So-called “window bills,” which eliminate statutes of limitations on child sexual abuse claims for periods of two or three years, have been enacted in more than seventeen states. Their primary justification—the thesis that victims of child sexual abuse are psychologically constrained from filing their claims until an average age of fifty-two—has no basis in fact. This thesis, and the legislation based on it, are promoted by a nonprofit organization whose key funders are among the largest plaintiffs’ law firms in the country. That fact should surprise no one, since the effect of window legislation is to extract payouts from deep-pocketed institutions—while leaving the vast problem of child sexual abuse almost totally unaddressed.
Window bills and the “age fifty-two” thesis are advocated by CHILD USA, the nonprofit founded by University of Pennsylvania political science professor Marci Hamilton, who describes herself as the country’s “premier expert on the history and constitutionality of SOL [statutes of limitation] reform.” Hamilton’s signature contention, retailed before one state legislature after another, is that “it is a medical fact that victims of child sex abuse often need decades to come forward.” In September 2021 she told the Michigan Legislature House Oversight Committee that “fifty-two years is the average age of disclosure of child sexual abuse.” She accordingly argues that civil statutes of limitations for sexual abuse should be retroactively extended to twenty years or more. Better yet, states should adopt “windows” during which time-barred claims will be revived, no matter how long ago the alleged abuse occurred. Many states have followed Hamilton’s counsel. California has done so twice.
