.
What is most important about the Child Abuse Potential Inventory is that a
high number of the statements on the questionnaire appear to characterize
persons who have been falsely accused of child abuse. You be the judge:
            "5. I am a confused person"
            "6. I do not trust most people"
            "9. I am often mixed up"
           "12. I sometimes act without thinking"
           "13. You cannot depend on others"
           "17. I am often angry inside"
           "18. Sometimes I feel all alone in the world"
           "22. I often feel rejected"
           "23. I am often lonely inside"
           "25. I often feel very frustrated"
           "28. Sometimes I fear that I will lose control of myself"
           "31. I know what is the right and wrong way to act"
           "34. I am always a good person"
           "38. I am an unlucky person"
           "39. I am usually a quiet person"
           "41. Things have usually gone against me in life"
           "43. I sometimes am very quiet"
           "44. I sometimes lose my temper"
>>> End - The Child Abuse Potential Inventory, Part 1 of 2: Reid Kimbrough---
---------------