Skip to main content



Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) List Serve

Database of Past CMRL Messages

Welcome to the database of past Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) list serve messages. The table below contains all past CMRL messages (text only, no attachments) from Nov. 20, 1996 - December 22, 2017 and is updated quarterly.

Instructions: Postings are listed for browsing with the newest messages first. Click on the linked ID number to see a message. You can search the author, subject, message ID, and message content fields by entering your criteria into this search box:

Message ID: 8818
Date: 2011-02-25

Author:Daniel Pollack

Subject:Re: Greene v. Camreta

The case is being argued before the US Supreme Court on March 1.... Kind regards, Daniel Pollack, MSW, JD Professor Wurzweiler School of Social Work Yeshiva University 2495 Amsterdam Avenue, Room 818 New York, NY 10033 212-960-0836 dpollack26@yahoo.com --- On Fri, 2/25/11, D F MCMAHON wrote: From: D F MCMAHON Subject: Greene v. Camreta To: "Child Maltreatment Researchers" Date: Friday, February 25, 2011, 3:12 AM Just curious: I've looked at a range of sources regarding policy review/revision within the 9th circuit following its decision concerning child abuse interviews conducted in public schools--especially in Oregon, where the decision has been most pertinent. Is anyone aware of any attempts to assess the impact, if any, of this decision on investigations within the 9th circuit? Sheri McMahon ND

The case is being argued before the US Supreme Court on March 1.... Kind regards, Daniel Pollack, MSW, JD Professor Wurzweiler School of Social Work Yeshiva University 2495 Amsterdam Avenue, Room 818 New York, NY 10033 212-960-0836 dpollack26yahoo.com --- On Fri, 2/25/11, D F MCMAHON wrote: From: D F MCMAHON Subject: Greene v. Camreta To: "Child Maltreatment Researchers" Date: Friday, February 25, 2011, 3:12 AM Just curious: I've looked at a range of sources regarding policy review/revision within the 9th circuit following its decision concerning child abuse interviews conducted in public schools--especially in Oregon, where the decision has been most pertinent. Is anyone aware of any attempts to assess the impact, if any, of this decision on investigations within the 9th circuit? Sheri McMahon ND