By Oriana Mazza
Rape and sexual assault cases have caused controversy in the
courts for some time. Some defendants ask the courts to order
complainants in these cases to undergo psychiatric testing.
State caselaw is split as to whether a court can compel such
testing, and if so, under what circumstances. These
psychological examinations can seriously infringe on complainants’
rights, leaving them feeling violated and re-raped. These
feelings are compounded when a victim is ordered to undergo an
examination at the bequest of the accused rapist—backed by a
judge—for the sole purpose of determining credibility.
This Note posits that there should be a federal statute—intended
to inspire greater unanimity among states—forbidding federal courts
from compelling complainants to undergo psychiatric examinations in
sexual assault cases, whether the complainant is a child or an
adult. Such a statute is necessary because the practice not
only deters the reporting of sex crimes and undermines the victim’s
right to privacy, but also because there is a lack of uniform
standards across states. A statute that addresses these
issues by disallowing the practice in the federal system would not
abridge a defendant’s rights—constitutional or otherwise.
Moreover, like rape shield statutes and similar laws, this ban
would represent a positive social stride against the negative and
anachronistic views of sexual assault victims inherent in
compulsory psychological examinations.